Breaking News 突发新闻 | | Forum 论坛 | | UK News 英国新闻 | | USA News 美国新闻 | | World News 世界新闻 | | Political News 政治新闻 | | Sci-Tech News 科技新闻 | | War & Terrorism News 战争和恐怖主义新闻 | | Sports News 体育新闻 | | Multimedia 多媒体 | | Set Homepage 设为首页 | |
| |
 | Translate: 翻译：               How industry money protects killer chemicals如何保护产业的金钱杀手化学品 Tuesday, September 9th, 2008 周二， 2008年9月9日 It happens almost every time. 它发生的几乎每一次。 When a study is published linking a workplace chemical to serious disease, a scientist working for the industry disputes the findings. David Michaels, author of ‘Doubt is their product’, exposes industry’s dangerous tactics to protect its toxic favourites. 当进行一项研究，出版了连接工作化学品严重的疾病，科学家的工作，为业界争议的结果。 国宝迈克尔斯，作者'无疑是他们的产品' ，暴露了业界的危险的手段，保护其有毒的收藏。 By通过 David Michaels朱迈克尔斯 | This strategy of “manufacturing scientific uncertainty” comes directly from the tobacco industry’s playbook. |这一战略“制造科学上的不确定性”直接来自烟草业的剧本。 In fact, many of the same scientists who manufactured doubt for the cigarette companies are now performing that same task for a wide range of other industries.事实上，在许多相同的科学家，谁制造的，无疑为香烟公司现正执行相同的任务，范围广泛的其他行业。 How did we get here?我们是怎样来到这里？ In the 1950s, when scientists first showed that smokers had hugely increased risk of lung cancer, the cigarette companies ran a sophisticated public relations campaign to raise doubts about the increasingly definitive scientific evidence.在20世纪50年代，当科学家首次表明，吸烟的巨大肺癌风险加大，卷烟公司冉一个复杂的公共关系运动，以提高疑虑日益明确的科学证据。 The companies realised that if you could argue about the science, then you could avoid having to address solutions: how to help people stop smoking.公司意识到，如果你可以辩称，关于科学，那么你就可以不必地址解决方案：如何帮助人们戒烟。 But even when that didn’t work, Big Tobacco could always fall back on the argument that smoking was a choice – whatever the risk, smokers made the choice themselves, and that it was their right to do so.但即使没有工作，大烟草总是可以依傍的说法，吸烟是一种选择-无论风险，吸烟者作出自己的选择，这是他们有权这样做。 The result was the creation of an industry of scientific consultants who specialise in “product defence,” and the recognition by corporate spin experts that manufacturing doubt works – do it well and you can stop government regulators, or at least slow them down for years.其结果是创造一个产业的科学顾问谁专注于“产品”辩护，承认公司自旋专家认为，制造业无疑工程-做得很好，你可以停止政府的监管机构，或者至少是缓慢下来了多年。 In 1969 an executive at Brown & Williamson, a cigarette maker now owned by RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, unwisely committed to paper the perfect slogan for his industry’s disinformation campaign: “Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public.” Big Tobacco has lost all respect and credibility, but the practices it perfected have proliferated.在1969年1长官在布朗与威廉森，卷烟制造商现在所拥有的雷诺烟草公司，不明智地致力于文件完美的口号，为整个产业的造谣运动： “毫无疑问是我们的产品，因为它是最好的手段，竞争与身体其实'存在于心中的普罗大众。 “大烟草已失去所有的尊重和信誉，但它的做法，完善有激增。 A growing trend that disingenuously demands proof over precaution in the realm of public health.越来越多的趋势disingenuously的要求，证明以上预防措施的境界市民的健康。 Product defence 产品辩护 In field after field, year after year, conclusions that might support regulation are always disputed.在该领域后场，年复一年，结论可能会支持规例都是有争议的。 Animal data are deemed not relevant, human data not representative, and exposure data not reliable.动物的数据被认为是不相关的，人类的数据不具代表性，暴露的数据并不可靠。 Whatever the story — workplace chemicals that cause cancer, diesel exhaust, global warming, sugar and obesity, secondhand smoke, plastics chemicals that may disrupt endocrine function — scientists in the “product defence industry” will manufacture uncertainty about it.