Very Dark Water

[Speedbird-1]

We watched the film 'Dark Waters' last night.
I know it's old news to many, but... Wow!....what a tale of corporate malfeasance, greed and civic irresponsibility. (I think that covers it)

It make one wonder, what else the large conglomerates, aren't telling us.

What's the latest info' on Teflon use?

[m j b]

Originally Posted by Speedbird-1

...what a tale of corporate malfeasance, greed and civic irresponsibility. (I think that covers it)

It make one wonder, what else the large conglomerates, aren't telling us.

I did a paper in college about corporate responsibility, comparing Ford, P&G and J&J and their production issues: The Pinto, tampons and Tylenol tampering.

My conclusion (you can reach your own) was that only J&J did the right thing. As soon as there was conclusive reports of tampering, they pulled 100% of their product from the market, and kept it off until they had a solution. That's where all of this annoying product protection stuff that you young folks take for granted came from.

The other two tried to ignore, hide, rationalize and fight any correction or change to their product or the deaths resulting from them.

I used to work for a large multinational consumer product company that manufactured a product that tended to kill their consumers. The amount of rationalization there was simply amazing. These otherwise normal people, parents, husbands and wives, just overlooked disturbing facts.

I quit because I could no longer deal with the hypocrisy. But yes, I was a willing participant for quite a while. Money corrupts.

[JasoninDenver]

I highly recommend reading "A Civil Action" for anyone interested in the depth of delusion and denial that can occur in our corporate world when decisions are made based solely on profits.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Speedbird-1

We watched the film 'Dark Waters' last night.
I know it's old news to many, but... Wow!....what a tale of corporate malfeasance, greed and civic irresponsibility. (I think that covers it)

It make one wonder, what else the large conglomerates, aren't telling us.

What's the latest info' on Teflon use?

Originally Posted by JasoninDenver

I highly recommend reading "A Civil Action" for anyone interested in the depth of delusion and denial that can occur in our corporate world when decisions are made based solely on profits.

Thanks guys … I’ll be adding these to my list

[Blansky]

The main problem lies in the fact that corporate CEOs will never go to jail for their crimes, the company will only be fined, some rather insignificant amount (in the grand scheme of things) which is no deterrent.

I remember back awhile when GM pickup gas tanks were exploding on side impacts. They didn't fix it (recall it) and install a rubber bladder, was because the lawsuits were cheaper to settle on the family lawsuits for people that got burned alive, than it was to fix the problem.

People may not know this but the medical and medical device companies test their products in animal labs, dog labs, then move their testing to poor people in 3rd world countries and then in the US before the product is approved.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by Blansky

The main problem lies in the fact that corporate CEOs will never go to jail for their crimes, the company will only be fined, some rather insignificant amount (in the grand scheme of things) which is no deterrent.

I remember back awhile when GM pickup gas tanks were exploding on side impacts. They didn't fix it (recall it) and install a rubber bladder, was because the lawsuits were cheaper to settle on the family lawsuits for people that got burned alive, than it was to fix the problem.

People may not know this but the medical and medical device companies test their products in animal labs, dog labs, then move their testing to poor people in 3rd world countries and then in the US before the product is approved.

To your first point, the corporate veil can be penetrated and corporate officers held personally accountable for serious misconduct. The lawyers can weigh in on what constitutes “serious”, but it is fairly common in environmental enforcement actions in my experience.

I wouldn’t expect GM to put resealable fuel tank technology in a pickup truck. Maybe relocate/redesign the tank. And your assertion that companies are experimenting on people outside the norms of traditional medical research practices is pretty inflammatory without an authoritative citation.

Corporations are not inherently evil, as you imply. They are susceptible to market influences, activists shareholders, and group think. But it is not a custom and practice at most corporations to intentionally incur risk on itself or its customers.

[Blansky]

Originally Posted by Maleg

To your first point, the corporate veil can be penetrated and corporate officers held personally accountable for serious misconduct. The lawyers can weigh in on what constitutes “serious”, but it is fairly common in environmental enforcement actions in my experience.

I wouldn’t expect GM to put resealable fuel tank technology in a pickup truck. Maybe relocate/redesign the tank. And your assertion that companies are experimenting on people outside the norms of traditional medical research practices is pretty inflammatory without an authoritative citation.

Corporations are not inherently evil, as you imply. They are susceptible to market influences, activists shareholders, and group think. But it is not a custom and practice at most corporations to intentionally incur risk on itself or its customers.

