440 likes | 622 Views
2. 1. UCC1 39_Cull\UCC_19_Cull\RespHarmlessKey UCC008541-008545.pdf. . From Mr. FS Wada to Dr. AL Zecha. UCC008541. A. Short Fiber is harmless. 3. B. Other fibers dangerous. "In almost all cases where there is a strong statistical relationship between mesothelioma and the inhalation of asbestos, crocidolite and/or amosite have been involved. Where asbestos exposure has been limited to chrysotile (RG-244 is chrysotile) there is strong evidence that no excess mesotheliomas will occur.".
E N D
1. 1 UCC told Customers Calidria was safe. How?
2. 2 Short fiber is safeShort fiber is safe
3. 3 B. Other fibers dangerous
4. 4 B. Other fibers dangerous
5. 5 C. Only Heavy Exposures associated with disease
6. 6 D. No UCC employees got sick
7. 7 Did UCC know that this information was wrong? Yes.
8. 8 Short fiber is safeShort fiber is safe
9. 9 Short fiber is safeShort fiber is safe
10. 10 Short fiber is safeShort fiber is safe
11. 11 Short fiber is safeShort fiber is safe
12. 12
13. 13 B. Calidria not harmless
14. 14 C. TLV did not protect workers
15. 15
16. 16 January 7, 1991January 7, 1991
17. 17 January 7, 19991January 7, 19991
18. 18 May 31, 1991May 31, 1991
19. 19
20. 20
21. 21 Why did UCC give customers the wrong information regarding Calidria? They had a toxicology problem to sell
22. 22 Toxicology was a problem March 24, 1966
OPINION: UCC acted in concert with other corporations through the AIA and IHF to make sure very few people [were] have been paying attention," to the health problems of asbestos and to limit governmental action to protect the public. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health & safety standards.
Opinion: UCC increased marketing efforts in response to adverse health and safety information on asbestos health risks. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health and safety standards.March 24, 1966
OPINION: UCC acted in concert with other corporations through the AIA and IHF to make sure very few people [were] have been paying attention," to the health problems of asbestos and to limit governmental action to protect the public. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health & safety standards.
Opinion: UCC increased marketing efforts in response to adverse health and safety information on asbestos health risks. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health and safety standards.
23. 23 Toxicology was a problem
24. 24 Toxicology was a problem
25. 25 Toxicology was a problem
26. 26 Toxicology was a problem
27. 27 Did UCC advise employees on how to communicate important safety information to customers? Yes.
28. 28 June 22, 1972
June 22, 1972
29. 29 June 22, 1972
Opinion: UCC increased marketing efforts in response to adverse health and safety information on asbestos health risks. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health and safety standards.June 22, 1972
Opinion: UCC increased marketing efforts in response to adverse health and safety information on asbestos health risks. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health and safety standards.
30. 30 Who believed UCC?
31. 31 July 5, 1972July 5, 1972
32. 32 "Of the four, three are proven bad actors whereas the fourth (which they claim is the Calidria type) is much more innocuous...Union Carbide claims they have sufficient toxicological data that places Calidria in the nuisance dust category and distinctly separates it from emotional generalizations associated with generic asbestos." Dow Believed UCC OPINION: UCC knew that exposures to TJC products were above the TLV and knew they had a legal duty to warn but failed to do so. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health & safety standards.
Opinion: UCC misled customers.OPINION: UCC knew that exposures to TJC products were above the TLV and knew they had a legal duty to warn but failed to do so. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health & safety standards.
Opinion: UCC misled customers.
33. 33 Short fiber is safeShort fiber is safe
34. 34
35. 35
36. 36
37. 37 Short fiber is safeShort fiber is safe
38. 38 Why did UCC not tell the truth about their product?
39. 39 May 30, 1975
Opinion: This is wrong no preventable death or injury is ever acceptable. Every unnecessary death and disease case is appreciable and substantial. Substitutes were available for asbestos. Every lost life was appreciable and substantial.May 30, 1975
Opinion: This is wrong no preventable death or injury is ever acceptable. Every unnecessary death and disease case is appreciable and substantial. Substitutes were available for asbestos. Every lost life was appreciable and substantial.
40. 40 Opinion: UCC based its marketing decisions on liability risk instead of health risk. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health and safety standards. It was all about the money.Opinion: UCC based its marketing decisions on liability risk instead of health risk. This was wrong and contrary to contemporaneous health and safety standards. It was all about the money.
41. 41 November 23, 1981November 23, 1981
42. 42
43. 43 March 25, 1974
Opinion: This is contrary to generally accepted principle of substitution of a safer for a more hazardous product. It appears that profit superceded health & safety concerns for UCC. This was wrong. Misinformation on health & safety should not be given to customers to promote sales or for any other reason.March 25, 1974
Opinion: This is contrary to generally accepted principle of substitution of a safer for a more hazardous product. It appears that profit superceded health & safety concerns for UCC. This was wrong. Misinformation on health & safety should not be given to customers to promote sales or for any other reason.
44. 44 UCC Still thought it was OK to rely on the vendor
45. 45 Response to Knowledge 2003