无论故事-工作场所的化学物质，致癌，柴油车尾气中，全球气候变暖，糖和肥胖，二手烟，塑胶化学物质，可能会破坏内分泌功能-科学家在“产品国防工业”将生产的不确定性。 The “debate” over global warming is perhaps the most pernicious outgrowth of tobacco’s strategy. “大辩论”的全球变暖可能是最有害的产物，烟草的战略。 We can expect to see the scientists who last year claimed uncertainty about humans’ role in climate change now asserting that there is so much uncertainty about the public health impacts, or the technology required to reduce carbon emissions that we must undertake more research before setting new policy.我们可以期待看到谁的科学家去年声称的不确定性，人类'的作用，在气候变化，现在断言有那么多的不确定性，市民对健康的影响，或所需的技术，以减少二氧化碳排放量，我们必须进行更多的研究之前，设置新的政策。 I call it Denying Climate Change 2.0.我称之为否认气候变化的2.0 。 While much of the media has learned to be sceptical about manufactured uncertainty in the climate debate, less public attention is trained on the pervasive use of doubt-for-hire in other industries whose products threaten the health of workers and consumers.而许多媒体获悉，被怀疑制造的不确定性，气候的辩论，不到公众注意的是，受过训练的就普遍使用，无疑为租用，在其他行业，其产品的威胁工人的健康和消费者的利益。 In Doubt is their product: How industry’s assault on science threatens your health I dissect industry’s campaigns to manufacture doubt about a series of important workplace hazards, including asbestos, benzene lead, aromatic amines (dyes and rubber chemicals that cause bladder cancer), beryllium, chromium 6, diacetyl (the artificial butter flavor component that has killed or damaged the lungs of dozens of workers – Hazards 101) and ergonomic hazards.在无疑是他们的产品：如何业界的进攻，科学威胁您的健康i剖析行业的活动，无疑是制造了一系列重要的工作场所的危险，包括石棉，苯，铅，芳香胺（染料和橡胶化学品造成膀胱癌） ，铍，铬6 ，双乙酰（人工奶油风味的组成部分已死亡或损坏的肺部数十名工人-危害1 01）和符合人体工程学的危险。 I focus largely on the US, because this country dominates the worldwide standard-setting process. i的重点主要是对美国，因为这个国家占主导地位的全球标准制定进程。 When our regulators allow manufactured uncertainty to weaken or delay protections, workers across the world suffer the repercussions.当我们的管理部门允许制造的不确定性，以削弱或延迟的保护，工人在世界各地受到的反响。 Standard response 标准回应 I have had the opportunity to witness at close range the process of manufacturing scientific doubt.我有机会亲眼目睹在近距离制造过程的科学疑问。 In the Clinton administration, I served as US Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health in the Department of Energy ( DOE ), the chief safety officer for the nation’s nuclear weapons facilities.在克林顿政府中，我担任美国助理国务卿环境，安全和卫生署在能源部 （ DOE ） ，行政安全主任，为国家的核武器设施。 I ran the process through which we issued a strong new rule to reduce exposure to beryllium, a metal vital in nuclear weapons and now used in consumer products like golf clubs.我参加的过程中，通过我们发出了强烈的新规则，以减少暴露于铍，金属至关重要的核武器和现在用在消费产品，如高尔夫俱乐部。 Beryllium causes lung disease at extremely low exposure levels, and it causes lung cancer.铍肺疾病的原因，在极低的暴露水平，它的成因肺癌。 After leaving the government, I was able to obtain a collection of secret documents which showed that the beryllium industry has run a 30 year campaign industry attacking any study that questioned the old, out-of-date OSHA standard.之后，离开政府，我是能够获得的集合，秘密文件显示，铍工业已运行30年的运动产业的攻击，任何研究，质疑岁，不合时宜职业安全与卫生署的标准。 Chromium 6 is another industrial chemical featured in Doubt is Their Product.铬六是另一个工业化学品精选无疑是在他们的产品。 For more than five decades, we have known chromium 6 is a powerful lung carcinogen.五年以上20年来，我们都知道铬六是一个功能强大的肺癌致癌物。 But in the US, it has never been regulated as cancer-causing.