Document G66JmBpmQ6onbJDy4XOm3axnm

Ill THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ST. CLAIR c o m m , ILLINOIS FRANCES E. KEMNER, ET AL., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) NO. 80-L-970 vs. ) MONSANTOCOMPANY. > ) Defendants. ) ) REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS MAT 31, 1935 Before tha HONORABLE RICHARD P. GOLDENHZRSH, Circuit Jwdsa APPEARANCES) MR. REX CARR and MR. JEROME SEIGXREID, Attorneys at Law on Behalf of the Plaintiffs; and MR. KENNETH HEINEKAH and MR. JOSEPH SASSIF on Behalf of the Defendant, Monsanto Coopany. 1 INDEX OF WITNESSES 2 Called on behalf of the Plaintiffs: . 3 DR, GEORGE ROUSH 4 Cross Examination (By Mr. Carr) 5 2 6 INDEX OF EXHIBITS 7 8 PLAINTIFFS EX'. NO. MARKED FOR ADMITTED 9 IDENTIFICATION . .INTO EVIDENCE 1434, A 10 1435 11 12 1435A :n 12 .19 20 20 20 1436 13 51 53 1436A 14 54 - 15 1437 58 1438 16 88 88: 1438A 17 89 89 1438B 18 119 19 1439 , . , .. 144. ?' j, . 20 1440 ` .:i-v ; V \ 150 ` 151 21 1440A 22 1441 151 f .r' 160 ' 151 160 23 1441A ,'i 'i * . 160. 161 24 1441B . 161 161 1 BE IT REMEMBERED AMD CERTIFIED, that heretofore, 2 on to-wit: May 31, 1985, the matter aa hereinbefore oat 3 forth cats on for hearing before the Honorable Richard F ,, 4 Goldenhersh p Circuit Judge in and for the Twentieth Judicial 5 Circuit, and the following was had of record, towit: 6 7 8 (The cross examination under section 2-1102 of 9 ' Dr, George Roush by Mr. Carr continued as follows:) 10 Q (By Mr. Carr) Dr. Roush, yesterday Mr. Helneman 11 accused me of fabricating a statement that TCD was In 2. 4-D. 12 Do you recall that. sir?. 13 MR. 'HEIHEMAHs Ho, 2, 3, 7, 8, Mr. Carr. 14 Q (By Mr. Carr) Okay. 2. 3, 7. 8 in 2, 4-D. do 15 you recall that, sir? 16 A Yea. sir. : r\ * t *'' J ^ 1 11 . i ^ j v: d 'H 17 Q I'd like to hand you some testimony from.Dr.. Fred * ' * ' '* 18 Hileman. You know who he is, don*t you? >" '\ , 19 A Yes. sir. ' * f ' 1' `, 20 Q And these were questions asked of Dr . Kileman by 21 Mr. Musgrave, and Mr. Heineman wasn't here, but nevertheless 22 he should be aware of what Mr. Masgrave is doing in court, 23 and what Dr. Hileman is doing in court. I'd like to hand 24 you that and ask you to read that-. That's March 21, 85, 3 l Counsel, 2 MR. HEIHEMA&: Your Honor, any X object to this 3 procedure Whet in the world is he doing? Is he ashing 4 Dr Roush to comment on somebody else4s testimony? 5 THE COURTt Gentlemen, can you approach the bench 6 for a minute, please* 7 8 (Colloquy held et the bench out of the hearing of 9 the Jury*) 10 THE COURT: What do you have in mind? 11 .HR* CARR: X want to show that they ere the ones 12 that have said 2, 3, 7, 8 is in 2, 4-D by the testimony of 13 Hllemsn under the questioning of Kusgrave. 14 MR* HEXHEM&H: Well, your Honor, it's totally 15 improper for him to-- ' *. * , 1 t' i* _* 16 MR* CARR: Unless Hr* liilesasn-- 17 HR. HEXHEMAH: Why don't you ask this witness 18 whether 2, 3, 7, S Is in 2, 4-D* 19 THE COURT: Go ahead* -: ' 20 MR* HEXNEMAN: My objection; is overruled, your 21 Honor? 22 - THE COURT: It's overruled* X didn't know you had 23 made one. But it ie overruled. 24 BAYONNE. N.J, <0 1 (The following proceedings were held within the 2 hearing of the Jury.) 3 Q (By Hr Carr) Dr. RoushB have you had an opportun 4 ity to read the testimony of Dr. Hlleman? 5 A Ho sir X couldn't tell what the subject was % 11 6 starting out in the middle like that* 7 Q All right. Could you get that can of Weed B Con 8. if it's not already out. 9 ' HIU HBIHEHAHr Bo you have a copy of it for me r 10 Mr'Carr? - * 11 HE. GARRi .1' don't Counsel, X assumed you had, 12 HE, HEXHEH&Ht X didn't really know you'd be bring- 13 ..tag up Bar HiXeman'a testimony* 14 HE CAEEj Yo u oughtn't make accusations if you 15 w a r m 11 there for the facts. .* 1 \ / / 16 HE. HEXHEHAHj Why don't you ask this witness about ; : '.V :f.. " O , 17 It. Your Honor X would like to state for the record an 18 objection that Hr. Carr's reprssentatlon of what is in that 19 testimony, this is cross examination# a clarification of 20 Br. Hiienum by Hr, Musgrave after Hr, Carr had asked Dr. 21 Hileman a hypothetical question to assume that if there had 22 been dioxin in 2 4-di and it had gone through in 2 4-D. 23 and if it had gone through Into the Weed B Gon then to make i ^L ,b i ' 24 certain calculations and that's what Br. Hilssasn was PENGAD CO., BA VO N N E, N.J, 1 testifying to in this clarification. The calculations that 2 were being made based on the hypothetical question, asked him by Mr. Carr, in no. sense was there an admission that in 3 fact 2, 4-D as it's been sold as a herbicide contains 2, 3, 4 7, 8-TCDD. I object to the manner in which Mr. Carr is 5 6 trying to misuse this information. MR. CARR: Your Honor, for the record, Monsanto 7 8 has admitted through its various witnesses that at least up until 1981 when Diamond Shamrock changed the process of 9 10 manufacturing 2, 4-D, that the phenolic contents of 2, 4 11 dichlorophenol would go into the 2, 4-D, that in September 12 of *81, or sometime in late *81, the Diamond Shamrock sacti13 vated the process known as toluene extraction, which they 14 said removed the dioxin content from the 2, 4 dichlorophenol. 15 Mr. Musgrave in examination of Dr. Wilson-- of Dr. Hileman, 16 and the plaintiffs in examination of Dr Wilson, demonstrated 17 that if there was 2, 3, 7, 8, or for that matter any TCDD in the 2, 4 di.chibfiirophenol itt3would pass into the 2, 4-D that's 18 19 being manufactured.' .This examination that was done by Mr. 20 Musgrave on March 21, 1985 of Fred Hileman is totally 21 consistent with those' statements that are in evidence, in that 22 2, 3, 7, 8 would be: in the 2, 4-D. * 23 MR. HEINEMAN: Your Honor, X believe that the 24 EPA said in the document that Mr. Carr introduced in 1 evidence, and I'm trying to find it, X think the EPAsaid 2 that no 2, 3, 7, 8 has ever been found -- 3 MR. CARR: We agree one hundred percent that that's 4 exactly the statement. 5 MR. HEINEMAN: -- in 2, 4-D. Never been found in it. 6 MR* CARR: . I agree one hundred percent that that's 7 in the statement there. It's also demonstrated that the 2, 4-D 8 they were examining was from Dow, and there's a table of 9 material that they have in there. It's Dow material. No state JO ment ever been made that the 2, 4-D made from Monsanto to 2, 4 11 dichlorophenol, and we have conceded that 2, 3, 7, 8 is not 12 detectable levels in all batches of 2, 4 dichlorophenol. We ar 13 not representing that it is* It's a batch-- at least up until 14 1979 when they quit using caustic that contained high levels 15 of 2, 3, 7, 8 and Counsel doesn't know that, but he should * \' t * . ip 16 know that,if he's read;the record. Jr ' \ "1 j >- 17 M R . ,HEINEMAN: Counsel doesn't know 18 what? ' f 19 THE COURT: Okay. The objection is overruled* 20 Excuse me, X'nr losing'my voice* Mr* `Carr, you may proceed on 21 your line of questioning. 22 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, does the testimony of Dr. 23 Hileman here that I've asked you tovv-.examine propose that 24 there would be twenty-five parts per billion of 2, 3, 7, 8 / PENCMl' CO.. BAVONfiE, N.J.j 07002^ ,FOHW IL 24 B 'I .2 3' ' -4 5 6:. 7/: 8' *9-' 10 11 12, 13, . 14 15 16 L17 ' ` 18 .19 , - 20 21 , 22 .23 / -24 -y i \ `-\fC 4*'' J ^ V , -^ . * - ]* . ,, ' S1'/ M '> r . . -- _1 *' r-\ J* ^l: ?' * fy 'i dr coeluting isomer.that.Would b.-ana'ly2ed: with 2, 3, 7S 8 .. **w - < ! i. tv '* f ^ ,' Vli ^ % in the original 2, A dichlorbpheno1. The middle of page _ sixty-on. \ . -`I J . 'v A *Yes *'' , ,?:y-< ` ` J -'/ ' Q And on the next page. Dodo Hr. Htleman give an answer saying that,/Starting on thebottomof page sixty-one^ "the .concentration that I calculated as being; in the can of being one point six parts per billion?'* Dp you see that, slx| . :. N: vMR.'sEEIHEHAli: Your Honor,;may I have a continuing objection to,the use]pf this :tran0cript as being totally improper andtotally beyond the rules of evidence?. - '? 'THE COURTt Sure. The objection overruled. j ^^ -rv<' * *-;v ; ' ; ,:; ^ It's noted as a'continuing'objection^in raiaproper uses. , r, THE WITNESS: I sea that *'yes. Q;; (By Mr. Carr) There* s no question but what:the / ' fc.1*.' -~ ` * v ,,fc * .J ' < * J - i'' i- - ' r^ * ^ S T- * - **' i. r * * ~ '~r \s ^ ^ r_ 1"T> " ' ^ ^ -4. L i*. answer is, referring to the--that fraction of the-- or- that part of the...2, 3 , 7 ,V8 that was in the cans tan*t that corrects Doctor? ..;; v/y. : "* A . It doesn't say it'a 2,\ 3, 7, 3. j - , Q Well, Doctors If you look at the question immediate ' ''* ,k ^ y '- ' , '. r - ' , . V-. ly above it , the..answer immediately above ,it, it talks about twenty-five parts per billion of 2, 3, 7, 8 S does it not, airt Tii'^rs`^ *- y 'L. y ^.-*fSit^ \,*f}v.'^''^ s^ ';'-yT^x- -V.'\` ' A Or it eays] coeluting ;iaqmafsy... It. doesn't say i*'* A ri7.v - ,v t> *"* 1 ^ ''Bpacifte Z, -\y*. ' i%.; : \ .A- * , asauct. chat- ',,.J} ?. / .* ^ if'iilfr<>`*'.'*'-*r\V1''* , ti 8 \i 1' *- ft>-j : 1* 7 : ` Vft ?ftvft V' s7 1 it coelutes with ;2;!j3i*7 ft8ftthat --it'might*well be 2,3, 7, '2 y 3 F. \ -v 4- `'.-`.8V'*or"is :2;^3.,. 7, 87J jft ft7 ftft ?*ij '7 --; ft/ -. ' '7/1 /ftft*/ft^ ;-/ft'V V1' ' f ; M R / HEINEMN :t Your Honor-, it's asking him to r - .. ', i ' <**;, ' ' * \ - rr'- f t - r Vv** f*- , assume, what-.maybeV he/hopes isoin-the'testimony,. What in * "\ 5- the/world7is this, Judge? 'I'm'objecting to it as an improper 6 -ft procedure; . .- ; .-..-.ft'"* . .'ft.;;- ft . 7/ 7- THE COURT:- That's the third objection. The first * 1 .. , 8f t one I-'ye overruled. The.second, one was a continuing.objectiojn 9- , , . ; / y This -pbjaction contains nothing new/ ;It is a .continuing. 10 ft \ /.objection and is so noted. .'Unless you have any-new '--7 ft 'A' , II,. ft objection, I don11 want -any .further objections from you **.*'p - ,r "" 4' * L 4; /> ,k 1 / ft rift4-* * ^^ * V- ^ '^'ft ' r K, -i - " vi L . * F , V -p , " ,- t 12 on this, line of"questioning .* Mr . Carr,^you mayftcontinue .ft 1 3 . ; ft' /ft fft. .MR. ,HEINEMAN:ft Your.Honor/ may. speak? -1 thought 14 ..this was' .different in that *he asked him t o assume~something ' 'V. -fft-' ' i: .ft v -.ft,ft '"* ; ft.- "ft; .'`.ft 15; -, that.wasn1t in th transcript,ftand that-s what i was- - PENGtO CO.. BAVONttE. N.J. 01002'. FORM 1L 14 B lft objecting t:o. .7 -7 7; ft /'-ft- ft ft/' * '`ft . ft ft 7 17 " / / f t f t T H E COURT: , Th,question <itself directed him to 1 8 ; ( something in the. transcript'"two questions away.' This .,1s 19 . covered under your,continuing objection. Unless you,have 20 smthing/new,- I don't want .to hear ny repetition of the ' :*vift-'-.ft.- ftft-vvftft -./ft'v.v- -7ft -/ft " .-/''\/ft`. * 21. ^continuing objectionft ih:'. Carr / you may proceed.- 22,' ` . ' ' . f t /ft Q- (By Mr. Catr). Dr. Roush, his answer .oh page sixty- r.r " ' J-1 f*, - * " t t ^ ft r ' J^ T t i1 ^ , " -, t 1*. W ' " ., ^ 23 one-sys, quotai you asked me to..use value jf.twenty-five " ` ^ lit . '- , ^ j; -I -24 -, parts ..per billion of the. 2/ 3 / 7, 8 or coeluting -isomers ft-ft ft./y 7 ftftftft^.//ft/ " 7/' 7';-' ft"-1-' ' 7 ' ..^ftft:c/< 7ft . " '/ -ft';'1"-ft 7 ,, 7^ ft /; 7*7 -ft'* "7 ' . i.v 1 that t o would analyze with 2, 3, 7 8 in theoriginal 2 2, 4 dlchlorophanol, Isn't that exactly what ha say? 3 A Yes, 4 Q And do* not hi answer that that*9* on* point 5 six pact par billion in the can refer to the twenty-five 6 parts per billion of 2ff 3, 7 8 or coeluting lso&ere? 7 A Yes; 8 Q And that would be one point sir part par billion 9 in that can of either 2 3, 7* 8 or coeluting isomers 10 would it not* sir? . r\ \ II A Yes. : '.''..f 1 ; 12 Q And that would be la this can for your .information* 13 Doctor* right in front of you. How, Doctor* Dr, Wilson 14 has also testified to the truth of plaintiffs exhibit 1411, 15 While it does not say 2* 3* 7, 8-TCDD* it does describe 16 2* 4-D as being an Indirect* end for that matter a direct 17 source of TCDD in human beings * doesn't it* air? 18 A Yes. 19 Q And you* ypuraalf* along with Dr, Susklnd* have 20 written documents which describe TCDD as a contaminate of 21 2* 4-D* have you not* sir? 22 HR, HEXHEMAII? I'm sorry* Hr. Carr.waa that 23 TCDD? 24 HR, CARR* TCDD, I MR. HEINEMAH:-- Not 2, 3, 7, 8. Okay. 2 THE WITNESS: Tea. 3 Q (By Mr. Carr) And TCDD Is & term that includes 4 all the tatras, doesn't it, air? 5 A Mot necessarily. 6 Q Does tetrachlorodibenso-p-dioxin Include 2, 3, 7, 7m 8 A Yes. ` ''` \ 9 Q All right. * ' "( \: *'** ' i 10 A But when you say that it doesn't naan that's what 11 it is. , 12 Q It doesn't mean that that's what it is not, does 13 it, sir? 14 A That's right. 15 Q And when you're referring to TCDD, you mean to 16 refer to TCDD tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, do you not, sir? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Which includes 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Yes. And, Doctor, the term TCDD here in this 21 exhibit includes 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD8 does it not, sir? 22 A Mo, not necessarily. 23 MR. HEINEMAUs Objection, how could ho know that? 24 THE COURT: Objection is overruled. 1 THE WITHESS: Hot necessarily. 2 Q :By Mr. Carr) Didn't you Just agree, sir, that 3 the tetrachlorodibcnzo-p-dioxin includes 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD? 4 A Yes. 5 Q -This is the term TCDD. 6 A That doesn't mean it Includes 2, 3, 7, 8 11 ' ' fV i' * "* 7 Q Hell, Doctor, didn't you just say two. seconds ago \' 1. :- ; *' . *. > 8 that the tern TCDD includes 2, 3, 7, 8? 9 A Yes, . J. .t \. >; . ^ . 10 Q And the term here is TCDD, is it not, sir? * 11 : K', ' > 11 A Yes. 12 Q All right. Let's just stop right there. How, 13 Doctor, 1 hand you**-would you mark this as en exhibit 14 15 (At this time Plaintiff s exhibit 1434 was marked 16 for Identification by the court reporter.) 17 Q (By Hr. Carr) X hand you what's been marked 18 plaintiff s exhibit 1434 and ask you to look at that and 19 see if you recognise that as a document, I think, from your 20 file, but not necessarily, but certainly the file of 21 Monsanto. Hake this 1434A, please. 22 23 (At this time Plaintiff s exhibit number 1434A 24 was marked for identification by the court reporter.) I Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, I'd like to also hand you 2 exhibit 1434A and see if you don't see that as a copy of the 3 page you're looking at at this very moment. 4 A Yes, sir. 5 MR. CARR: Your Honor, I'd like to introduce 1434-- 6 I don't believe I got an answer to the 1434. You recognize 7 that as a Monsanto document, don't you, sir? 8 A Yes. Yes. 9 MR. CARR: I'll offer 1434 and 1434A into evidence, 10 and ask leave to pass 1434 to the jury. II THE COURT: Any objection? 12 MR. HEINEMAN: Object, your Honor, total lack of 13 foundation laid for this witness as to this document. 14 THE COURT: Objection is overruled. It's admitted 15 over objection. 