My wife worked in the medical device field for 28 years. She's trained people while worked in the dog labs, one of which is a couple of miles from where we live. My buddy in Sonoma county and his brother have brought devices to market and sold them to the big boys, and often travel to South America where they test their products. Third world countries is the standard for testing these products because of the lax regulations and people they can pay to test them. Hardly any secret.

[Speedbird-1]

Originally Posted by Maleg

To your first point, the corporate veil can be penetrated and corporate officers held personally accountable for serious misconduct. The lawyers can weigh in on what constitutes “serious”, but it is fairly common in environmental enforcement actions in my experience.

I wouldn’t expect GM to put resealable fuel tank technology in a pickup truck. Maybe relocate/redesign the tank. And your assertion that companies are experimenting on people outside the norms of traditional medical research practices is pretty inflammatory without an authoritative citation.

Corporations are not inherently evil, as you imply. They are susceptible to market influences, activists shareholders, and group think. But it is not a custom and practice at most corporations to intentionally incur risk on itself or its customers.

Is anyone from Dupont in jail....if not, they should be.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by Speedbird-1

Is anyone from Dupont in jail....if not, they should be.

Why?

[JasoninDenver]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Why?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/m...nightmare.html

[996marty]

Originally Posted by JasoninDenver

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/m...nightmare.html

Interesting read and doesn’t put DuPont in a good light

[77T]

Not to take attention away from C8 and the Dark Waters story, but I suggest watching this replay from last night's PBS American Experience documentary.

https://youtu.be/gR4YBDzPzd0?si=Oy1Qe2co_ZFKZ7Rj

DuPont will eventually benefit from short-term memory loss among lawmakers and regulators, and frankly lazy public health experts.

The end of the Love Canal story today is "bury and forget".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[77T]

Originally Posted by Speedbird-1

Is anyone from Dupont in jail....if not, they should be.

I don't believe anyone was charged with a crime. The litigation was for civil damages.

This DuPont issue is complicated. Chemistry itself is complicated when a breakthrough compound is discovered and then launched in its first-use application.

Does anyone recall the phrase “better things for better living through chemistry”?

In the depths of the 1930's Depression, DuPont's advertising slogan lauded its potential to solve virtually any human problem.

It's clear that without chemistry, the world would be a very different place.

What is not so clear is how unintended consequences bear on the succeeding generations of corporate leaders and any alleged intent to commit a crime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by 77T

I don't believe anyone was charged with a crime. The litigation was for civil damages.

This DuPont issue is complicated. Chemistry itself is complicated when a breakthrough compound is discovered and then launched in its first-use application.

Does anyone recall the phrase “better things for better living through chemistry”?

In the depths of the 1930's Depression, DuPont's advertising slogan lauded its potential to solve virtually any human problem.

It's clear that without chemistry, the world would be a very different place.

What is not so clear is how unintended consequences bear on the succeeding generations of corporate leaders and any alleged intent to commit a crime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Well stated.

My point, people don’t go to jail if no crime was committed. Much of current environmental law arose from found problems. Companies were in compliance with the law at the time they created the problems. So, the executives aren’t going to be prosecuted for things that weren’t illegal at the time.

The morality of Dupont’s actions at the time is objectionable, and they paid a dollar price for dubious behavior judged in the modern environmental context, but our system of government doesn’t allow prosecution for dubious behavior alone.

[JasoninDenver]

Originally Posted by 77T

I don't believe anyone was charged with a crime. The litigation was for civil damages.

This DuPont issue is complicated. Chemistry itself is complicated when a breakthrough compound is discovered and then launched in its first-use application.

Does anyone recall the phrase “better things for better living through chemistry”?

In the depths of the 1930's Depression, DuPont's advertising slogan lauded its potential to solve virtually any human problem.

It's clear that without chemistry, the world would be a very different place.

What is not so clear is how unintended consequences bear on the succeeding generations of corporate leaders and any alleged intent to commit a crime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Intent to commit a crime only attaches when there is knowledge of an underlying danger or defect that is then hidden by corporate leaders. New chemicals usually go through a pretty comprehensive testing phase as Blansky mentioned. This would insulate corporate leaders up to the point that new evidence shows harmful effects. At that point, the issue becomes “do they have a duty to disclose the new contrary information”. CEOs in the tobacco industry felt not and others have followed their lead - think Sacklers.

Sadly, I do think criminal penalties will need to be imposed to change corporate culture.