但在美国，它从来没有规管的癌症造成的。 Secret minutes of the Chrome Coalition [1], the chromium employers’ trade association, reveal that when the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration ( OSHA ) was finally considering a new workplace exposure standard, the chromium industry brought in some of the nation’s top product defense scientists, to design a sophisticated counter attack.秘密分钟的铬联盟[ 1 ] ，铬雇主贸易协会，显示当美国职业安全和健康管理局（ 奥沙 ）终于考虑新的工作接触标准，铬业带来了一些国家的Top产品国防科学家，要设计一套精密的反击。 The chromium manufacturers also sponsored an important study which showed that chromium 6 caused lung cancer at levels far below the OSHA standard in effect at the time [2], but those results were never revealed until I discovered them.铬制造商也举办了一个重要的研究表明铬六所造成的肺癌水平远远低于职业安全与卫生署的标准，实际上在当时的[ 2 ] ，但这些结果显示，从来没有，直到我发现他们。 Deadly tactic 致命战术 These examples are not exceptional.这些例子也不例外。 I report on corporate efforts to manufacture uncertainty about asbestos, lead, vinyl chloride, diacetyl, and a host of other chemicals.报告对公司的努力，制造的不确定性，石棉，铅，氯乙烯，双乙酰，以及一系列其他化学品。 Doubt is their product is filled with never before published documents, like the never-published letter from the medical director of DuPont stating that 100 per cent of the men who made beta-naphthylamine ( BNA ) at one factory developed bladder cancer [3].无疑是他们的产品是充满了以前从未出版的文件一样，从未公开信由医务主任的杜邦公司指出，百分之一百的男性是谁β -萘胺（ 国籍法令 ）在一厂开发的膀胱癌[ 3 ] 。 DuPont also produced other bladder carcinogens in that same factory; at least 450 workers at the plant developed work-related bladder cancer [4].杜邦公司还制作其他膀胱致癌物质在同一个工厂;至少有450名工人在工厂发展与工作有关的膀胱癌[ 4 ] 。 One of the chemicals closely related to BNA made at that plant was ortho-toluidine (OT).其中的化学物质密切相关的国籍法令在该植物是邻-甲苯胺（酒店） 。 Through a series of DuPont letters, reports and papers, the book demonstrates that DuPont managers witnessed this development and growth of this tragic epidemic, yet refused to acknowledge that OT could also cause bladder cancer, shipping the chemical out without proper warnings.通过一系列的杜邦公司的信件，报告和文件，这本书表明，杜邦公司经理见证了这一发展和增长，这一悲惨疫情，但拒不承认酒店也可以导致膀胱癌，航运化学列没有适当的警告。 As a result, dozens of workers exposed to OT in a plant in Niagara Falls New York, USA , have developed bladder cancer.因此，数十名工人暴露于城市旅游局在一家工厂在尼亚加拉瀑布New York ， 美国 ，制定了膀胱癌。 For many years, DuPont and other manufacturers have disputed the link between OT and human bladder cancer.多年来，杜邦公司和其他制造商已有争议之间的联系，城市旅游局及人膀胱癌。 Earlier this year, the International Agency for Research on Cancer evaluated OT and reached the same conclusion I did, too late for the Niagara Falls workers: OT is a human bladder carcinogen.今年早些时候，国际癌症研究机构评估，职能治疗，并达成了相同的结论，我本来，为时已晚，为尼亚加拉瀑布的工人：酒店是一个人膀胱致癌物质。 In researching this book, I uncovered a many documents like the DuPont bladder cancer ones.在研究这本书，我发现了许多文件，如杜邦膀胱癌。 Some of these documents are shocking.其中一些文件是令人震惊。 To ensure they can be used by activists, public health practitioners and regulators, I have posted every reference in the book, with links to all of the “smoking guns,” at DefendingScience.org.以确保他们可以使用由活动家，公共卫生从业人员和监管机构，我已发布的每一个参考在这本书中，链接，所有的“吸烟枪， ”在defendingscience.org 。 Doubt is their product powerfully demonstrates that conflicted science is not good science.无疑是他们的产品，有力地表明，科学的冲突是不好的科学。 If a scientist is paid by a polluter or a manufacturer of dangerous products, her or his judgment is inevitably clouded by that financial relationship; this is true even for scientists who have great integrity and who try to be honest.