16 17 (At this time Plaintiff's exhibits 1434 and 1434A 18 were admitted into evidence over objection.) 19 MR. HEINEMAN: Which is 1434A, Mr. Carr? 20 MR. CARR: The second page, Counsel, here. You 21 can have a copy. 22 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, this copy "Preparedness 23 Q & A Re 'Agent Orange' Dioxin At Krummich," was that 24 document given to p u for review? 1 A Yes, 2 .Q And tha writing on tha document, is that all yens* 3 writing? I recognise some as your writing, but I don't 4 recognise all of it as your writing, or is it all your 5 writing? 6 A Et'a not all my writing, 7 Q All right. Do you know who else it is? It's \ *r- * . ; \ . , 8 not important. If you don't know,' * -**" : 9 A I know Dr. Tillman's writing. 1p * 10 Q All right. Doctor, the second page there that II has been passed to the jury discusses the husaan effects of 12 TCDD and PCDF, that would be polychlorinated furans 13 is that right, air? TCDD standing for tetrachlorodibenao- 14 p-dioxin, which would include 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD, would it hot, 15 sir? 16 A Yes, sir. 17 Q And occupational exposures TCDD and PCDF would be 18 then considered to be contaminants of Trichlorophenol, 19 Trichlorophenate, 2, 4-D, 2, 4, 5T, and p c b ,. would it not, 20 sir? 21 A Yes, / .V/1 i. 22 Q And now, Doctor, Is thi3 aacond page a docurasrit 23 that you prepared, or is it one that was prepared by / . 24 Suskind? See Dr. Suskind, an article by Dr. Suskind la 14 1 J2* ^ 3 4 .5. 1 6 7' ' 8-, ,9' H) , 11 12 13 14 15 16 S 17 18 19 20 ' 21 22 . 23; 24 - attached to this document In which he. makes the same statement. '/ iJ./ kC. " . /*1, i " ^1 ,, ' A ,-lie, this' is;from our department " .i. .Q All right., Your department prepared this state ment than* based upon th knowledge'1that you 'have of .'the ' * irjl/v- ' ** ! :> chemistry; from your department that TODD8s re contaminants \ ,. ^ -,, ,]' ' ` Cr;">, +*' '^ ViW\ * of 2 4-D*a i Is that -correct J:ioir?, ,'/v-* H > i;;i- . * -' -r ' ' j *- "* '> 'l .'t- . . - ` ' 1 * *. ' p :-~,-r i.- - .- A Yes* * - v ,, J '1 ' ., . . -*;.//; TV;J.S' `;5;)^r,; \;vjV Q All right Now, the statement that i)r, Suekind-- turn to tha very last page of:exhibit 1434 s which 1 handsd ." you Ha also saya that populations Involved in the manu: facture and use of 2P 4 0 5T. and 2, 4-D ara good sources of inforraation for.human health-- huaan health effects* does ha not,, sir? , ; / .I haven't read this yet. ;~ Q, .'Oh, I'm sorry. - , 1Ffc_'\ ` ; -/ A I haven't read the statement of Suskihd yet. / Q Well,' go ahead and read enough to become familiar with it, and then direct your attention to the last page, if 1 11 ' _ 1 '. . ' 'S ' you would, please/ The only part of .the; article that !/ really wish todiscusswith you,:Doctor, so you need not, raid it. all for purposes of this cross examination at this tim at; lst, i* Just that part that refers to TCQD ex posure as to include those populations involved in \therman- i a 1' - r - J' . ,J i ^ 1 " ` ' ^ \ , L." ` " A \\ ^ " L-* -' ' , J . C` k , ' '' "' .,,J! `.Vi'O 1 rr "v- 7- r* , '; y> r > \*t i-'" t '+ BAYONNE. N.J. 0700 1 ufaetur and use of 2, 4*D. Did you read thatt sir-- 2 A Yea, sir. 3 Q -- so that X can ask yon that? 4 A All right. Yea, air. ~ t"'\ ? * f' s 1 *i 1 t 5 Q Dr, Suekind does say in this document, does ha 6 , not, ha discusses the human health effects of exposure to 7 TODD3s starting with the accident in 1949, that nitre 8 exposure to TCDDp he discusses'as well, doss'ha hot, identi 9 fiable populations known to have been exposed to TODD arc 10 good potential sources of information, and that includes 11 those populations involved In the manufacture and use of 12 2, 4-D, does it not, sir? 13 A Yes. But ho doesn't mean 2, 3, 7, 3 necessarily. 14 Q Well, Doctor, he doesn't not an 2, 3, 7, 8 15 either, does he, sir? 16 A Ha didn't know. 17 Q He uses TCDD Just as you use it, don't you, sir? 18 A Ho, he didn't at that time. 19 Q Excuse me, Doctor. Don't,you usa the term TODD 20 just exactly as everyone else does, that is to include 21 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD? 22 A Ho, sir.' 23 HE. HEXHEHAWs Objection as everyone else does. 1$ 1' 2 3 4 5k 6 7* .. 8 '.. 9 10 11 / 12 13 14-v 15 !6\ 17 k 18 19 20 21 22 23 ' 24 - How in the world da you know how everyone else uses the ** V i , . `; Ct 1 term? You're asking^Ms-wtiies v^.epeeulat'hw everyone else uses the term. Clearly TCDD. includes twenty-two > ,' . . -' - , .j,---.'`,,j - i v - i!^; <*1> v*;,r' J isornera, -your Honor,any/ one,.,or morec-ofJtwecity^two -iebmrs. , I'll object to the question. y y 'y- y\ yy rr;\ >> y "" ' , 1 * 'S *j'V,^v v'ViN'i . .MR. CAKR: I certainly agree one hundred percent. ,^ - h i' m, ' ' r \1 * Q (By Mr. Carr) When you uae .the t e m T C D D ,'you mean to include all those isomers of TCDD, including 2, 3 7, 0, do you not sir?/. /' ' " 'e- TOE COURT: For. the record, the objection is overruled,, '/y " Vr ; *- V toe WITNESS: Everything-- r ; Q (By Mr. Carr) Po you hot, sir? \vV,\ / - 'y :V ,h o .`; 'v / " * ; ^ ' ' S ' -r- Q . Whan you use the tora TCDD you're not talking ; about;tetrachlorodibOTSO-p-diain? / '' A " Yes. - y 'V - ` Q And is 2 r 3, 7, 8TCDD a;totrachlorodlbonzo-p- dioxin? y y . A' "Yea. -r Q How, Dr. Susklnd lays that identifiable populations include those involved In the manufactur and use of 2 e 4-D doesn't has sir? -A Yes. 1 > y t< j y ' 1 Q And he's discussing TODD, is he not, si?? 2 A But he is not being,, specific,vhafc.h means. 3 Q Sir, I didn't say he.wae being specific, did X, 4 sir? ** 1f r `!,- 5 HR. HEIKEMAN: Objection, your Honor. 6 THE COURT: Objection is overruled. 7 Q (By Mr. Carr) All the t cd d isomers, have,-some S toxicity, don't they, sir? All of them, every single one of 9 them. 10 A Hot the some. 11 Q X didn't say the same. 12 A Every chemical has toxicity. 13 Q Doctor, I'a not even quarreling with that. Ha's 14 talking about all of the TCDD Isomers, is he not, sir? 15 A No. 16 Q Ball, Doctor, does he not use--he'a a scientist, 17 Isn't he, sir, just as you are? 18 A Yes; 19 Q And when you use the term TCDD, you mean to include 20 all the TOD Isomers, don't you, sir? 21 A No, I do not. 22 Q Bell, which ones do you mean to exclude? 23 A Xf I'm talking about 1, 3, 6, 3, I'd say 1, 3, 6, 3 24 Q Sir, I'm not asking you whsn-- X fia asking you what 1 you mean when you us the tors TCBD, 2 A X don't use that without being pacific, . ' ; 3 Q Well, Doctor, you just usad it hare. This is 4 your document that you prepared. Human Health Effects TODD. 5 You used that* ,. \V 6 A Yes, 7 Q You said yourself you preparad.it, 8 A Yes, 9 Q So, Doctor, don't tell us you don't use it. You 10 did use it here in this document, did you nfetB sir? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Doctor .the term TCDD as used in this document 13 includes 2, 3. 7, 8. does it not. sir. 1. 3. 6 V 8. and all 14 the other TCD isomers? , 15 A It's hard to be sura what he meant by that. 16 Q Doctor, we are talking now about what you meant. 17 When you included the term TCDD. did you not mean to include 18 2, 3. 7. 8 in the use of that term? 19 A tfe were trying to find out whether-- 20 Q Excuse me. Doctor, could you answer that question? 21 MR. HEINEMANj He is answering it, Judge. He got 22 four words out and Mr* Carr is interrupting him. May he 23 please answer the question? 24 THE COURT: He's not responsive. Overruled, 1 Please answer the question* Doctor.*, ^ 2 THE WITNESSt Eopeat the question for me please 3 4 (The previous question wee reed beck by the 5 court reporter,) 6 m m x m s B t Yes, 7 Q (By Hr, Cert) Thank you Doctor, Do you have 8 any knowledge that when Dr, Susklnd used the term TCBB in 9 this docursasat that he meant to exclude 2 3 7, 3 from 10 that term, sir? 11 A 86. 12 Q How, Doctor, you also have put out other documents 13 at Monsanto in which you use the tens TCDB, have you not, 14 sir? Haven't you, sir? 15 A Yee, sir, 16 17 (At this time Plaintiff's exhibit 1433 was 18 marked for identification by the court reporter.) 19 Q (By Hr, Carr) Handing you now whet's been 20 marked plaintiff's exhibit 1433, If you could look at 21 that and see if you recognise that as a document either > * 2 2 , prepared by your department or by somebody in your-- by you* 23 or somebody in your department, Hake this 143SA. 24 ' k v- (At thiatii&ftBleintiff,s exhibit 1435A was ' V *. ' " r' marked for Identification by the court reporter.) Q (By Hr. Carr) I show you 1435A and ask you if you recognise that as a page from 1435, one more page -. L ,4 4 - t* * r , " * '- > . 'V r- JiJ r A, .Yea, eir. ^ i Q Do you recognise 1435 as a Monsanto document prepared by your department? \ k Yes, Sir. V Q 1 offer 1435 and 1435A into evidence if It. pleases,,the court. p1k '\ ' - v - ;> . '^ v/itt. HEXHEMAH i Which page is 1435A. ^ . 1 ./ HR. CARR: I1!! give you a copy. MR. HEXNEMA8: Thank you. *tf sorry,;was the' exhibit offered, your. Honor? :; ' THE COURTSYes. Both of them war. .. <77 MR. HEXHEHAHi We have no. objection. - -._ THE COURT: They are admitted without objection Q (By Mr.,.Carr) Doctor, directing your Attention to the first page of exhibit 1435, right about one-third of the way down, (Tetra-2; 3, 7, 8-TCDD). v A/ Yea, sir. .. 7';- w A Q How, you understand there are including-- your v ,it ,, * ' '. '*n 1 V` department is including ttu^re that the Tetra-2, 3, 7, 3- TCDD all to mean one 'and the same, .more or less, aren't * , ` . y -; . 21 ,, !;V 1 you, sir? 2 A Ho. ^ 3' Q ' .You're not understanding that? 4 A Ho. 5 Q Hell, it* certainly included In the phrase 6 tatra and YCDB, isn't it, air? 7 A Yea. 8 Q Yes And, Doctor, on 1435A, the terra-- it9* also 9 stated there, is it not, that available current data in* , 10 dicates that whara residual precursors exist (PCB, 2,4-0, 11 2f4 f5T, pautachlor and etc) in the environment, TCDD and/or 12 TDCF levels In the ten times one hundred part per trillion 13 range nay be found in the soil, animals or fish Do you 14 see that, sir? 15 A Yes, sir. 16 Q And, now that statement that TODD can be found 17 wherever there's 2,4*0, that's an accurate scientific 18 statement made by your department. Isn't it, sir? 19 HR. HEXHEMAH: Your Honor, t object to the .i - 20 interpretation of the document. He leaves out the term 21 precursors, which is in that statement , 22 J THE COURT: Objection is overruled, t think that" 23 was read. 24 MR. HEIHEMAMt Hot in the question, your Honor N.J. 07002 ,> ,, ^* . *; ' - - ' . - - v*jf 1r- : :, '` ' * r*j > ^ . >_- / / O ' ^ \ 1 / *iE C O U R T tf -Y o u m a y c o n t i n u e . 2 Q , (B y M r; C a r r j' . D o c to r , y o u m ean t w h at yo u s a i d . ,,3 d i d y o u n o t , s i r , w h e r e *t h e r e 's - 2 , 4 -D o r P B o r 2 , 4 , 5T i n 4 t" th e e n v iro n m e n t t h a t TCDD m ay b e fo u n d in th s o i l , a n im a ls 5" , o r fis h ? / -/ ^ .6 A T h e a n s w e r i s i t c a n . . 74 * Q M y q u e s t i o n i s y o u m e a n t w h a t y o u s a i d t h e r e , 8' ' _ 'J -- ,, 9: 10 d id y o u n o t , s i r ? ,; i; \ . * ; ^ A ` , W e ll, th is w as w r itte n in 19-- Q . E x cu se m e, O r. R o u sh . I know w hen i t w as w r it t e n . n/ , I t w a s w r it t e n , O c to b e r 2 4 , 1979 ; Th e docu m ent c le a r ly s a y s 12 f 1 t h a t ; M y q u e s t io n i s y o u .m e a n t w h a t y o u s a i d i n t h i s 13 d o c u m e n t ,V1 d i d y o u n o t s i r ? ^ ... ~ 14 i; / M R . H EIN E M A N : - Y o u * H o n o r , I o b j e c t . H e 's a s s u m 15, . in g t h a t D r . R o u sh w ro tf i t . d o n 't t h in k h e 's e s t a b l i s h e d ^ 16 " t h a t. ' " " ,." - . : / ;.-V j v- : 17* ' : , * M R ; C R R j - H e h a s a g r e e d t h a t h i s d e p a r t m e n t . 18 ' w r o t e i t . W h e n .I s a y y o u , t h e w i t n e s s k n o w s 1 d o n 't m ean 19. : h i m p e r s o n a l l y . B u t I m e a n M o n s a n t o . H e ' s a r e p r s e n t a t i v e 20 . 21 ' 22 23 24: o f M o n sa n to , C o u n s e l, j u s t . a s ;y o u a r e .. \ 1/ , ; M R, H E I N E M A N S o y o u m ean e v e ry b o d y in M o n sa n to . - ' - __ O k a y / ' ; ? ' V. * ' ' Q* ' L(B y M r. C a r r ),, ' Y o u m e a n t' w h a t y o u s a id in t h is ' . ^ .f : . * 1`f i> . < -v i \ ; i f * ^ f*{ v- . i*| ^ * i * tar` d o c u m e n t, d i d n 't y o u / s i r ? " '' i r' \ ; : t - 1)-ir V ' : . - 1L V ' i ;f S r! * ' ,- ^ .. ^ 1 1 1 5 1 1- ' ` - '` ^t-v f" / , iv f j i l *- r / r O ';, . 1' . * 1 .. * ' * i. ' - V/ * ' 'ci '. i l. ' > - 1v. . . . ' - r v - r .. FORM IL 24 B 1 v ME*.- HEINEKAMs- You*re asking hits to--I .would 2 object to-- * - 3 rME. GAEB: Your Honor could X continue this 1 ^ # -i* \ m rr 4 crocs examination without this continued harassment by Mr. 5 ", Heincmaa? < .. `> - . 6 . ME. HEXMEMAH: X think I'm allowed to make an 7 objectionyour Honor* 8 THE COVET: X think the question was clarified. J9, ' Your objection is overruled. Mr. Carr you may .proceed* . 10 Doctor please answer the question. \ n. ,11 THE WITNESS: That sentence is only partially 12 correct. ^ ' , 13 ! Q , (By Mr. Carr) Doctor my question ie not whether 14 / it's correct or falsev. Xt may be the wrongest statement. p En g a p c o ., b a y o n n e , n .j . o t oo i roRM 1L 2* B ` 15 J 16 I t m a y b e a total lie; Xt may be completely, the truth. J ' -1 ,, 1 i. , . r All X'm asking you Doctor ie when you said that did you 17 .* 1.-mean it air? ' ^ 18 . A . Yes* 19 Q Doctor this statement that you made was in the tT ' J . ,, .r ,- - 20 seme year that the Sturgeon spill took place isn't that 21 correct sir? 22 A Yes. ' , V \ , V 23 ' Q -And it was in thaty e a r t h a t Monsanto decided to -. / , /. i - 111 * i*ti r_ ^ 2 4 - . do this study o h i t a chloripheriols o find out the extont i, > a t-_i 24 1 of the problem, isn't that correct, sir? 2 A Ho. 3 Q Ho, that isn't correct? 4 A Ho. 5 Q Well* what part of my question is incorrect, that 6 '79 is not the year you chose to make the study? 7 A Ho. 8 Q Or that you did not make a study? 9. A We chose to make the study before 1979. 10 Q, When did you choose to make that sfcuily? What 11 year, sir? 12 A On the Nitro population? 13 Q What year did you make the study of your chiori- 14 pheunted--the effect on the chloriphenale on the world's 15 environment? 16 A In 1978. 17 Q tod you tested your chlorinated phenols in 1978? 18 Whet chlorinated phenols did you test other than & couple 19 of batches of OCB in March of 1978, in the total year of 20 1978* Doctor. 21 MR* KEXHEMABs Let ms object to this, your Honor. 22 The witness said that that's when they decided.to,.do the ` _r r / ** V , ' 23 Nitro study. ;- \ 11 .-1 V V 24 MR. CARR; ^y question wasn't directed to Nitro, >j I> 25 1 2 3 4 V 6^ -7 ':' 8- 9 1 10 ,11 . 12 * 13 14. 15 16, ' 17' 18 19 20 \ 21 . 22 ' 23 24 Counsel. r V ` sV'y ^ THE COURT: The objectton is overruled. THEWITHESS: I f o u g h t we were talking about .... 'Nitro.when you said the'study. *' Q (Byte. Carr) My question was you determined to do & study*. I wasn't talking about the workers of Nitro. 1 didn't even mention^ Nitro. Counsel did to you but I / "A 'All right. ^ > ! 1'- `~ . Q' I said when Monsanto decided to do its study Y,, , " . ' , ` '-E - t and this status surmary ls part of that study. It's part and partial of that study, tan ft it a sir? Talking about dioxins, 'where you can find them,/ the chemistry of them,, the occurence, the; precuora, the biological effects,oh ( aan. Monsanto's involvaaant in it. This Is a suma r y of work that was started*Nitro Is mentioned one place in this documenttwo places. Now, Doctor, my question refers ;r ,' *' A Lr ^ . * ' ' '^ > to the study that Monsanto undertook. You undertook It in 1979, did you not? ; v ..^ \ ].'/'.*J\ .; J . ; A Yes. Yes, \ V ,'. \ ' " 'v - L ,>, ; TvI ja :-lr * ' -f '*- Q You did a program- of studying chlorinated, phenols - 1,* \ ' v/'' ...V^ V-C' O \ to find out what TCDD'a, or for thatjaatter what total ,dioxins were in your products / a n d you undertook^ ther" stadias in addition.and this document 14351 a result-- `t; U : , ?'J- j jV ; * -* . , . *1 PENGAD CO,, BAYONNE. N.J, 07001 fOBM IL 1*B f / 26 I 1 a partial result of that study Isn't that correct sir? 2 J *;a \ Ye/' ' ^ '* ...\ 3 / Q .Doctor I'll get back to this document at 'later 4` '. point X believe as to the human health effects that are 5 mentioned therein. But I'd no Ilka to pass to--get back 6. to the line of testimony that ve vere Into yesterday before 7\ 8 9 . this diversion took place. Doctor, the view that you at r k' f1 ' 1 * r ` s* Monsanto and that you have yourself insofar as TCDD's are concerned, and 2, 3 7, 8 in particular, you have a 1<T view don't you, sir," X think you testified yesterday that 11 - they only cause skin problems in people. You also have a 12'. view, don't you, sir that if it doesn't cause chloracne 13 that it's not going to cause any problems whatsoever.. ^ 14 <;;A Yes. ' / V:. ... ` -' 15> Q And, Doctor, that view that you sold here that 16 1 if it doesn't Cause chloracne that it's not going to cause BVONNE. N.J.; " OJOOl 17 .. any hu s m ^health problems whatsoever, that's a view that V 18-- 19 Monsanto has akyell as just you personally, isn't it, sir? nv ' : A Yea " % .r .'v: /. '20 Q It is that view of yours :and t-fonashtdVs that' has . - . , ' - '"aA-A-'U1: V L'.% 21 guided your actions, your, efforts insofar as possible bad > <S- 22 health effects might be upon the people at Sturgeon and-; 23 the world in general; isn't that correct, sir? `' 7 ;,>;rypM. 24 - A Yes, air. ;-r '' 27 1 Q And now, you, of course--you know chat acute 2 ' exposures to 2, 3, 7, 8 or TCDB's can cause a nunber of 3 effect, doaft you, sir? 4 A Tea, air, 5 Q And you know also that all the-- that all the 6 human health effects to 2, 3, 7; 3-TCD have not yet been 7 established. You know that aa well, don't you, air? 8 A The full rang of affect haw not been establish- 9 ad probably. I don't know, X can't answer that question. 10 Q Well, didn't you-- didn't you testify that 11 Affirmatively that it has not been established that there 12 are not other effects,. Doctor? I don't want to take ad 13 vantage of you, because I have read your deposition, and 14 maybe you haven't. Specifically, it hasn't been established 15 as yet, air, that there are not other effects from exposure 16 to TCDD other than ehloracne; isn't that correct, sir? 17 A That's right. 18 Q Doctor, but yet you've taken the position 19 affirmatively that 2, 3, 7, ,8-TCD is. not,highly toxic to 20 man. You've taken--you interrupt me if I'm saying anything 21 that's not correct, 22 A Ho, X haven't said that, 23 Q You haven't said that? `1 k ^ 24 A Ho, BAYONNE. NJ 1 Q I don't want to use it to impeach you at this 2 point* Doctor* because I think you probably have forgotten 3 what you said. But I'll direct your attention to the 4 deposition which you gave in 1983 and see if you don't-- 5 if that doesn't refresh your recollection as to your 6 statement* 7 MR. HEINKMAIfs Do you have a page number? 8 MR. CARRr Yes. Sixty-eight, Counsel. 9 MR. KEItJEMAH: Page sixty-eight in the margin? 10 MR. CARR: Yes. 11 m r . m m m m i i$83? 12 MR. CARR: Yes., 13 Q <By Mr. Carr) Does it refresh your recollection, 14 Doctor? 15 A Yes, 16 Q And you did say at that time you do not agree 17 that 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD is highly toxic to man, didn't you? 18 A Yes, but what you're saying is what you mean 19 by highly toxic. "v ' * /: 20 Q Doctor, X used, exactly the same words, then that 21 X used now. You said today that you didn't ever say that (* * ,i j 22 it wasn't highly toxic to man. But in 1933 you did say 23 that, didn't you, sir, using exactly the same words? You 24 understand that, air? 1 A Yes. 2 Q Yea. How, have you since 19S3 c o m to the con- * 3 elusion that 2, 3, 7, 3-TCD is highly toxic to man? 4 A Dafine what you mean by highly toxic, 5 Q Doctor, however you took the words to moan highly 6 toxic in 1983. You didn't ask me for any further definition 7 then. You understood what I meant then. X think you under 8 stand what X mean now. 9 A Yea. 10 Q Howf do you aay today that 2, 3, 7, B-TCD is 11 highly toxic to man? 12 A Highly toxic Is-- it has to be defined. Highly 13 toxic as compared to a rat or the mouse, or highly toxic In 14 man-- 15 Q Doctor, however you feel like defining the word 16 highly toxic. You define the word highly.toxic for ua, 17 please, sir, as you want to and then tell us whether or not 18 2, 3, 7, 3-TCD is highly toxic to, man. \ , ;, :; , 19 A 2, 3, 7# S tetraehlorodibenso-para-dioxin is *ji ' j * 1 - A '' 20 highly toxic to the guinea pig. >` M 21 Q Doctor, first of all I've asked you to define the 22 words how you use highly toxic. 23 A .X'm trying to. 24 Q You're using the words highly toxic. Just tell us. 30 l If you would, please* sir, wHat you understand others to 2. mean or yourself to mean ,when the words, highly toxic ere 3 used* That way we caii communicate.,using the same meaning, 4 once I understand what you mean by It, sir* ** I S 'H _ .K T * 5 A Yes* It can refer either, to acutely toxic or 6 chronically toxic* It can be acutely toxic and be highly 7' ` toxic, and not highly toxic In a chronic exposureJ Or vice 8 , versa* \ .. .9 r Q Okay* How, Is that your definition-- you've got 10 two meanings than, highly toxic Is highly toxic in an scute n , basis, or highly toxic'in a chronic basis, 12 A Or comparing with.other* 13` Q . Is 2, 3, 8-TCD highly toxic to.man In either an 14". scute sense or a chronic sense? is ; 16 17- / . 18 . It's highly toxic. 7 / V . . 7-;. - , /V 7* Q Yea * In both senses, Doctor?,; \l|take/it^ o n mean '' ` /' ^ v 'k' - vV ^ '7 * . , / 7 . ,V 7 . * L L 11 ^ that to be in both, senses? `A ` `to1.* 1 ' / '' 5`- f. 7 .7 -1^ r7> /'> v;-t v ' ' v jf *>' 'l *. ' \ A ' *t ,i J,i !- 1 7 7/5 t-;7 7-/ I7 - 7 77 v1 ^-! 7- 19 Q You didn't mean it in. both senses.^ All right* 1 '* . -L 1 - .r` . t [ ' 7* 7 m ` v * 7 j i ," * 7 20 \lhat sensed do you mean it? 21 . / A Acute* -.;/* . _r . * *' , a' `J " 7 .. 22 - Q.- X`,m Lsorry?. /:* / / ` ; : \ /// %' 7 ' l " L '1 L ^ .1 `, 1 23 A /. Acutely, It ia highly toxic* /r 2 4 : Q But chronic exposure It*a hot highly toxic; is -s;p * PENG4D CO.. 04YONNE.' N.J. 07001 fORM IL 14 B 31 1 that what you*ro saying? , t *, , _ 2 k ./Y*/ V - v . - 3 . 7 . Q ; Doctor, then do you believe that the 2, 3,' 7, 8-TC1 4 cannot accumulate in ..the body? ,; , 5 A' Yes, it can** " - , .! 6 Q Doctor, it it can accumulate in the body, it can 7\ > take.a series of small doses to add up to a large dose, can 8* " it not-, ..sir? 9 .*V;A- Yes, sir*'". , 10 r Q And will it then be, when it adds up to the equiva- ^ ^' i 11 ; lent of an acute exposiure, would it then be highly toxic, 12 sir? . y. J ,- 13- . A I don't know. / . % . ' .14 Q Well, Doctor, if youknow that an acute exposure is; to TCDis highly toxic to man,: and^ youknow ,r logic tella ' -.:,.n , .V > \\ M \ V' Y_*'\;- ' .16 you, and your past knowledge as a scientist in this field 11 r * * - ' K * * ^ * ^i v * * * ^^ ^ 17-r tolls you that you can accumulate!enough dcses to '-reach ' is . that acute' level. Why don't you know that if X amounts of . \ :' ,, '\ j 1" - r-YV' i.j ; V j Yt1"f ' 'y Yv; 1 - v v V* K \ t f' - ! . ' 19 2, 3, 7, BrTCDD is highly toxic to man, when axposedvto an 2 . 2i acute one^tima basis, that.It's hot highly toxic whea^ 1x - * ' * v *' y ,, d ' * i* A ` 1i; ^ 1 - ` "k ' 1 , 'V ' - _ - V1 Y - "o J < ^ .v accumulated on a chronlc baeis? ; , 22. /'' HR. ffilNEMAII: YourHoaor, I object. He assumes , 23 , . that tha two levels are the same* \ - -24 HR. CARR? That's corrects . .y % T J' P'n GAO CO.. BAYONNE, 'N,J OTOO* FORM 1L * 8 1 THE COURT: Objection is overruled* 2 THE WITNESS: If a an has an cut exposure 3 the amount of dioxin that get into the body trill be die 4 tributed differently then the seme dose, the earns amount 5 with chronic exposure. 6 Q (By Mr. Carr) How is that Doctor! 7 ' A' It1a the way it goes into the body." When it goes, 8 in chronically it goes into the tissue that has the great 9 eat affinity for the material or in which it has the 10 greatest solubility. Acutely that doesn't take place. 11 It's distributed throughout the body in a different fashion 12 and only after that acute exposure Is the material leaving 13 the general tissues and will go back into the fat. * 14 Q What you3r@ saying is that, if I understand you 15 correctly is the body doesn't have the capacity,to deal v *' r i _ , , m4 * 16 with large doses of TGDD, but it eim deal with:to seme 17 extent smaller doses of TCBD; is that correct? , 1 8 A Yes. 19 Q All right. Is that the sense of what.you are 20 saying? Have I misinterpreted? 21 A Ho, no. It has something to do with equilibrium 22 in various tissues in whether you are going to see an 2 3 effect.. 24 Q Doctor, we know that the liver has a great 33 1 affinity for TCBB, don't we, sir? 2 ';, a / 3 Q On a chronic or acute basis? 4 A Ho* 5 Q No. W* don't know that? v i* 6 A N knew that~~tha only real knowledge that wo h a w 7 is from th* Sows study where they found high levels of 8 dioxins in the liver. 1 haven't seen other studies in 9 which they vandalised thca liver for dioxins, 10 Q Doctor, is what you're sayingD and there was just 11 one lady that died of cancer sis months or so after the 12 exposure and there was just that on* Hyor study is what 13 you're, saying today based upon that able,/.-singlec solitary 14 lady that died? i ";V ''*'::V -V*` V" 15 A I don't know what the question is. ' 16 Q No. You said that the 'Saves'/'Italydeath liver 17 was examined. 18 ~ A t Yes. .* 19 Q And found high concentrations of TCDD?. 20 A Yes, 21 Q All right. How, is the Judgment that you have 22 given us here, the opinion that you've given us here, is 23 it based only on that study? 24 A What opinion? f o r m It. 2 B 34 1 2 3' 4 5`' 6 1' 8 9 10 M 12 . 13 14 ' 15 16' 17 18 19 20 2i';. 22 23 24 V Q The pinionthat you've given ua that the liver has an affinity for acute .exposures in dioxins -tb dioxins . t: , - ;*}V 't.v The liver tissue will attract dioxins* yr A The only data that we have that says it accumulates in. the liver io that*that's the only evidence 1 know that It accumulates there. * 1 . * p.T if > ^ (1 - * r ^ " *' ., ' * B * e Q All right; That's what I've, asked you. i * A" -Yea*, _ > * ' . ' .' - ,- ' Q Your opinion then is based solely on that one incident that one liver study. 1 ' ,* * / x ` V "V L * A X didn't say that it was concentrated in the liver. v . -1k. i --i j - 7i V,, //', t L'; >- -Vv y.V i x,-Lk?;< *' ' You asked me what X knew about. >;-X*5w1a-'s tr'y.i_vng:Vto ssy- t-V-h*a^ only knorw'ledge- we Vha.ve. that,ityydo,as accumulate Iir-nirti;he l--iVve'r' - ' -x . -v as it does in tha rat in from that one study; :That's^tha only piece of information that X hava. i r.y \< s .vA ^ ,\ \ ^\ Im *?< .*. ,,Doctor/ Toeybe we're notbecausa X believe you're trying to answer my. question 8 we must have seme breakdown in communication. I asked you to cotspare' chronic and acuta exposures ralative to high toxicity of dioxins. ..`A y Yes, .sir. *vy Q You answ&red to me that on an acuta basis the : , body duals with it dtfferantly than it does bn a chronic , basis. .y . k''- v'-.ry-`:A "Yea,- sir. -V'y _ ; is ' ^ ' - 1' ' Zm ^ ^1- J}1- L r ^ ' y- - ' ' .^ 1 ' , 'y. 1 BATONNE, N.J. ;v' -VO..'.. 35 l. Q All right. And then X asked you. veil, it " i ; - "- - ./. ' r: a fact that the livar attract* on an acute and oh a,chronic 3 hoots the dioxins9 and,you sold based upon one study yes, .t jj-, ' L 1`* i- . ' '. .t' , * 4 . you thought that to be o*. s . A X didn't say anything about chronic. 6 Q Well.whafcdoyou moan by tha affinity of dioxins 7 " - and-the liver-on a chronic basis?.1.?;'' /"" Kv" 8 9 '? 10 rIn terms of where the dioxins will concentrato in >* ^ . - the liver chronically? . 't ` - * *1 , ` ft -~ ' - i. . -:|Q, - Vea. -1' ~ 11 r , A .Xt*s difficult to say. ;t? sure that thersjwill - j 1 /. -''( ->; r >.?"-' <\v \tl \< \ V 'J . ^ ti-,-v'4- \:>\c ; r,;- 12 be with the same level of exposure chronically^-we: have;,to 13 . talk about a chronic exposure; asfve sit/in the/work place-- L' ` :'7< v,\j-i,l4*A ^ r'r *'-3. `* 14 Q Long time, long range, day after day, year after is; year exposure to-- ` ; ;v ' - L*:< i \0'!l '!U\4 l*:'A} ] 6 ' Al : Xlere wil;be a leas concentration of dioxins 17 in the chronic exposed liver, than there would be in an acute is one .with the same dose. ` `- 19 Q Xs what you9re saying that if one is exposed,, for 20 : example, to a hundred parts per billion of TCD on occasion, 21 . and exposed to a hundred, parts per billion over a period of - ' ' 1 'v 22 two years, lath suppse, that there will he less concentre* 23 r tioa in the liver on the two year: exposure than there would 24 be on the one day exposure? 3^* 4\ 9 B*VoNNE. N.J, 07002. FORM IL I*B 1 A " I can't do it when you talk about concentration 2 A hundred parts par billion. You have to talk about 3 absolute amounts. 4 Q Well , absolute amounts * a hundred grams ,, or a 5 hundred micrograms, or whatever. 6 A If vet give a hundred grams over a long period of 7 time, there will be lass in the liver than there would if 8 you gave it acutely. 9 Q On the one day? 10 . A ?* ... ; > . ' . ' ; ,. v " ('' '! * 11 Q Doctor, what's tho basis for,that? I'm not 1 12 quarreling with you. But I'm just telling you, what's the 1 3 basis for that opinion? 14 A It's the affinity of tha fat^for.the dioxins that 1 5 taka it .out of the liver. 16 Q Well, it goes into the liver first then? 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q And over a period of time it will pass from the 19 liver to the fat? 20 A That's right. 21 Q .And it gets there through the blood, doesn't It, 22 sir? 23 A Yes, sir. 24 Q So for e time being, so what's in the blood is 1 then being transported from the liver to the fat? 2 A Yes sir. 3 Q All right. So there's always a greater amount 4 In the fat at the end of a chronic exposure than there is 5 in the blood? 