如果是一位科学家所付出的污染者或制造商的危险产品，她或他的判断是无可避免的阴云笼罩着金融的关系;这才是真正的科学家，甚至谁有很大的完整性和谁尝试诚实。 As a result, we cannot rely on the judgment of these scientists when considering how to best protect workers from toxic exposures.因此，我们不能依靠的判断，这些科学家在考虑如何以最佳方式保护工人免受有毒风险。 Activists, unions and scientists need to demand that our government agencies rely on independent studies conducted by independent scientists, not ones bought and paid for by the producers of the hazards.活动家，工会和科学家需要的需求，我们的政府机构，依赖于独立进行的研究，并由独立的科学家，不是买和费用由生产者的危险。 The mission of health and safety activists, as well as public health and environmental agencies, is to reduce hazards before people get sick or the environment is irreparably damaged.该特派团的健康和安全的积极分子，以及公众对健康和环境的机构，是为了减少危害之前，人们生病或环境是不可弥补的损坏。 We don’t need certainty to act.我们不确定性，需要采取行动。 It is time to return to first principles: use the best science available, but do not demand certainty where it does not exist.现在是时候返回的第一原则：用最好的科学可用，但不确定性的需求，它不存在。 References:参考文献： 1. 1 。 Secret minutes of the Chrome Coalition.秘密分钟的铬联盟。 [pdf1] [pdf2] [pdf3] [ pdf1 ] [ pdf2 ] [ pdf3 ] 2. 2 。 Collaborative cohort mortality study of four chromate production facilities, 1958-1998, September 2002 [pdf]协作队列死亡率研究4铬盐生产设施， 1958年至1998年， 2002年9月[ PDF格式] 3. 3 。 June 18 1947 letter from the manager at DuPont’s Chambers plant [pdf] 1947年6月18日的信中，从经理，杜邦公司的商会植物[ PDF格式] 4. 4 。 25 October 1991 email from Robert Weiss MD [pdf] 1991年10月25日的电子邮件从罗伯特魏斯海事处[ PDF格式] This article was first published in Hazards Magazine, 103, August 2008此文章是首次出版，在危险的杂志， 103号， 2008年8月 Have Your Say: How industry money protects killer chemicals 有您这样说：行业的钱，如何保护杀手化学品 Please read our请阅读我们的 posting guidelines before posting发布指引，然后再发布 . 。 Alternatively或者 you can discuss this report here您可以讨论此报告在这里 . 。 3 Responses to “How industry money protects killer chemicals”三月的反应， “如何保护产业的金钱化学品杀手”
Related News 相关新闻
| Go to Forum去论坛 | Latest Topics最新主题  Email This Page To A Friend 电子邮件此页给朋友 Latest Headlines 最新的新闻标题
More更多 Breaking News突发新闻  Archive 存档
|
About 大约 | | DVD Store DVD的商店 | | Opinion 民意 | | Reviews 评语 | | Special Guests 特别来宾 | | Webmasters 网站管理员 |
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. 所表达的意见，在rinf新闻电线和通讯是唯一的责任作者（ S ）和并不一定反映的意见，网站管理员。 RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. rinf.com ：突破新闻与其他的媒体是copyleft的-复制及分发自由。 News Forum 新闻论坛 |
In 1977, “Building 6: The Tragedy at Bridesburg,” by Willard S. Randall and Stephen D. Solomon, documented how the Rohm & Haas company (possibly best known for “Plexiglas”) managed to hide the carcinogenicity of bis-chloromethyl ether for decades. 1977年，在“建设6条：悲剧在bridesburg ， ”威拉德美国兰达尔和Stephen四索罗门，记载如何罗姆＆哈斯公司（可能是最出名的“树脂玻璃” ）管理，以隐藏的致癌性之二-氯甲醚数十年之久。
“Manufacturing scientific uncertainty” exists in other venues, such as the never-ending war by fundamentalist religious creationists against evolution - see, for instance, “制造科学上的不确定性”的存在，在其他场地，如无休止的战争，宗教原教旨主义creationists反对的演变-例如，见 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dover_trial http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/dover_trial . 。 The creators of “intelligent design” creationism have no science to contribute to the discussion, but they work very hard to sow the seeds of doubt against evolution, which is the cornerstone of modern biology.创造“智能设计论”神创论有没有科学的讨论作出贡献，但他们的工作很努力地播下种子疑问，对演变，这是基石，现代生物学。