6 A Yes, sir. 7 Q the Seveso study indicated that there was 8 three hundred to one. Is that consistent with what you 9 know afrbut it? 10 A Three hundred to'one of what? s - * ^ j- t . , 11 Q Three hundred parts greater of dioxin concentre- 12 tloa in the fat than there is In the blood'. V 1 3 A Oh, it's much more than,that. It was something ;i ' j ` , V " * r- l-- ' f i ' \r . . f ' 'v'f' ' . *t^ 14 of the order of eighteen hundred to one in the blood. It 1 5 was three hundred to one between the liver and the fat, X 16 think. It was a great disparity in getting into the blood, 17 into the fat as compared to in the liver. 18 Q Well, X think you're misapprehending the document. 19 It was a level of six, was the lowest level, and that was 20 in the blood. A level of eighteen hundred, I believe- 21 A In the fat. 22 Q Was in the fat. 23 A Yes, sir. 24 Q Now, that's a three hundred to one, the highest 1 levai was. eighteen hundred Dr. Rmsah. That m e in the fat* 2 A Yes. 3 Q The lowest level wee in the blood* 4 A Yes, air* 5 Q That was six. 6 A X remember that. 7 Q tod eighteen hundred divided by six is three 8 hundred* v 9 A Right. X thought that'-.- N 11 , ('r ' t 10 Q You see? .' - : ^v ; 11 A X was relating that to liver rather;than the, 12 blood* ., ` ' ,, ` ^ *v ,1t- "; ' 13 Q You thought th eighteen hundred was to liver? 14 A . No. No, eighteen hundred was the fat. X thought 15 the intermediate was three hundred in the liver-" 16 Q Then it would only be fifty to one if it*a three 17 hundred. ratio, sir, of three hundred to one, that is 18 tha fat concentration of dioxins la three hundred times 19 greater than the blood concentration, 20 A X've forgotten what the blood concentration was, 21 Q It was six. How, will you accept that, sir? 22 A Yea. 23 Q All right. How, Doctor, these chronic health 24 - effects, that could occur, it is your Judgment and Monsanto* 1 judgment that there ere no chronic health effects frena .2 dioKino isn11 that correct g sir? 3 A Yes, but there ore others that will say the 4 seme thing. 5 Q doctor, I don't want to quarrel with you* I know 6 there Is others that say the seme thing. There's others 7 that cay the opposite. X*m not attempting to equine you 8 on the world of literature, on who says what about dioxins. `-7!' ': ; 9 Because there are views on both .sidas of the fence/ Are 10 there not* sir? . >s <; v . 11 A liot on chronic effects. 12 Q There are no views on chronic effect-^ / ^ 1 3 A Established fact. 1 4 Q Sir? IS A Data that will establish whether there's a chronic 16 effect or not. 17 Q Excuse me. You said there are others that will 18 say the same thing. I'm saying there others that will say 19 the opposite aren't there sir? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Doctor X em not talking about what Monsanto 22 believes about this. 23 A `Yes. ' 24 Q Hot about what anybody else believes about it. I A Yes, sir. 2 Q All right. 3 A Yes, sir. 4 Q Now, it is your view, for instance , that 2, 3P 7, 5 8 is not a carcinogen to human beings? 6 A Hot established. 7 Q Well, it's more than that, sir. Not established 8 can mean a variety of things. It can mean that it's not 9 teen proven beyond a reasonable doubt, or there0 not a lb unanimity of opinion, or It naans that fifty-one people 11 believe onething, and forty-nine believe another. I'm 12 k f' .; : ;f ? f . (i talking now about your views, sir. lo it your view that 1 3 2,3, 7 * 8 is a potent carcinogen to human beings? 14 HR. HEXNEHAH: let ms object to the form of the IS question. The prior portion obviously was a speech relating 16 to Hr. Carr's opinions. X object to it and ask that it be 17 striker* and ask that the jury he Instructed to disregard it. 18 THE COURT: The objection is overruled. Proper 19 clarification. 20 THE WITNESS: Will you repeat the question for me. 21 22 (The previous question was read back by the 23 court reporter.) 24 THE WITNESS: No. 1 Q (By Hr. Carr) How there are other reputable 2 scientists that have the view that 2, 3, 7, 3 la a potant 3 carcinogen, to human beings aren't there eirf 4 A X don't know who they are. 5 Q Doctor when your deposition was taken inP X think 6 in D&camber of *83 on page eeventy-four X asked you this 7 questions HDoctor aren't there,reputable scientists that 8 hold a view whether you agree or not that 2.J 7, 8 is 9 a potent carcinogen to human beings And waanft your ' 10 answer at that time "yes." 11 A X think there's been a change cince^then In 12 definition-1 3 Q Excuse tae, Doctor. Has that your answer to that 1 4 question at that titne air right Imre? 1 5 A Yes. 16 Q -ind you believed a year and a half ago at least 17 that there were reputable scientists that hold the view 18 that 2 3 7 8 is a potent carcinogen to human beings. 19 You believed that at that time did you not sir7 20 A Uo. It's very difficult to answer the question 21 yes or no. 22 Q Didn't you believe what you were saying, sir, at 23 that time? 24 A What I said.there and X think X said It la it was difficult to define whether there are reputable-- t Q I Excuse taeyvfilr.. Weren't you tellingm your , true and honoat belief at that tine? Weren't you being honest; and candid with me then air when I asked you that question? :^ ,;A . Ye.' ^ r /'$ r^V .r , r, i , ! -o ; /.< r .: ; ,t r f >; i ' >\ *. *. * ` *- . - /O;-/ r: j-v,-'-}'i V\ M ^ *v ' Q Thank you. And t&at was your honest belief at .that time wasn't it, elr? H.'*;' *:?; -V\ -v . ^/ <" W ''*.-iV.- V-~, 4 ='.Cr; j t- A Thftt'ft a qualitative question when you talk about % reputable people. ,, :'f`i \?"Yv, v ;-*' *v*- ';v >'V v 1* i" ^ '. Q Doctor, I'm not oven quarreling about reputable or not reputable all I'm asking you is it was your, honest belief/in December of 1983 that reputable--other reputable L "j " k f * * X *, ^ * - , -l. s -| _ v 1 L " ** ^ > 11 ^ `" J . * ` 1 'J scientists held the^vlew that 2, 3, 7 8 was a potent carcinogen to human"beings.- V" J / ,A .Yes;_.- '^p Y" 1 * >' Y . Q And, Doctor, it is Honsshto!s view that 2, 3, 7, 8 can neither cause nor promote cancer; isn't that correct, sir? 1A -Yes.'^. v ` ' *, Q How so we don't have any later quarrel about it, cause wpuSd be where the YCD la the direct initiator of the cancer, and promote means that, it would by acting in 11` 1 .b ` - , ' 1' concert with or synergistic effect, or however it might, do. 1 that if you're exposed to one carcinogen and then exposed 2 to TCDD9 that is 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD, that the TCD lias a unique 3 effect , perhaps not unique there are other things that 4 will do it as veil, to cause that known carcinogen to be 5 more active, to promote more cancer, or more likely.to 6 promote cancer than it would otherwise , that'a what you 7 mean, and you understand me to mean when X'n talking about 8 TGDX) being a preiEotic or not being a promoter of cancer s 9 isn't that correct, sir? ; ; ` ^ 1* L_ *` "i T \ 10 A Tea, sir. 11 Q there are also reputable scientists that 12 hold the view that .2, 3, 7, 8-TCD is a promoter of cancer; 1 3 isn't that right, sir? 14 A . Tea, air , 15 Q How-- 16 A In the animal model 17 Q they don't believe that it promotes it in human 1 8 beings? 19 A - They don't know. 20 Q Sir, you're again suggesting positive knowledge 21 X don't know that anything Is known certainly or with 22 certainty* What I'm asking you, it is the opinion of 23 reputable scientists that TCDD is, or 2, 3, 7, 8-tCDD is . 24 a promoter of carcinogen or cancer; isn't that correct, sir? V'V m .*4 i .2 *3 4 5. 6 7., 8- 9 10 n 12 , 13 14 15 16 17 18, 19 20 21 22 23 24. ' ";A-' '.Yea. ^ Q 'But Honsanto differ with the view of those scientists doesn't it, air? , A Based ontheinforiaationafreilablGtoday, Q I 1 sorry? ;< ; **r> A . Based on the information Available today. Q And part of the infori^tion that-^parhapa all of the information that you're relying upon for that viaw , . ** ;" V - c '- today la the Honsanto studies, Dr. Gaffey, Dr.; Susking and Hosabergerj isn'tthat correctsir? ... A .Ho, chare have been other studies done. Q Wall that's.part of your evidence for-- 'A ' Yes, _ -1-' ; ' v \ \ , - -' ` .^ Q -- your view; isn't it, air? /A. Yes, sir. V' ` .* -/ 'v,;.-; / - `v/- ' `. Q How; as far as low dose exposure is concerned, sir I understand that you take the view that a low dose is- something that/doesn't causa chloratne, and that if it doesn't cause chloracn that there are--if it's that low that there are no ill effects from such exposure. That's correct thus far, is it not, sir? : \ A Yes. . . t;V : ' V ,^ VL:V 1 `: : ` ; `L ,.1^ - v ' Q Yes. But now there aren't any studies that state that exposure to doses as low as thirty-seven parts per ; - FORM It, t* B 1 billion of 2, 3. 7, 8 or forty-five parta per billion don't 2 pose a health hazard or a risk to the health of humana, ara 3 there, sir? 4 A There are tolerance established that say a 5 hundred parte per billion io saf to. use; * 6 Q Doctor, are there any studies that you're aware 7 of, or works or publications with which you're familiar 8 that would indicate that exposure. t-`aiAstancaa that contain 9 ten parts per billion of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD is not hazardous or 10 does not pose & health risk or may be injurious to human 11 being, any studies been done on it? 12 A No, sir. 1 3 Q X there any studies that you know of that says 14 exposure to something forty-five parts per billion of 2, 3, 15 7, S-TCD does not pose a health effect or health risk? 16 A The studies have been done on Industrial popula 1 7 tion-18 Q Excuse me, Gould you answer that question. Doctor? 19 A Tea. The studies have bean done on industrial 20 populations would certainly include those concentrations. 21 Q So you're saying there are studies that indlcat* 22 that thirty-seven parts, par billion don't pose a health 23 hazard? 24 A Tes. 1 Q Hava Chose studies coma Into existence since 2 December 22 1983? 3 A The study of our population at .Nitro would give 4 evidence,to that effect* \ 5 Q Excuse me* Xs that`the study that .was published 6 in 1984? 7 A Yes. < :I V4*.\ '; : 8 Q You're talking about the Susklnd Herfcsberg? 9 A Yes and the Hoses study. 10 Q And the Hoses study. Other than those that 11 study or those studies of the same population not necessar 12 ily the same population but Nitro workers are there any 13 studios that say such exposure dom not constitute a health 14 risk or health hasard? 1 5 A t think the other industrial studies would say 16 the same thing. 17 Q Were those published before December 1983? 18 A Yes sir. 19 Q And Doctor the question that X asked you in 20 December of 1983 on page fifty-one, starting at page 21 fifty, the.bottom of page fifty, X asked you whether or not 22 you answered this question accordingly s "were you familiar . 23 then or ware you aware of then any studies either that you 24 conducted yourself, or conducted by others or published 1 which stated that exposure to thirty-seven parts per billion 2 of 2, 3, 7, 8-TGD does not pose a health hazard or health 3 risk or have an injurious effect, on the health of human *- , \'i 4 beings?" ' Your answer was, "there are none." 5 MR. HEXHEHA9; Let Ime object, your, Honor. 6 Q (By Hr. Carr) "There were nona than?" Hay I (r , 11 . 1. > ' . 7 finish? 8 MR. HEIHEMAN: Certainly. 9 Q (By Mr. Carr) "There wore none then?" Answers 10t "There ware none then." Questiont "And there are none now?" II Answer: "That's right." Question: "Was there any then, 12 or is there now any studies or works, publications with 1 3 which you*re familiar which indicates that exposure to 14 a substance that contains tan parts per billion of 2, 3, 1 5 7, 8-TCD is not hazardous or poses a haalth risk, or may 16 be injurious to human beings?" Your answer was "There 17 are none." Question: "There were none then and there are 18 none nowj is that correct?" And your answer was to that 19 "That's right." Weretffc those your answers to those 20 questions at that time, sir? 21 A Yes, sir. 22 Q Mow, Doctor, you have in your organization at 23 Monsanto something called a Biohazards Committee, don't 24 you, sir? 1 A Yes, sir. 2 Q . And that Biohazards Cmamlttee has a,responslblltt; 1 ' ' ' 14_ " ., * 3 for--wall 0 it contains a number of peoples that you consider \ "'"\ . . ; , < 4 reputable, prestigious and Knowledgeable in;the [field of '' v * h- **-' `` -u 4 , ,K * ' - 5 human health hazards and risks from toxic chemicals and 6 *t* j other sorts; isn't that correct sir? 7 A Yes, sir. 8 Q Br. Heal, for instance, from Vanderbilt Universit 9 now from the Chemical Institute was a member of that 10 Biohazards Committee, Dr. Olson, and many other people-- 11 well, not many, but at least a half a dozen scientists-- 12 A Four. 1 3 Q -- belong to that committee. 1 4 A Four. i 1 5 .Q Sir? ,16 A There are four of them. 17 Q Four And your organization contributed to that; 18 isn't that right, sir? 19 A Contributed to what? 20 Q To that membership. 2! A What membership? 22 Q Of the Biohazards Committee. 23 A Oh, yes. . 24 Q I mean four wera outside people* There are otbeifi 1 from Monsanto on that committee-r ;T ;\ -\ 2 A Ho, . 3 Q -- in addition to those, four? ., 4 A Ho, That is the c o m m i t t e e 1 ; 5 Q Just four total? 6 A Yes . 7 Q ,All right. Are you familiar with a book-- I had 8 it with me, but now I Just have a photocopy of the page 9 from it. Are you familiar with a book called "Chlorinated 10 Dioxins and Dlbenzofurans In the Total Environment" volume 11 two by ti,K. Keith, Christoffar Kappe, Gangadhar Choudhory, 12 that contains articles*-well, the entire book deals with 1 3 dioxins. Are you familiar with that, sir? 14 A I've read,parts of It, 1 5 Q Yes, And It has a number of prestigious con 16 tributors to that book, doesn't it, sir? 1 7 A Yes. 18 Q Do you consider that book authoritative, not 19 necessarily that you agree with everything that it says, 20 but do you consider it authoritative in the field of dioxins? 21 A Ho. It's up-to-date, but that doesn't mean it's 22 authoritative. 23 Q Well, do you consider--wall, let me how you 24 something. People that contributed to it are authorities I in the field, aren't they, air? 2 A They are workers in the field. Yes. That doesn't 3 mean they're authorities. 4 Q Well, do you understand what we mean when I say 5 authority? When we use the word authority in the courtroom? 6 A book that others in the profession would accept as written 7 by credible people having a scientific Interest, and that 8 one can rely on their integrity, and their knowledge in the 9 field, not necessarily that you would agree with what their 10 results are, but that they are sincere, and knowledgeable, 11 and an expert in their field, if you will, in that area. 12 Now, 1 didn't mean to suggest by authority that they're the 13 last word on it, they cannot be contradicted. 14 A Right 15 Q Would you agree that that book is authoritative 16 in the sense that IV given it to you, sir? 17 A No. What so many of these books-18 Q That's all right. Doctor. Would you agree that 19 you've heard of Thomas Tleman from Brehm Laboratory, haven't 20 you, sir? 21 A Yes, sir. 22 MR. HEINEMANs Your Honor, I object to this. I 23 remember Mr. Carr would not permit me to examine Dr. Carnow 24 on books that he did not admit were authoritative. And, i 'SI 'J , v - J 1 therefor*s would object to hi*'doing so new, i-;< .**' 2 - M&. CARR: - I* not doingItCounsel, l,ia;.npw.`j 1 " - :v. * 3*. going to ;a;part of the book to establish whether or not fc-,,L , - Vit'$ 4 that part the doctor would consider sq written by authorities . .` .;;-4v i, - * :\ , ;l " S & - *s ' in the' f i e l d * >7 ;> \ " ''V,;* V- ''/ Y&E C-OUBXi r Co .ahead,- to'n may d'o .that* J `i1*.. > . . ' J- . 1 S' - ,/ ' , J, ' ^' 7 ^ -; MR, HEXNEMAN:; vie that over ay objection,your 8 Honor? - ,J .,r -;V' - V.. , 9 : YKE COURT: Yes,. it* over your objection* / ':\- ; V' ' : ^ . / . .10 .; Q (By. Hr. CarrJ Bo you consider Arnold Sckectery. * *V ? . , . ., - . ;. r.... - k .. i' *\ 11. Department of Preventive Medicine, Clinical Casspua of the- 12 Upstate Mhdical Canteri State University of 1?^ York; ^ ' > _V-_, ;.W: f..!. , ' '.;' ` . 1 3 Fenton Schaffnar ofth >h:v; Sihbi School of Medicine; Yhbiaaa v- . ' 1'J.,f. :4k : T';' 14 Yieman of the Brehm Laboratory, Department of Chemistry `, '' 1 ` 1(` it tJ 'l; 4 '> -t , ' ' 1 5 at Bright State'Univ^'sityI'lichsol-'.-TaylorT* :V m Ness, : 16 Jpto H* Garrett and D.J* tfagel of the Jh?ight State University; \ J.-l vf??1'T T i H >'X i 1 ' \l' 0* Gitlite and H. Bogdasarifin of the Hew York State University 1 8 * as authoritiaf: in the field * sir, dealing with uBiological \" .J ' ^ j ^ "< * t - ' J '1 ' ^f * * , ,,'^ ' i>- * * ' ' *.* 'J 19. Markers After Esposuro to Polychlorinated Dibenad*pDiorihsf ' n,' y *. 1 -r ' v, ^ . t' '^ ^ r, ' *. ^ 1 * '> .r f f i4 20 Dib&nsofuranc, Biphenyls , end ReXated ChemiesXa^11 ^ ' 21 , ; - .. A' Yheyre wrking ;ih the' field, yes. , > " '22: . 23 24 Q All right, ..Would,jyou mark this, please?j- . ' , ,* < ' 1. I 'r ,, '' ` * '* ' ^ * . - *-/v.Vi /. :. v ;: ,* ' . J-1 - > (Plaintiff9o exhibit 1436 was marked for v - - ; ^ r---. ' ' .i 'i'ft. J.. , ^f L7 . i 'I--\fl \ ^ V -- 4L * '' t \ Ai*..*-ft. 'V PENG*D. CO,, -BAYONNE; N,J.', , ' 1 f. - :y 7 ':*-';-v-,*S1''- . '..-.\. >,,'--.-.*-V**-/'-;,; ``/--r ---l.V*./..1r,.-.*/:*Vv, `-'A:/."- 52 s/' >J . .- '-> -:/-/ , - -, r'- ' 1 ' * 5*- . L -- ''L ' y V y' y.:yj;.v . A y ? ;'y y-..,, y y ,: -* .y y - yy> 2\ * -/1 identification bythacourt reporter.) . :y . :y y. yt; v/'/N;'/y'^ / '/ ' -' '*-2/ Q7,J(y Kry Carr) I'll hand you what*a been parkedk;y f* *r - . - 7 y y " v v - > -> v ; ^ - 1 \ ' f plaintiff.1o exhibit 1436^ ^ t c h 1*11 roprasent and I'll .tie L 4' ._ 'L ''s - 1-J .; .- \ y 6 it up. with fch book, I#il repraaent it this time, your >T `Ln< . , y JT . Honor it is,a; chapter frosi th .book that I m<mtiond #V v\ V ' , t: y and. that thaaa are tli authors of that chapter of the book,, f V >; J-; > i- '.*+..*' ''' / ?'ik7'a&efiBai':'. Your lionorV'I bbjMtV^ -'wr1'''.' v...y y .- > v * y ; - - .>y;A Mk* CARRj X would: offer that exhibit into ,; 9: evidence* ^ y V ' io -' V\ i IiEIAIi:< X object#.your Honor, firattohis ;y - ,,y y.1, v.; y. - ; / y . ' y ;" ^ V - i '`c \ '> -i"S% J`< . H, '"r f . j ' ' ' * ` - f ` vi .r ; i.i;. y- * * * s.y*'-.- v -yyy-y ' - -''i- *' /-. z- 1 2 thewitrasflabout it, because, the witneoadid not '-- ' r y 'L- - y \ y r y y .v* * / that`s;. y ^' {y y ' *- ; It wae authoritatiya>|i\Ha aid they Waresworking in the- 'L14 , , field, yea* . He did not admit it wa authoritative. : V .f yyy . / f C v r ^ ' i..nf," y - y * y- i-.y- - *rrf, . 15 ` V^^condl^/'^to, adiait it into evldencef there*a no foundation ' N .J* ,07002 r }6r ;.S laid for its adnksiimi: into evidence, and I object to it ' . (y 7 - y * <y v \ y* - hearsay. - , JV * ,-`v 1 r*r j/y '.'c0^;. 'V'-y A '. ^ * fy.y, it V* . . V . ; THE COURT: ; >fr. tCarr, do you have ;^y responae^^ . y 1 9 ; ybu-wi^-m'imka?. ^ _ ^ y / : V -'=> ^ 1 20r' v ' 21; " / * v i ~ r ^ -.' 22 ' S LA "` ' 2 3 ^ - \ : .HR. CARR: Your Honor, in addition'*to tha wit- ' y nes1 hctablishing that these gontlasicn have written: that a *. -,\ S', c -v :*'.is < y\i-->*.". chapter , 1 /grant you the .court will *; r -si iv. -y>y have to.tkh my;ra- - ;;) ^ y v y y y - ^ .-y,/ :`;y ; :,->v yt'-' ]./' ; presenttion that it is 'froih the.book, tAe'\author#,0 Tha v , "f, . 24 y . y witness has said that ha recognisec these gentleman-are-y .*-v^* 1j .;' -'v--. .=' 1 .,`j'\]v ' .',' - -*-;. y yv'*`,t ' '-!' y.r*.'/,/ y*,y*.J-*^ - - - / ' ,i ;: y A': ^ .* . . *.- . y ,- s* y y yv v* x - ,' ; r ^ - . , , j *' :4 ` . . \S z` x *<" > v - * . s 1'. '-**,r * ` t j V^' ;r. ' r ,-V' f' *' ' ,...' ' ' - -V> ' / ...A - . ,r^t-> . - .V 53 tV' 1 2V r3 \ 4' I 5 <\ 6. 8;' /9; ; 10L i II * 12/ 13 .14 15 16 7 17 18 . - -i 19 -20 21 '22 ... 23 / '24 / .authorities, in the fields .^ 1 1 T, T -V * >p j ' -. i . . . fc t 1, ^ - .r i*J ,j i , 4 , ,,_* , 5 V ^..-HEXHEHAHt1'You.want to- road back what he ^ ,fc*,- W "* 'r- . .J J. ^ fr said? / * :.-\ - ` " THE COURT:. *X quotad whet he acid. He said they work in>the field, ys> in answer/to the question as to * *> y'i Xy. ''/ IA whetherthey ware authorities. ,X `take that in the context in' which 11 was asked 'they are recognized as authorities,, ,1 ' A. ' * J-. J% " _ ' J1' _'' the objection is overruled. Fourteen thirty-six is ** admitted oyer objection. -: \ ', VMR. CARR:; I might point out for the further rcord/ yourJHonor ,,-that.lionsonto witnesses: Hays acknowledged that Brehm LaboratoryV Wright .State. University Brahm , *- -*/' . . .-l - i/, ;v- "v ' Laboratory, Thomas .Tiernan ar authorities in the field. .'V-:' '\AV!)'*%:: ^ ' Y ^ C T v w Y./ - '/ ' , -i -./// ..JiR. HEIHEMA1J: LI'm hot objecting to that. He -:. esked whether this 'witriass; was; /.That'a 'what X*m objecting/ ^ *f-7 ` " - \" to. V / ' ' /-" ^ \ . ' .i/: ^ / *' " _ . i j1'*--*- , fc - ` 4-1 < _ ' -* V ^-'.5 ' r , ." ; " . ;THE rCpURX^U.X^lnx0y>that .v ! knowfthat * M ' /. * " ruling ort what.was argued .before;and what X stated, Before ' you get ..Into the articlewe'll take a shorts break at this tima, I want to adviso the Jury, a I do before any break, and'this.will go for any other breaks you're not to discuss r - V . W -1/ ' -r * - v ; .- .* ^ i . J % ^ ' ' ,, ; V- . - - ' .. - ' * - ^- this natter among yourselves or with anyone outside the jury panel, said as yet form any opinions or conclusions in , - " " -V' '-*/'- :'' '/ .: \ trial. The;court is in recass. vf * .- '1 : :/*:" ' // / ^ 'V.- >*^ r-1v 'J *>r BAYONNE. N.J. 07001 FORM li, N B (Short roceaa) (Plaintiff's exhibit 1436A was marked for identification by the court reporter.) Q (By Hr. Carr) Dr. Koush/ I hand you 1436A and ask you to look at the book and sea if exhibit 1436 is not chapter nineteen taken, from that book, Doctor X sea you're looking at sensthing other than what I'm directing your attention to. X don't mind. ' A Yes. ^ Q But if you could Just answer my question, A Yes, sir, Q Hould you please , . A Yes, sir. Q Ail right. Thank you. Your Honor plaintiff's exhibit 1436A is the book that was authored by Keith, Eappe and Choudhary.- THE CODI&i;^ n r > : Thank you. I Q (By Hr. Carr) How, Doctor, directing your attention to the chapter that was written by the authors that I previously asked you about, .I'd. like to direct your, attention to page 249, if you would, please, sir. That page deals with an incident called The Binghamton State Office Building fire or accident.does it not, sir? J ^^ t 1' , ' \. ,, - ' s 1* I*'.". t ' V. , ,vl ' ` 1 . 1 f ' ' -a- ", -J -: -i: -- ...- -run^ r r^ -1 ' *, ,V'.* - ` ' 1 L, v "At, >-., , i ,> -X -V , , ^ r- , , . -v ` ` J- : #, - v.v<--,;y^ > - -- k r, - *~r-\ ^ ^ 1 ^ k- t-. r H *. 1 L_ ' ' ,r , - 11" f ;k, i C 1 *, -.~ **. C-, J',: -`'I- r ^ k, * Si*' '- ' S' * i. i"aL,ri \ rk',.1; : - - - ^ v - - k - V ^ ;. ..'-'***' i / c T '' F ., / ; rk- -ir*'.AA- 1:'YYeess,*1ks'ir.-T>.'i`iXr,,i?iV,`-.-.. */>v L* - i ft r'\'. 2r i.s. *, Q ' And you've heard of that ,: jrou knov; about that k-;'rv..*`, - *-1--,':\ .,x ' -/ 3 ; Binghamtom'State Office: Building incident? V* 'VVv 4 '"r -k'v^v v,-'^ ^ :" V*H Si, ? '*' `v \ ,'v,v ' MR'* HEXNEMAN: . Excuse me., your Honor. .Hay I have ;V'.,'6 , 1 v k ",j . ' >J* , "'-tJ,'v ^ ^ " -*' ^ -J* i"?>\ t'* it tt* - 'r'*V* ^^*VfiijCi`*LrKP- /*. ^ >'?-arcontinuing objectionfeto\ this line of^ questioning? iV; '-'V-?;-----'<;r*,-- > V\ T \ :.-v'>Vr'i :THE-COURT:.- Sure. ;:> x > J / : h ''' V ' '' .%*j : ,:$^V r- '! . 8;`V V ; i ^ R . HEINEMAN ^| With'1respectto tHis "article in : ' i*,.. -.\ ''93' .this part ot the h o o k a s i c v s - . r/n m , ' .... V-'-v'^vtf 'vtV-1' . \ " Vo: ite'COURTs'1f;SureV o noted; L ') + s , , V ` ' s , H ,. '( ; . 'S' ''-"k ; ' ' '` . ` . J S` - ' > . ' t. ' 'L i * - s ^ Y 31 ... J, ' . 'J ' -, i} >' / ! ' *t ' ll: *`O * a' v/ -1'" rQ \ (By Mr. Carr) fV ' ^ ^ ` r. ^ And youf of coursehave ^ ' h; V' T ' , > .V i-i ^ read other-)- r ' - - . -' *v th.,e ^ t v Vj t^ } 1 * * mj* * c * ' y *V r 12 Vs .you1va read; this -Boole dealing with that incident? v^-'V-, / * ' ` -*> ^ ~''-yy~r:A^ *v-V' ** 1 3 .. y v:;.v *e;Aw '3I;hadh!t'read this 'part' of ltn- BAYONNE," N.J.- OTOOI ` FORM I_L 14 8 t X j i ^ 4 Z '*> s o r r y r t ^ r ` 15 - ^' / ;i61 *rv ..'v;A J;X hadn11 ;read; this part `of;it.,-, .;;;,` : V > r>, Q ;VYouvhadnv1"read this .part of' it? - V r;-:Vo, ... -i;..-. V A.1 7 , !^f > a y :no,:\^y:yyyy{:-^ y y > y ;\y ;-yy 4 18 - 19 J-20 V Q ;; You have* read other articles dealing wlth The " ^ ^ ^ ' ,yy'7 v \ -v;.Vi JV .Binghamton,State'Office-Bullding incident? +'*r '* : f, A ^. r * '111*` ' 22/ V 7 " Q vi It 's been, a widely discussed and written:about _v, 'y *>y -- -....... occurrence? ' S. ^ iV2 0 VvVrVk'v^A-vvvYes,-.apc.yyyy >-yy :y , y yyy^. ^*%;y ^ TJ \^' *"''*! F ^ J , ^ I ^ ^ "P _J '~'*"i. ' ^ i 'j ` ' *f j >4 L f| '.H 1, n. ' J ^J ^ ^ *^' , " V24'C,r --OVV,'4-.Q ; And there :was-:rit was an.reftlectrical panel fire that!' *1W*v * ,r /' ,1" fv ^JJ' * f^ vCy 56 *M A 1 '2 , _. '3 4 ,5 i-' * - i^ . 7'- i--18 L 9. . 10 h ; 12 U V 14 15 . r -\6 V l1/ / 18 Vr" * ^ 19 i` 2 r ` 21- 22 >2 3 / 24.. involved releasing up to two hundred gallons of transformer fluid, P.CB Arpclor,' tetrchlorinated benzines, benzines that had been converted.to polychlorinated dibenzofurans andpoiychlorinated dibenzodioxins; is that correct, sir? /. 7 X Yes. s ^ 7 .. ,V Q And you know1that/to be the case for other docu- . ments in addition to that which.you1re holding in your hand '^ V " j f ` i^ -J - * i. i ( +^ 1 , , -V . ;' ' ` *. n * now at.this time.don1t-you, sir? 'V r," - ' 'v /- vKr\.( f;-V - ^''j-Ln' A " '_Y_fiS# **ir,`M i*.X 'vi V?xv,' *p ;*,1i\y: 'tt ` 1 ^'r -\ . _ ^. * . * j ^ th * ./ ^ h \ *- " ,, 1* " ; All right;:'"'Now,/and you1also! know that there' was found, in the boot, arid i t X described in.this article, that' ' 1- '^1 \'r"',r.- ... k.. ,.^ ^ * r:'` " . the soot was found to have- v 3, 7:,V8-!TCI) in'it, scraped from the walls'of The Binghamton State Office' Building? A .'Yes. ,'v -r,` ' Q Yes; .And there have been a number of studies that'have confirmed that it was, 2, 3, 7,8-TCDD that was in that soot in .that--following\that;Binghamton State; Office Building fire;_isnVt that correct? ^ \ .. - - A" ' I knew there was TCDD. 1 didn't know .whether it wasr.2* 3,' 7 8 or not, : ' , . ; ' " ;,-\ \ Q Well, you haven't read the other articles that '- > J-`J;,i` .- -!J.'''r'I --'V " ' *v.` "'-T ` J'- /' were written confirming, the. prescenes of 2,. 3, 7, 8-TCD at' ; CL' , '` 1 ' :L `~ ` ' "v " ' - .. :c . ' - s , Lf - * ' 'J t two point eight ^arts; per, xiiillion' in that soot? ^ ;7 , . ' ,'.MR; .HEINEMAN:- .Do you have, the article ;to refer BAYONNE. N.J. 07002 FORM IL .24 8 ._>`t 'V 57 1, : /' ^ "3' - V: - him to? k". .* -i.; 'V. . v ^ ;>Vi ^ v -1 \ `- / M R . CARR:1 do. ,But I'm asking the-witness, '"'r v 'J` ... V-;.\ ? -- v..,,^ 'V.-c,- "' havethree articles to" refer.him to> but 1 1m asking the I ' 4 1. witness whether ,or not\he has read such articles,. : -MR. HEINEMAN: , Why don't, you let him see'them*. '; ;6 THE WITNESS.; I don't recall*"-' ; ^ -- . " /"V * '' ' 1 s * t 7 ." ' ! 11' i. r '* r i*'t t " J r ' J,, ' `f'> i , t *' f ' fc` S ^ 1 1*l ^| * * *Vj '" r | ; ` p * f' , if l-"' _**j "JW Mi'R(.-,CARR: You "cr*an eJx'amine thJe wi.tn4*e's's,'th"e^ way - - ~H ^ %" - i* \ J ^\ 1 * / / ^ . r`\ .' L' - .-8' . you'd'like to. But: if -you don't mind I'd like to examine 9v - l: 'the witness in my own manner. ` . ^ r- 1 lO- -v \ V; THE' COURT:; ^Mr.t.Carr,';^ ^ ' S C '*t.z lI -\r' \ MR-. HEINEMAN: object'.to your; asking him abou 1 2 ' . whether he's read articles if you don't show him what the; 13 , '14 ark./ -:iv * - J VliH t : . THE COURT: The obj action.is,overruled. It's a IS .proper -course of cros s; examinationv . You may proceed t:M r . 1 ** * - J f 16;- -'Oarr/"- \ ^ ^ "J ,t \ Li ; ,17 \ ^ THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the question for 1 8 ' me. 19 ; 20 , t .i T 21 . L (Questiqnreadbythe court reporter.) /.; THE WITNESS: ,Not that I recall. Not, specifically 22 Q (By Mr. Carr) lit me help, you, and see if:this \ 23 > 24 ' refrieshes your recollection, or--could you mark this as an exhibit. :ti i- - i B A Y O N N E ,, N.J. 0 7 0 0 2 58 .1 ; ''T' ,, * :vv 'jT-. r v v* ` ;.(Plaintiff 's,,exhibit 1437 was.marked for - j k.'1 'i fr '1 *- :' * *' j ' p - ' V "4s . .` * - 8. ^ "1 L 1 ^* identification,by the courtreporter.) ' 3, Q (By Mr. Carr)k .Doctor, 'I'll hand you now what's 4 been marked plaintiff!s/exhibit 1437. which is a literature, ^A ` ?'-/ publication called "Toxicology, and Applied Pharmacology," - '6 ; You recognize that as an authoritative.publication.in this t* `J ' ' i ^ r ,; V V i,, - V , ` . / k' ^ field, of toxicology, do you not, .Doctor? \ . ', ,' - . .` .. 'J 8 . J^ H / V;/ A .Yes,'air, . , / *[-^'Jr/`%*\-MR/'BEINEMAN;s>ik'pd1you have--; ' y v;/ ; "/ o. ^ .MR. CARR:, No,/I don't .v These are the other ' 11 - I2-;v articles. v'*V , ." "'-`a , - ' '- ' '-'lrV-r'';v f'; *O" ;`r->\';;iC'i '. A- i;\<T 5.Tit,f-,'-1 (Byr.Mr. CarrVv All li'i"n...gsopiinpgg/3to ask/you abotut that 13 14 / V article, Doctor, is/just-the reference'to t h e 1concentration ; "A ^ .\K\ /. :c a 1 '>/ -:r" ` ^ ; 2, 3,:7 , 8-TCD. as^ contained' on thevr first page of the.. 8 T l W U O J ' C O iO V-"N "3 N N O A V 9 "15 article, so you needn- th read; On. 0You; can do it' at .some / \ "' >16 . ` /other time/ but l!d like to go on., /Do you see the rference 17 r , >there to the 2#-3 t.7j8?. / ./ ; ; ,/ ./ is /`/'"" A -yYs/'// ^/;/'V /' ././ '/a `-'/y'/ /: 19. .20^/ *`21 22 ' ; \ Q . the refererice is two point eight parts per . ,million of 2, 3, 7 , .8-TCD.as being found in that -soot in , ` '* , ' J- ` ` ' ` . r V- ,,' l. y'- ^ , -- " * -' ' '-v ", -,V 'J : .. '' . p."' i.1' V '' The Binghamton Office; Building,, is'it not, sir? / .; / , /' ' A Yes. .:".* .Q - A1 'right;. . Now/ Doctor, .referring back to exhibit - 24 " 1436, I think it is,; on page two bundred and.forty-nine,Jit >\- , ^ t* -* i'* ; ' i'' - - * > iJ- ^v# - ^"vT -^i , ' 7'- ' ,, _i f r t - i't.. 1 - - discusses' that fireand, more 'specifically it points, out ; V-> v - that there werc three persons--in this article they're - j^ .-3 v ' "dealing with three patients or persons that were in that building and exposed to this soot on one or more occasions. ' ' 5' 6 -: Do you sea that, sir? ^ 'r ,1' A -` No, I'm hot. with you. Where. are you reading from? '7 '-8 , \ .' 9 ' \ L , Q Well/ the top of the page; and, the page preceding ;v it , two-four eight , talks about three persons that Were ' studying that have- beep in the building. - 10 : / - A : Top of page two',fortyreight? *-- 1 l' ^. r + kl* 11 }i - r Q ; All right. Kook; on page two fifty -then, and . >: 1L ^Y*' 1, ' ^ ` ( J *1` " ' l. , ` | ^`i ` 12- that will help you; a little more." Where it says findings, 13 ; liver biopsies contained in 1983 from three pattents' are 14' 15; presented in this chapter. .Do yousae thatr>sir? > - ,. ., * , * ., . : jL ' v A Yes. \h ^4 ' .ii Ik-Sa .?';* Yf' 'i Jj?*: >1 v-'\'-i*'* /- -/ .J>'>~/ ^ -` - > /v-v -v-. j v ,,v > _ . - , - . F O B ill. 2 4 B 16v: Q .- A l l ,right .i ;Now;:\back ;tb1twtf; forty-nine,vthe ' x.`- - - '''k- r " ^ /'5V-*;sj-.f\ '> V'i .b -V 'f. \cf k- 17 . last.paragraph on.that page.: It says, does it not, ; P E N G A D C O .. B A Y O N N E ; N.J, 0 7 0 0 2 18 .- 'bhloracne, a skin iesibh,. was used^as 'a"biological marker ;i9 '' in past incidents, .but whs noted infrequently in-.-that is " . '*j-'.- .V-J ' .1j-,,^.J,^.1.^v^ \ ..*-* . 't ''i.-'1b'. -i.''- " -1 infrequentlyin adults in Seveso; Italy, and was rarely r ' * .i.- ** -.I F`,''**>,'> "r '*>" k 21' seen, in Binghamton./ 'However, Binghamton soot was found -22 " to causetoxicological findings similar to that found in -23 'animals^fed 2;, 3, 7, 8-TCDD wheh guinea pig oral toxicity 24;,_; studies; were performed." Do, you, see that, *sir? ' , 'v : - J v ,i T'" ' ,,. J.,**;.- ' *- . - J/,. ' i- `Vt. .-1- > . v __ r y i. '> 'r4K i r-'. *';t'-- 1' - ,, ( 60 1 ;' > *V- ' Srs.V'"^ ; :> v' "' - / f-... . >-o*: ''X/iv. s , v -; ' . ' v,i * 'A -/.Yes-..- -'V-v; <;r *y -. >. - '">:" ^ -v f\ y y -- yy;y^. -;U.;r -y^y--- - s/y^'y^y'.y-y, ;v';!,Q :;A11 right- ' Now, ;the authors state, do they.not , 3-v- that this chloracne that'1lias.!been Used- In biological'skin *V:' 'k J r`-, \ 6y, markers was rarely seen on the Binghamton,; don't they, sir?! ; y :. y V v \ ^ V C v ^ " ;V ! ` Q - And this is,Binghamton where there *s two point eight parts., per million ,ofVthe Qdot on the*walls; isn1t it, JV -8 9 --s * io ; A> yYes. '* / V y 7"' ,v: .. .. / 1 ^ ",, .. * " - ' V v, i , , y-,.' I : .- . >. - _-u - .Q7 ^ It 's; also noted infrequently, at Seveso , Italy* ,!/ ,v- f t \ .li-' /vS' t f.T '\r\ .s}.;"- V:,yesi "Q/ Youknowthat' to b e a f act? "V ... ^ J > y i3 ;; -*,X / .A . But it .was found frequently in. children, ': -, ^" f1 tL, ^v-' - " 'r> :r ."'SI.!J -j - - ; "' / -- : i , , . - , * i;j1'*, ^ ^ , . ` - . ' ;.;ji ' , t` . * *' ' . L 1. "j - , .* . : 14 * .^ J ';hQ ;. ?ound infrequently, in adults; > ; : ^ ^ -?'- -If.^ V- , ,Av, Yes. ,But in>children it was found-frequently. " 16'- ".u'ttV'Y^tVQC'Wellr D6ctor , the point that I'm tiding ;is that ; -*-17;-, - you can,be exposed toVlarge doses' of;2,;;,3*, 7 ,^,8-TCD and not *> ; t`'" * , ' ' j " '-V'-'~S* ' -18 develop chloracne. S.N. //- / ''i .-y \ r-r-'/.'f > '7^^ `.w'-.ftjiv ,* ;- - 1 9r> -1 --"- i. A ; Not on that: basis, ;not bsd:onSeveso. -,^ -'... ' 20 i . Q .Doctor, weren *t all these-peoples at Seveso that L i-* /' -, - . i, '\PX- V'-'iti'i s.<*y ^ _v . ;,21 1^ *r ` were'.*As4t*4u d4i.%e#d3 there,;,>d4 idn'^At*'theAyn -get expomsAejd] it*Ao Atit%hAe' 7HsJamHAa -22' / contaminate ; that is 2 >/-3 7 8-TCD? ** I - 2?;"' A .But not the -same: dose. ti- .j ; ' 24' : k -Q ^'Doctor fid.w on earth do^you know that? ^ V 'i 'PENGAO CO.! *BAYONN E. N.j.- 07002 ' FORM 1L 2* B y ' ""S'-*-r' >V; <, ; * 61 * ^ . ,,S' 1 ^ A J Well,' thechildren fre qaently had chloracnia. *- i-' 3: ` : Q 1'YesV:Y? Y Y : Y * ;Y ' - ' Y Y-`"'Y Y *-\ _ ,*v-- .. '* ; ^ *_r - A v Well, how aid they?get-~ , 4 :Q, Yes. And the, adults in the same family infraquentljy. '*'V -6 [' I-. ,, :A Because theyhadn'1 verymuch exposure. \ v \f Q Doctor, we have here, do.we hot, these are adults * i '1 - r* J^ ,1 'n t - f.***. >*\* p* ;* , * ** .1. **' J " -i' I . *' - .*iw' ' f fri. t .that we're talking about here again. ThereVs rio children ? J *'?$(-T r9 ;i0' involved in,Binghamton; .Is that right, sir? It?says rarely, seen in Binghamton*', doesn't it, sir? 1 , - ` 'l J s. ' . ` V. ' *> p k. ,` - k' J " - . c -l " >' ' 'L - r ` j* ' ` - "* J L^ - i`. Y tf v, J ,. \ '$ i. v*j 'I Y Y . / A Y . Y e s Y ' :Y Y . Y '1 ' Y / y Y' Y V ` ' 11- Q ' And two, point eight parts per million is a pretty *1 2 " j1heavy ^dose o f 2, 3, 7,8-TCp to be exposed tor isn't it sir? 1f13', , A , But they didn t let the people go in, the building. . ../,;r Y ; V '-y ? jsY .*Y.y *: *.. .. - ': i 'v it:.. , Well, sir, we will-move on; and we'll find out 15 , that these, were people that were in the building that we're ^ /;; , . Y Y ''^Y-. y--*-/' Y v ; U;; talking about ..-' ''r^ `iY , .\ _ *' ^_t_; ^ b a y o n n e : n .j> 0 7 0 0 1 \ f o r m ; i l _ 2 * s v /nY ' 18 lV 20 . 21 L*| ,.'""" A *!* Of* ^course. ;v *-V''-v -/11't /\^ ' .V 1/ '- > Y L ; ' ' r-' ` J- \ 4 * * < s- t ''--t * x O ` a, ' ' ^* F ';,, - Q The statement says, does it not , that those people -,, .^_l ^ '`-v1',J' -f 'v V'-* ^ . -- in the Binghamton?OfficeY those people that'were! exposed to *' - .- >j ^ * ^ .t . *. , . 'X 1, j ir *r . . . v . ^ .j . ^ , -, .t " - , ir \ that contaminate,.chloracne was,rarely^seen?'- . Y: , ^ Y.;- Y A It doesn!tysay how theyi got: to that conclusion. 22/.**' I- ~ Q Well, Doctor, would you riot; agrrie with me that 23' ` that'swhatthisarticle says?r - 24. j , A^; Yes... if . =YY - . ** - -.. * ! 'i. > ' *- 62 `1 Q> And/ Doctor . and now if you move over to page ; ,2 , .two fifty where they/are talking -about- their findings, this. \ - V 3 ;1`was the first person* they; had.studied was a thirty-five year old worker who had been :ln^the building for over twelve ' : *,: <: - ' v \ - v ; -v.^ . -S. V . ; . .*/' . -P - ' ,, 5 - months after the incident.; Correct^ sir? t* , j ` X* * /kt` * . 6' * _ / ` ;.` ;Yes. : _ ^'V ;/ . * .;v ':f , '7-f*' Q And he developed elevated liver enzymes and was ' -8 ,' ...; evaluated; isn't that/correct, sir? * .... , / : ' ^ 9' ; JO 7 .-/ ,, ./A/ ^ -Yes. '/ '/// t. ;/ /,./ ; "r` ''.;*~' ` /- v -/ >. *v / ;* ;/V" .T. -j*: /. - /. V-v, w;v Q ,7.And .he had SGOT findings above the normal range,, . ;n :- * j SGPT findings above the/ normal rang/ GTP findings above - /n * th norm rang/ triglycerides abye th normal.range , did . 1 3 _ ; /he hot,/sir? * /"" '// , 77 ' V - ^14 , %'V-/^''''Yek/-:7'';:v7:; ^ ^ ", ' ; " ' /' '/// -/ V':/ /7. . / 15 \ - .16 V'/ 17, ; // Q Now, there is no mention/ that he had chioracne, i ' " ` N> f ' 4 'r\ ' \* , T' / \ ' ` ' *- A. '; j - -, A' * " ^ . r* ' ,, _ p1 - ,-^ ' L - * ` is trhefe , ir?y , *: .\ "j~*~ " * ' ' t. /V > - "' 'J _ ' / r"\ ^ " '' ^ 7 "* ^ " * J ^ 1* r ^ J ; V / *Well /,I haven* t read, it ./- 1 : is';'- / .Q Well , you want to go ahead and read it. . * ' ," 1 9 - : . , , Well, this is only a-summary./ It doesn *t -describe 20 '. the findings . ",k ' ; .,21> 6 Excuse,me/Doctor, would you lust go ahead and yr:sV';-'.(- '' * :` --` '%-.J` ji :C,'i/i/>'i'<-/ *''!"i1 ' :-c - 2 2 / ' .read, it, -please^ -jf v'-/ - ; ' 2 3* . " ' ..' Sir, how^far.should.I Trad?: i ^ - ._; - *Sj--i-- 'V../ -/`.^Vs,','','i!'r/, ' 24 Q Read about that first person, the thirty-five year , > . 1. v ; v j n* * ' - v , r- . ^ / . . . . .. ,: _ v . -t v , -V* ^vv; -- PENCAD' CO.: BAYONNE. N.J.f 07001 FOR** IL^ 24 B 1 old person. A All right. 2 Q And I want to ask you about that. 3 A All right. 4 Q There is no mention there that he developed 5 6 chloracne, is there, sir? A No, sir. 7 Q And he did have these other abnormal laboratory 8 findings, did he not, sir? 9 10 A Yes. II Q And he was exposed to the 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD, wasn't 12 he, sir? A Yes. 13 14 Q Now, the second patient was a forty-one year old engineer who was in the contaminated building repeatedly 15 during 1981. Do you see that, sir? 16 A Yes. 17 Q And what did he complain of, sir? 18 19 A Weakness, headaches, irritability, and dizziness. 20 Q Did he complain of any chloracne, sir, or any 21 acne conditions, or does the article mention that he had 22 any chloracne? 23 A I haven't gotten that far. 24 Q Well, read it please, sir. It . ', r' ' r> '1 ] ' A All right. 2 Q I8 there any mention of chloracne? A N o i sir. 3 Q He had headaches, didn't he, sir? 4 A _ Yes. 5 f-u' f ; r " .*1 . -- 1. <\ , 6 Q And you know headaches",is: a complaint that workers at Nitro and at Krummrich have made for years, you 7 8 know that, don't you, si r ? ` ` . .* ' ^ -:.u A Yes. . ;''-i , * ^ 9 10 Q .And fatigue. . He calls it weakness here. That 11 would be similar to fatigue, wouldn't it, sir? 12 A Not necessarily. *j Q Well, not necessarily. But it could be, couldn't 13 it, sir? 14 *" A Well, a lot of people have weakness, they don't 15 call it fatigue. 16 . Q All right. I won't quarrel with you, Doctor, 17 if you don't accept that. Nevertheless, there are workers 18 19 at Krummich and Nitro that complain of weakness, don't they? 20 L .A Y e s .. \ 21 Q And, Doctor, also irritability that's a neural"'! 22 behavioral change. There are workers, m a n y , many workers that complain of neural behavioral complaints at Krummich' * . ;.'i ?:? - '*' A. j : K '.Vv-' ` t". A; .65 --i r11';//. V - and Nitro; isn't;that: c o r r e c t s i r ? '. 2 . /- ' kk, sT 1-T ,3. '' ,. ,A'./ At N i t r o . / ^ Q j `But not at Krimimich? ` '4 5`. Q Doctor, havie,you looked at the Krummich study that l ' M ^ r- ^4., %^`7" * v . -* V *6; w a s :performed by D r . S u s k i n d in 979 and ,1980? / > V; - '* v v;Y/^7'V.ry/;-' ,, V 7^ ./ . 7; A ; Y e s . " , / V ! 'Ki-;'X . V :/ _\ ' 1 . , , *,, -Vt1Cv-t.-.y - - h; , - . ''-y.-/' : `, 8- Y Q Did you look at the history.of those people, of "ri;*A`K,'- -I, j'.V ,-- t' ,!- ' -'-^9 / ? those workers? ` 7'>' 'ty ^--.'V:*i ^ D i d y o u look-at their medical history? 10' l 1 ----rv*-\ " didn't get. a.copy of-the medical-histories.'- i / .`u - c - - , ' ^ ..n, - 7 ; ; Q > Doctor; ,1 1m going to inquire of you about that !- 12- -. .later on,'bout what you found, what. your people found in ' \0 13 ' .14 ' your workers at ^nnnmich. Are you...te1ling me now that you ' >.'. . ' ` n^^' ' -i, ` ' * L -* * - . *'' v ' . , *' - haven' t looked- at. their histories , what complaints that these .15 . \ y 16 men/have-had? > ; ` ".s' '' .^ - \*" *'" ' ' \ ^ JAa '1`* -| A0 In the Krummich study? ; . ' '' . J+ n' 18 i9 ; Q-' Yes. \ ' C Jn * - - ' i /' ..'/w- 7' / i." L ; r ' " ' l ' J; V ` ' A ; I wasn't given a copy f i t a ^L* ^ ^ . _ L ^*7' 'mC\ ^y , 1 ; :Q . Doctor., I've ^got copies of .it from your file 'k 20 C 21 : .22- * . \ 23, "V* k - - dated September, 1980 . \ / :7 * .. A I thought.you were talking about the Krummich , '.- s .u' study. ,, . . ''''-- i-'- L. ^,0--.-"-`'-5t-. j_ **. ' *'. . v'- '^ '-j. V Q -I, am talking About the Krutnnich study-. I>'ve got % ,V -Av , 24' copies from your file dated September the 9th, 1980/-that .. 1' FOBM IL . IA B .BAYONNE. N .A OOI 7. .. -t j ;a V/-0; ' wr , `X ;' : '/;" ^ v ; / - '>>- ,,- \/V- `-V ' f" 1 V' * ' r ' IfV, *t.-I` ' ^' T k: - -/r,, h * ' "/ V i V ^ r r ^ `v M ' >.- <r^ rL^ ^ ivt, Jp`- ** * > r, * 1 -i -;v/ -XAi*rfrC,tft* ^f-L^* *r 66 u\. * t' 1 1.2 ! 3"- 4 ^ ^^ L - \ ` - ' ^ '- -' r 1 wer'e "d.el`iiv'er'ed *to,/-.m.e /b,-y'.C,ounsel^.;,- .fV^;V\,:1i" . '' '-'i *>.n! ,,,'* ' . / *' '.v ^ MR.' HEINEMAN:,: You mean -the ones from" Dr. Suskind? `; r* ;/` /'*'. ;r ^r : ^ ' '' *'/ _. ; "/ MR.1CARR:-, That's correct, the Krummich study.- 'MR. HEIliEMAN::' Right."...That's Dr. Suskind's files; 5' V correct?- - ' ;. '. ;// ) v.-- J ../ k ' - ^ " 6' ' * MR/CARR: --No//Dr. .Roush's file*. 1 * '. ;THE''"w i t n e s s i/'iodonVt. think so. -/ ,. ' 8 %Q .(By Mr, Carr) ;Y>u`don't think so? . <L. x: 9 ,' `a 1 n o ..-"/ '/;//" /' v (i- - ` . ,LS.". , ,j . . J- -A 10, Q . Doctor-- ^ L .' ; y' liL. vV/\ A/' The Krmmich study, was`.done by Suskind ^and we were I-, l/ 13, not given' copies of that report.^ '/' V V? ' Q Doctor / well,; we'll get, to that shortly* Doctor/" 14/ A ', All 'rightv . 'rf * Sy'v,-^ y . n ; >, / */ ./ `.v` J " ' . ' ",4*N-b'V' *iN,' 1 5 , ;, Q fr In any .event;,'-you-haven't read it; is that right? 16\ " L ,{ 1-7 - . '' >' 7 18 1 .A I haven't looked at it. I read the final report, but not the individual; histories. -,;r;-'?1 Q 'That's what I'm talking about, the final report, 19 v . * 't- ,20 ' 21 ,'J 22-'' you have got that? ; ' . ' .: / . ;/ -/ 'A : The final reports ./l / * . ' - . - - k - ;1- x, vs, - r r/' \ Q You have got that and you have read that? ,. ^ j J" t *m* 1 .-1 % ,, C ` " 'A>- Yes-, sir. / /' / * ; r. ^ V. u,, `j?* *-' *r,f\ . *1* ' 23 :Q/ That's, dated ,September the 9th, 1980. ; 24^ A";'Yes.-, : ^; OOO FOB IL 24 1 PENGAO, CO., BAYONNE. j /y- 1 .2 3 ' Q you aid get tnar A Yes, sir.' . -.^p -> < lK' n` /> Q Are.we all'straight on^that? , A "Yes, sir. t , k. , - 5' 6 "7 8 - .9 io^ 11 12 - 1} 14- - 15;. if 17'. ^ .18 ,19. . 20 1 2l\. 22. 23. 24-': .MRi -HEINEMAN:'/You asked .him .about _the histories. Q (By Mr. Carr) ,Doctor, I asked you'about the report and you said you didn't^get it, but now you say you 4 % -- . ^ , V ' l` ! , . " > ' * + have got it. ` '/ ' - .... _ *, * ' 'r 1' / -'MRJ HEINEMAN rLThat`'s, hot true / Mr.`CArr./ X objeet to that representation; > -C V - /'`'///, /MR, CARR: Didn't he just say he-- / , 2'**` ..t ' <To , ,, . ^ ' TT V ^ `' /t ^' t ,,'iN1; , ^ '1 <', r. ` 'L - ' lt THE COURT: Objection is overruled. Number one. Number two, we are arguing about a tangent. Go ahead,Mr. 7V /; - -Carr/ / ^ AN j .' 'i */-* '' "**\s l 4 " `' A ' _, : , Q /(By Mr. Carr): Now, 'Doctor;, -the medical histories that Suskind got from/your workers at. Krummich plant,.have you ever'seen those, sir? t V '" 7 A/ I 8aw them just recently in preparation for .this ^ - - -V <../' -r-;' ^ - -- trial, but I havenit.gone through them in detail. : Q > You don't; know^ what .percentage of your workers at <Krummich plant have consistent complaints of headaches in the chlorinated phenol" departments? / ;'> 17-' '.'*V". r-", W- - :r'" L ' ' A- NO.'' " 'r,,: 'V ` j" '- ^. - . ` . . Q Do you know what percentage of your workers have. f... 1> ./_'' i; ; I consistent complaints abbut^fatigue? 2 A No. ` I1 i j\ " -: ' T, ` ' Q About neural behavioral changes, irritability, or 3 sleep difficulties, do you know what your workers at 4 Krummich have complaints about that? 5 6 A Not from that record, no. Q Doctor, you're the doctor,* you're responsible for 7 8 the health of these people. This study was performed in 9 1979. 10 A Yes, sir. 11 Q The report was given to you in 1980. 12 A Yes, sir. 1 3 Q And you paid for it. 14 A Yes, sir. IS Q And you haven't looked to see what the people 16 >complain about, what was bothering them; is that correct, 17 A I didn't get a copy of those records. 18 Q Did you ask for a copy of it? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And he didn't give you the medical histories? 21 A No, he wouldn't. 22 Q He gave it to us, Doctor, and your lawyers. 23 MR. HEINEMAN: Under court order. 24 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, didn't you pay for ,t? * . i* A, 1 A Yes. 2 Q And he refused to give the medical histories to you-- 3 4 A Yes. Q -- even though you paid for it? 5 6 A Yes. Q Do you have any letters asking him for it, Doctor, 7 8 because 1 didn't see any letters where you asked him for 9 them. 10 A I talked to him numerous times asking for it. 11 Q Dr. Suskind said to you "I'm not going to give 12 you those medical records?" 13 A That's right. 14 Q You point blank said, "you should give me those 15 medical histories," and he point blank said he wasn't going 16 to? 17 A That's right. 18 Q Doctor, didn't that make you a little suspicious 19 about the reports-- 20 A No. 21 Q -- that he gave to you about the workers at 22 Krummich? 23 A No. 24 Q Didn't that make you just a little bit suspicious 1 that perhaps what he said1in his report wasn't backed up by 2 what was in the records? Didn't it make you just a little 3 8USplci0U8? 4. ` A No. 5 Q - Doctor,;we'll get into that report in some detail > - *", . 6 at length, and you will be advised of what your workers have\ mJ ` i) 7 wrong with them at Krummich. It's 1985 now the report came 8 out in 1980, Doctor, but perhaps it'won't be too late.' But, 9 Doctor-- 10 MR. HEINEMAN: I object to that, your Honor, as ii a ridiculous speech trying to influence the'jury. 12 MR. CARR: .You may think it's ridiculous. 13 MR. HEINEMAN: I ask that it be striken. And 14 that the jury be instructed to disregard it. If he wants 15 to make jury argument, he can wait until that occurs. God 16 knows when it will be. 17 -THE COURT:r-Objection is overruled. You- may 18 proceed, 19 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, could we get back to this 20 report. The worker here complained, of weakness, headaches, 21 irritability and dizziness, didn't he, sir? 22 A Yes, sir. . Q And you have no knowledge at this time, if I 'understand you correctly, whether or not your workersf in < ` ,,' t i :t, *V \ .*'--) ,'1 * ` fi 'V ` . - . . tif :Jt '- , f 4 I the chlorinated phenal departments have this same complaint; 2 is that correct, sir? 3 A I have it from my own records. We do our own 4 physical examinations, and they don't include these kinds 5 of statements. 6 Q You have records of these workers and it doesn't 7 include that? 8 A It doesn't say that. 9 Q Was the question asked because Suskind asked the 10 question and got responses. Did you ask the question? 11 A I'm not sure we asked those specific questions. 12 Q Perhaps if you don't ask the question, you don't 13 know, Doctor, you don't find out unless you ask. Isn't 14 that possible-- 15 A That's true. 16 Q Possibly true? 17 A That's true. 18 Q All right. Doctor, getting back to this worker, 19 he developed elevated liver enzymes, did he not, sir? 20 A Yes, sir. 21 Q And again as in his case, with the first case, 22 no evidence of alcoholism, legal or illicit drug use or 23 hepatitis. 24 A Yes. 1 Q He had SGPT elevations, GTP elevations, 2 elevations that persisted until 1983 when he was last examined. 3 This book was written in 1985. The last examination mention 4 ed here i9 1983, is it not, sir? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Now, Doctor, that's two years after his exposure, 7 isn't it, sir? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Doctor, could you not deduce from that that that 10 is a long time, long-term effect from exposure to 2, 3, 7, 11 8-TCDD? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Yes. And again no chloracne is mentioned, is 14 there, sir? 15 A No. 16 Q The third worker there, the third patient C, a 17 thirty-one year old firefighter that was just in there on 18 the occasion of fighting the fire; correct, sir? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And he had liver enzymes that were abnormal in 21 1981 and still abnormal in 1983; correct, sir? 22 A Yes. 23 Q No mention of chlor&cne, is there, sir? 24 A No. I Q He had an SGOT of fifty-nine-- fifty percent higher 2 than normal, gamma GTP of 54.9, thirty percent higher than 3 normal, SGTP at 41.4, albumin of 5.4, globulin 2.0, did 4 he not, sir? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Now, Doctor, these three workers that were studied 7 in this study, all of them had abnormal findings after 8 exposure to 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD that persisted at least through 9 1983, the last time they were looked at and mentioned; is 10 that correct, sir? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Now, you mentioned before that the liver study 13 of the lady at Seveso was the only one that you were aware 14 of. In point of fact, there were three biopsies done in 15 this case, wasn't there, sir? By this case, I mean the 16 Binghamton case. These three workers there. 17 A Yes. 18 Q Yes. So if you'll turn to page two sixty, it 19 discusses these biopsies, doesn't it, sir? 20 A I don't know yet. So I read the ultra-structure, 21 the finding, or just go-22 Q Just acknowledge please that there were liver 23 biopsies that were performed on these three people. That's 24 all I'm asking you for. V, A All right. Q . And at the top of page two sixty-one it points out, does it not, sir, that the biopsies were performed as a.part of a medical evaluation in,1983, two years after wards, and longer after the exposure than is customary in animal studies? A Yes. Q Doctor, there was found, or perhaps you better look at it, there were found pathology in the liver of all three of those workers, wasn't it so found?- A Where does it talk about the pathology? Q All the.pages preceding that. A I haven't looked at those. Q Well, let me help you, a short cut oh page two sixty-two, the last sentence before, the acknowledgments. A X still don't know what the liver pathology was. It just says liver pathology. 1 ,L * . - : , '. T '' 1 Q I'm not trying'to inquire of you, Doctor, precise ly what the pathology is. .The point of this examination is to show you that you can have' a -serious disorder from dioxin exposure without chloracne.. Doctor, on page two six two the authors make a statement on the mid-page paragraph, do they not.,' sir, "it is important to note that liver; rather than skin, is-- " ,3. Vi/ A 1 2 JJhere are you. reading? - Two sixty-two in the middle of the page, that 1 3 4 5Q 6 paragraph that begins at the middle of the page, Doctor. A All right. 7 j' 8 Q "It is important to note that liver, rather than 9 skin, is the organ most frequently responding in a pathologic 10 al fashion to dioxins, PCB's, and related chemicals in 11 animal experiments. It is also of significance, as pointed r1 , i ^^ , ' 1- .. ,, ; T- - 12 out by Crow in 1970,; that liver lsions.may be seen in some * v * ' Js 13 patients and skin lesions, in;other patients after exposure t " ^ < 14 to compounds that may lead to chloracne." You see that, sir? - 15 '; V - 16 A Yes. '/ L '/ j 17 Q Now, that's as far back as 1970 that Crow pointed 18 that out, didn't he, sir? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And that is another--Crow is a responsible path 21 ologist, is he not, sir? 22 A He's not a pathologist. 23 Q Well-- . 24 A He's a dermatologist. Q Dermatologist. He's responsible, isn't he, sir? A Yes. 1 and chloracne seen in others, skin lesions in others. 2 A Related to exposure to what? Q / To compounds that may lead to chloracne such as 3 2, 3, 7,,8-TCDD. 4' - ' . bV 1 *1 MR. HEINEMAN: It doesn't say that; does it? 5 THE WITNESS: He could ,have been talking about 6 chlornapthaleins. * '7 rV ' 8 Q (By Mr. Carr) Sir? _ ... * r A He could have been talking about chlomapthleins. 9 10 Q So he could have, but that leads to chloracne, doesn't it, sir?, n 12 A Yes. But it doesn't necessarily mean you're going to have the same lesions in other organs'. 13 14 Q Doctor, if you look at the bottom then of page two sixty-two it says,, does it.not, "The finding that three 15 *'^2 . ; *' . \ ' ./ ' ki- *- 1 ' out of three patients with liver pathology presumably arising; 16 i1 r ,,from exposure to dioxins, PCB'&, and related compounds, 17 who were biopsled to establish a diagnosis for their liver 18 L` * ,* A pathology, had similar lesions to those seen in animals 19 20 after similar exposure demonstrates that, ultrastructufal f ,,, 1 21 analysis of liver tissue provides "a useful biological 22 marker of exposure to these compounds." You see that, sir? 23 A Yes. . ` \ : -- ,, 24 Q And these authors make the finding, and they make , ,i i 1 it-- make sure that ybu understand this, and it's important 2 to note that the organ most frequently responding to it, 3 to dioxin, is the liver and not the skin. . 4 A You can't do that based on three patients. , 5 Q Doctor, three patients shows it to be a fact, 6 doesn't it, sir, with those three patients? They didn't 7 have, chloracne, did they, sir? 8 A It doesnlt mean that was caused from exposure to 9 these chemicals either. 10 Q Doctor, aren't these people-- I thought you said 11 theca folks were responsible authorities in the field. 12 A No, I didn't say that, I said they're working 1 3 in the field. ;- '.i- ; < l." * ` , . ` . - 14 Q You said they were authorities in,the field. r \fiA- \ '> .i\' t ' * 15 A No, I didti't:.' "'J - 'J'v * 16 Q Isn't Dr. Tiernan an authority in the field, 'sir? . * i k Li J r t` 17 A He's a chemist. - 18 Q Isn't he an authority in this field? Doesn' 19 examine these things? 20 A Examine what things? 21 Q For the prescence of TCDD in human tissue. 22 .A I don't know that. - 2 3 ; ^ Sir? 24 A . I don't know that he does in tissues or not. 1 know-2 Q Doctor, your organization has hired his laboratory 3 Just recently to do this. You've sent him things, you know 4 that, don't you, sir? 5 A I'm--1 don't know whether he was able to do it 6 with fat samples. 7 Q My question is you have sent them things to do 8 work for you, have you not, sir? 9 A Yes. But we haven't sent fat samples. 10 Q Doctor, these people so far as you know are 11 responsible people in this field. They're not going to 12 make these things up, are they, sir? 13 A The fact that they report it, that doesn't mean 14 they made it up. I'm not suggesting that. 15 Q And they were reported reliable so far as you 16 know, weren't they, sir? 17 A When you find-- 18 Q Excuse me. Would they be capable and would they 19 report it reliably? 20 A Report what reliably? 21 Q Whether or not these people had chloracne. 22 A Yes. 23 Q You wouldn't expect them to lie about something 24 like that, would you, sir? VfX,^n* v>M j-i\S??\**-.>,,//I \*V A -They didn't have,a dermatologist involved in this. Q Doctor, you .would not expect them to lie aboutjit , , ^ ` - v ' 1l would you, sir? ; ' 1 ' i *1 . 'i\ A They m4y have missed it, missed chloracne..;,; i . Q .Doctori we have her-- ue have A. Schecter, who is "* r" 4 w the Department of Preventive Medicine, Clinical Cantus of / : , - ^1 v the Upstate Medic al Center. We've got Fenton Schaffner, who is the Department of Medicine, Mt. Sinai School of Medicinei We have Taylor; Van Ness;, Garrett and..Wage!, who are.pharmacology and Toxicology, We have Gitlitz and Bogdasarian, who are the Departments of Surgery, Clinical 'i*/ Campus of the Upstate Medical Center. Are you really suggesting to us'thatthese people could have missed acne? 7 ^ .t i-X Yes MRi.HEINEMAN:/ Was YtKat acne dr,chloracne?' THE WITNESS` Chloracne. . ['< MR. CARlT" I'said acne. ;> .'!WV . J \ .^ THE WIT1JESS: Chloracne., Q . (By Mr; Carr)' You think they could miss acne, first of all, Doctor? -Sir? , ; ^ A If we'rci talking about, acne vulgaris, they may even.miss that; . - Q Doctor, do you think that they could recognise blackheads if they-saw them? , t.w:-*r 2f**'<T''.**- " A XX -V . /" 1. A Yes. But they may not call it chloracne. 2 Q Doctor, are all blackheads in your judgment chloracne? 3 ' A No. 4 5 Q Doctor, you think these people are Incompetent 6 to know what they're talking about when they talk about % . chloracne as skin lesions, when they use the words chloracn 8 a skin lesion? You think they're incompetent to describe 9 it. Doctor? ./ ' 10 A 1 think they could well miss it. 11 Q Do you have any knowledge of your own as to these 12 people in Binghamton, as to whether or not they did or did ,/,,, i 'i .** * r *> - 1 3 not have chloracn? ; \\ 14 A X have no way of evaluating that . 15 Q Doctor, my Question Is do1you have any knowledge 16 of your own about the .people, at Binghamton whether or not 1 * * `v ->* 'l!' v 'r * 17 they had chloracne? 18 A. Ho* ; 19 Q Doctor, these men say, on page two forty-nine, 20 that it was rarely seen at Binghamton. That means, I 21 believe it means, that they did see it at Binghamton. 22 A Yes, sure. 23 7 Q But only rarely. That indicates that they are 24 capable of recognizing chloracne, doesn't it, Doctor, just / f*. " j '> > I- ' - -8 1 viw * y* 1 r. 2 ; 3 4 ,5 6 7 8 9 10 . 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ;u. barely indicate that they know chloracne of the skin? : ' A No. , , Q It doesn't? Sir? A it doesn't mean that they could determine whether every.man has chloracne or does not have chloracne. Q And what you're saying is that while these scientists; these doctors that you consider to be expert in the field, and they know what chloracne is, they discuss it in the. book, they discussed it in the article, and you're telling 0 0 that you believe that these workers had chloracne and that these experts couldn't recognise it; is that what you're telling me? . ' tV"!, A I think they could ;have-aisded it* Q ' Sir? ^ '- : 4u. i'v. /yf;-.>:r-.,, *, ` -- , A They could have niiseed it. Q For that reason you are;not willing to accept what they conclude in the liver.rather than a skin as a more reliable Indication of exposure to2, 3, 7, 8-TCD; is that correct, Doctor? A It's difficult, to talk about what you can tell from a liver biopsy. Q Excuse me. But could you answer the question that I gave you? You're hot willing to accept what these men aay because you believe they are incapable of recognizing \ BAYONNE, N.J chloracne; is that correct? 2 A That's part of my answer, 3 MR, CARR: I've got noon, your Honor, and it's 4 a convenient place, 5 THE COURT: Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, we'll 6 break for lunch at this time. We'll resume again at one 7 thirty. The admonishments that I've given you earlier will 8 apply to this lunch break also. Gentlemen, can I see you 9 in chambers after court's recess? The court is in recess. 10 11 (At this point the lunch recess was taken.) 12 13 (At this point court was reconvened.) 14 THE COURT: Mr. Carr? 15 MR. CARR: Would you give the witness exhibit 16 1399A, please. 17 THE COURT: Before we start on the testimony, 18 in keeping with our policy of letting you know at times 19 when we will be off for one reason or another, sofar as I 20 know these are the only times in June. Let me give those 21 to you. June 7, which is a Friday, all day. June 11, in 22 the afternoon. June 14, in the afternoon. June 21, in 23 the afternoon. 24 MR. CARR: Then our vacation will be extended. 1 THE COURT: Right. That hasn't changed. 2 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, you have in your hand 3 now 1399A, which I'll advise you is part of plaintiff's 4 exhibit 1399, which is an analysis of analytical data on 5 dioxin, human tissue made by Colonel Young for the Veteran's 6 Administration Agent Orange Projects Office. You are 7 familiar with this, aren't you, Dr. Roush? 8 A Yes, sir. 9 Q Now, it refers to the fifty-five year old lady 10 who died from the pancreatic cancer seven months after the 11 Seveso accident, doesn't it. Doctor? 12 A Yes, sir. 13 Q It talks about how she was at home, how she was 14 significantly exposed to the toxic cloud, that she was eating 15 a meal in her home with doors and windows open, she consumed 16 vegetables, that animals in the area adjacent to the home 17 began to die in a period of fifteen days, and that two young 18 nephews living in the same building developed serious chlor19 acne. Do you see that, sir? 20 A Yes, sir. 21 Q Now, this is obviously, Dr. Roush, three people 22 who are exposed to the same amount of dioxin at the same 23 time, is it not, sir? 24 A I don't think that's--that's not necessarily ,---'- S.'"K ". .'I *.' f.pt i * 'i /, * - ' ;ij /" - .- `r - . -, *;> , T >. - t * , ,r i.^v*^- ' ' - v> , - . ' "s " !. `'fiA ,v. `.-,Lr*?:--: r?'<*---'X, >;-. -. -*- ' - i ,r>-' ,* .*i. , - :, y,-. .-., ; V ;^ ;'crrctv ;'vv^ -/; ,// 7-, '- '-"y '-'7'--.-A,.'' ^ ,- j . 1,. ' y y. - > - V.'- y., -- ;... *' i ;1 .' . Lj ' >S'\ " ,Vr. ; ' ... "Vl- * . ' 'fr. ..." < . * #> 1 . , X . . ^ ^- _ - . . * f''v > ';vu. Q Coeto^; it?^^ that eba was sitting ther* //V : .3 ./* JrV. - in a h o ^ :.vith.4^ opt when the toxic cloud piBBsed.Wer end it describes hr tissue that had enormous '1 'CV : X . ; ' "VV'/ J ' ' ''. A ; ; ; A..-- .'V. 2 , 3, 7 , 8-tb in her various tissues doesnft *c" K V 5 - '-iV-- ^ . j.,''." V- J- ' V ^ , * i fi ., il '.* >.J . '"1' ^ * r. `V " ' ''-`V-6:.V ;it#,'sir?: :'r;, ` ; -*V^*;- ,' '"T ' 7-- t- * ',1* ", "" -'. -. fc-h V `..*r`t - /,L. .i *>. ,V A\.::.Y*-,'-airv r V f * - . 1" -4 , ' y,.-.-.- ' v v. ' v: / - v -'1 ^ 'C_ * N *V li L * '.1^-21 . * I , V . -i' . V i . ' ^ ` ' . ,' V ' * H . ^, w* . V;'-". -' > .. , 8V .' i ; / Q todsho v^-,^.'0,c^.,-1 L-y. - '- ^-.,r ^.. didnot develop chloracne, but her f '- ' ' ..7 V ' ' - -V1." / ' .' \ ^ \ ,. V w> ', , ^phss in the same"huilding' did<r<-v .\>- --y *.*` v 9 '^ / ^~f< - '-4 v . *;* io^ A''""`Yes,- "'" sir 77.^""S-VtV-'-> - A:rrj'v?'.'*>`-.V*.>*..:- ' y '*-<;r. '"'1'^ V VxV ^ 4, V T J .;; Q/ Doctor, doesn't that indicate then, sir, ythat you - .--->.' "-s **` ' V :v"yy ., "r "u''*- ~ J. . ``1 - '- \ .r * f- ,i-,.`, - : X can bs exposed tO\2 ;3, 7, 8-TC08,fand depending onshov you ^ -y l- ' ^ K-t iL. Vvv.A\V y.4 ^ - . .. . * ; ,13 y ;`vre made up; genetically and'otherwise that you may not . *' ,1 O ' h V:sVrdevaXopy^chlor*che''whi''o < 14 ^ N. ' 1'^r 'yithyths^san^ ;dose 'b TCD, 'y PENGAD CO.. BAYONNE. N,J. OT002 'FORM. IL 24 B 1 .px' 'perhaps`-.less TCOD.^Lll develop ehlorac? Doeon^t :.that V-"' A5y ;; ip'' - y ^ v^,-i{ -'(' "S' . 16. y ;; .oiiggest that to you,''Drv Roush? ^ v v "'.* s ,k- . _ `r - 17 ',. ' k V-'-Nbt at ail,4airB'/'''A:` -- . V-- >. , i8 ': *,' * ^rv r>V c J9 %. ^ - " * if V ' -- v'^ * i ` ~ r k-: "So.. _a - y; u - ... . . t '* ''L.-li K ' 1? * ' '. . -* ;20; ` 21S-; : > .-" Q ^ =/'h' L 1 m ' ^ l> .Ixt -- tr .. _ Well, this lady had it in her tissue, didnft she, y ';;.J rv.;y'v * V V- - V * W p % J " > \ % L. ' L,.- ^ - v , --, ^ 1 4- :- " * *- f .;. ' ,,^ -_ . 22 J, ' VLniK '-- A :?Yes .sitv: 14 ' : ,,C r 23-; _ j .' -r 1 J` -',- ; jQ nd she didn't have ' f "V l.'"o 1 A. Sj, ' ' 2 4 - . ; `V Yhat* s'<right'4 S. . ^ J . - r i : .1- ; chloracne, - .L A did she? .^ ` i ^ - r1 " V" 1 Q And to that shows that 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD in har case 2 did not cause chlor&cne, doesn't it? 3 A The dose that she got did not produca chloracne. 4 Q I'm sorry, 5 A The dose that she got did not produce chloracna. 6 But that doesn't mean that the children didn't get appreciably 7 larger dose than she did. 8 Q Now, Doctor, she had in her fat tissue 2, 3, 7, 89 TCDD at parts per billion, nearly two parts per billion, did 10 she not, sir? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And she had it in her pancreas, one part per bllllo^ 13 didn't she, sir? 14 A Yes. , w v -y .v ft > 15 Q Doctor, that is certainly more 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD than 16 you have ever heard of being in the tissue of anybody, isn't 17 that correct, sir? 18 A This was an unusual circumstance, yes. 19 Q Indeed. And she didn't get chloracne, did she, 20 sir? 21 A That's right. 22 Q And doesn't that suggest to you that one can be 23 exposed to massive doses of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD and not get 24 chloracne? iA \ i' r '. , ; . 1 -y ; ^ - k - - -r ' f. tV * ..a fr '* t *i-.i ''t . v. -'t1' ' ji--^ ;-^ A :;;That's. true*;; Butit also says those children gotmore than she^ did;v <^ ' ' r . fV ' ] >r l V .. , *,, ' t ,e ; " : ^ V **7 that .the children got more than she did? `" V ^ ,a`": `1' '/ V : Q How do you read;that from .this document* Doctor, other than the fact that the children got chloracne?-v ./ ; .A; There I V writing on many--mahy writing0-:* . QV`; From this article* Doctor, how dp yougefe from this that the two nephews got 'more of the.dose of TCDD than this woman did that wac right there when the toxic : cloudwantovartha house? ; 7 *; k-Vr^ >*' ^ -y* y- ^ ` ..1 . L,Jjc'1-''y1'r-A..L You can"r'-t"'i:1dtr" af^w .that: -Av *V? ;- \ : f--rv vom tj-h\*i>s* from *^ th/i.s-1'*da-t_ a,*, but it doesn't mean that it couldn11 happen. v ; ; L ''x'i,/ > .v.j ;jV) /c 'P: ^ fy Q Well* Doctor,} X*m not/arguing- that; it couldnft happen* Indeed it could happen, But the childreh got a :^ V . ' greater;dose.but from the document there lsvcertainly nothing to indicate that # is-.there? ^ - ' ..A ;:But there's other writings that suggest the children did get, morn ezp.oh.dte ' , . /' : Q Is there any ^iting* eir# that indicateB^ t^ these two nephews living in the same bulldlng would develop ' ,f'k k':"tT -,, r Ly ,' ' . '. y '.-'1 serious chloracna on the third and fourth days got;more exposure to 2y 3,! 7* 8TCI)D than she did?,. -l4r ^ ^ ^ **J * ^ '!1/, " %" t ^ ^ ' ^ ' mj ' A There's everything--every placet believe that's - -* 1*' - * ' - ' -- . V-- .'^' `-'''. ,-.\ ': ^ - ' " ', :v -*'* -v;* '.r . / v.<,ti,v.-\*''is\' l > .correct. ... ^ it. / '"2' Q Where does it say that? 3 . A Not from this data, but from other writings on 4 , Seveso;' 5 Q : Doctor, do you have writings indicating that 6 these i m people had more exposure? 7 A Ho, I'm just talking about children in general, 8 . Q Doctor, I'm talking about the "specific evidence 9 that we have here now. If you don't mind, sir. From this 10 document. How, we talked about.three people that were in 11 the Binghamton accident that had no chloracne and were , ' . ` '":/ ' it{ i' /.*vi, ^ `` ' 12 exposed to 2, 3,; 7, 8-TCpV Now.were:talking about three 13 .. people here that were exposed to/2,<3,* 1 , 8rTCD, two of them 14 got chloracne and onodid not. Isn't that correct, sir? 15/ .. A Yes, _ l ^ y v y - ^ i y '' 16 . Q And, Doctor, you, of course, are familiar with -17. . the horse arena case that happened here in Missouri, aren't 18 'you, sir? 19 A Yea, .sir, 20 Q As a matter of fact, it was the subject of . 21 Biohasards Committee meeting, wasn't it, sir? 22 A/ Was the subject? 23 - - . Q Yes.' ----V ., '24 . A We discussed it, but it wasn't the reason that we PEN GAO CO.. "BAYONNE. N.J. 07002 ^ * f, /j y- . i< ' 1 `V.-i'*f'.sif *-, f*Y> V ~ 88 *"-I v tact. - * Q Doctor, it was the very first item on your agenda t 3 on ycur--I*ra not suggesting that it was the sole thing - ,, r-r _L -j* - 1' * .* r. s 4 discussed at that meeting. ' '5 - A lt was--yes. ^; 6 Q It was the subject of one of your meetings was 7 it not? V';:- 8> . k\ Yes'sir.. - 9 10 - . , (PlaintiffVs exhibit 1438 was marked for II- identification by the court reporter.) - ' M ;',1 f'' : V:* / 12 Q (By Mr., Carr).' Handing you now. what* 8 been marked 1 3 plaintiff 's exhibit 1438, X*11 ask you to recognise that as VV!`:r" 1 4 the minutes for your Biohazards Committee meeting on 15 November 17 1982. 'jj } f;:i i- 16' A . Yea s i r v \ 17 HR. CASH: 1*11 offer that exhibit Into vidence Y4t* 18 if it pleases the court and t have-- 19 THE. COURT: Any objections? 20 MR. CARR: ,--a page from it that I want to pass 21 to.the jury. , 22 MR. HEINEMAN: I have no objaction, your Honor, 23 'THE COURT: Pino.. It. ia admitted without objection 24 . MR. CARR: Would you mark this 1438A. B* YON NE,' N.J. O70D1 . FORM IL 14 B V-1 I (Plaintiff's exhibit 1438A was marked for 2 identification by the court reporter.) 3 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, 1438A is the first para 4 graph from the minutes of that meeting, is it not, sir? 5 A Yes, sir. 6 MR. CARR: 1 offer that exhibit into evidence if 7 it please the court. 8 THE COURT: Any objection to that? 9 MR. HEINEMAN: The first paragraph? 10 THE COURT: The first paragraph on the first page. 11 MR. HEINEMAN: Where it says who the committee 12 members are? 13 MR. CARRt Ho, Counsel, I've given you a copy. 14 It's the first major paragraph after the meeting being 15 called to order. 16 MR. HEINEMAN: You've given me? 17 MR. CARR: Haven't I given you a copy of that 18 1438A, Counselor? 19 MR. HEINEMAN: Ho, sir. 20 MR. CARR: Oh, I passed it to Jerry to pass to 21 you. 22 MR. HEINEMAN: Well, what can I say? I have no 23 objection to that exhibit, your Honor. 24 THE COURT: Fine. Admitted without objection. ] Q ' `(By Mr. Carr) Doctor, this meeting that'a con 2 ducted with Dr, Golberg, Dr* Kuecimar, Dr. lson and 3 yourself, was It not, sir? , - , 4 A Yes, sir* 5 Q And at that time you all discussed this horse 6 arna case did you present*the information contained In, 1 L - ' -s 7 that paragraph, sir? S A Wo, sir. Wo, I did not. 9 Q What was the source? Who gave that? Dr* Kuscbner, v vi 10 Dr. Olson, Dr. Golbarg?,. 11 A None ofthem.. We would bring lnr-ona of the i;;''-V1 V; ,'i---V' "( 12 members of the staff would come in and present the data. 13 Q That person is then notjidentificd in this-- in 14 these minutes then as to who gave the information to you v - ' .//. i*;,, ''~r-, 15 that Is contained In .these minutes? 16 .A That*8 right. 17 Q In any event, it was reported that at the horse 18 arena case that horses died, birds flying overhead fell ill, 19 and that children playing In the arena became sick, and 20 samples of the soil produced chloraene in rabbits; isn't 21 that correct, sir? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Wow, the children are not reported here as having 24 developed chloraene, are they, sir? l-' ` - .. `> ' ' . y* .* 1 1 A No. ,, - , s *1 t- 2 Q And you know for a matter of fact that they never 3 developed chloracne, don't you, sir? 4 A X don't know. that. 5 Q Well, you know that there's no reports that they 6 ever developed chloracne. 7 A There is a report that they had dermatitis There 8 were no further discusalone of it. 9 Q Well, dermatitis and chloracne are not equivalent, 10 are they?. 11 A; I'm not say;in`g that th_ey-\are,.J .. / 12 Q But my question is it's never been reported that 1 3 these children that, got sick had^chloracne; isn't that J V. * _ V ' ' ' i *- *" L-"' * * ~ 14 correct, sir? 15 A That's right1 16 Q But, now the rabbits did get. chloracne, didn't 17 they, sir? 18 A They were reported to 19 Q Yeah. And. there is a-- while most animals don't ,20 get chloracne when they're exposed to dioxin, rabbits do in 21 their ears, don't they, sir? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q Yeah And the rabbits in this case got chloracne, 24 but the people did not get chloracne, according to the r 1-J " ' ' ' V4>, _< - r * .' -V .1' *f>r v ' K~*. - Tv^-*-""-, 7 Cl .f. l' V -p t ,f- ,, 1 - infornation tbat you hav^i ian't that correct sir? * ^*-l , ^ '** ; , /*'f**1'7-' t' v -* * . ; hfc f ' r y ^ c'v, l 1 r -` t - ,- - A Accordlng to this information, what.was given to 92 L l , r-V % y / k3' ; - . . 4 ' S' .`l6 ; 7;.' -'v- Z . 8 ; - ^ ' . 1 ' 9 ; * * ^ *> -T- .io^v j' ' 4 _ t- .ir" - ' : (* ; , 12 \ 13 .J1 ` 1 4 - . is; -i6 17' r 18 V v 19 -i' ,, 2 0i\,-i,i" 21 v : -22' ,23 t> 24 ma, that'e1right. * Q According,toanyand&ll information that you ,( had about'the people associated.and th children associated f t* With the horse arena case' they did hot get chloracne? r-.. rA `'iX don't know ;that : -r-, ^ ; Q Well, sit, do you have any .Information that they ... have: beenvstudled, they've been examined by I>Td Ayers, i r J- '*" ' ^ ^ ' 4L / % J,* h *L.^ \ ' . . .,, Y they've been examined by Dr. Carhyle, they've beenv examined n by" other people, have you ever ,rend u report that says they ' . ^ had chloracne? s?- ` '- -- - i ::k -"' A No.' But I'm?iiot%atn:prlsed'.'' 1 ( ^ Q '."Doctor, didn't ask you if you were surprised. I'm simply trying to etahlh a 5pbint^ ?sir; that the rabbits ' k .* * 1-, ^ \" f` V ,`i . .S "_ \ * ^* 1 1 r* / ear. got chloracne, whlch is a etandard test for r a b b i t s . They can get chloracne when exposed, but the people didn't. See what I'm trylng to do is eetabiish a consistent pattern of exposure and no chioracne. This is indeed .. another case.of exposure without a doubt and no chloracne; isn't. it, sir? v ;r,''-" I don't accept that-they didn't have chloracne*j :; Q ; Well/ Doctor . for you to suggest that they do" * v -` v-;v- ' ,,t;L-. - have chloracne, y o n 9d have to have some information,-some PEN GAD CO.,' BAYONNE, N.J.' 07001 ` F O R M A L 140 >.r}.& . I-i \ '> ' * .-'i '* / -*vV- i 1 knowledge , some report from some source that tells you that 2- they had chloracne, and you have no such knowledge informa 3. tion or source; isn't that correct sir? 4 A I'm not sure they were evaluated for chloracne. 5 Q Isn't that correct sir? 6 A What? I'm sorry. 7 Q That you have no informationno source no 8 knowledge that these kids or anybody else therein the 9 horse arena where the horses died and the birds fell out 10 of the sky that they got chloracne? 11 A That's right.* .v ^ `,, 12 Q Doctor are you aware of the problems that the . 'J ^ *'1 - K 13 girls did have even though they did not have chloracne? 14 A X knew one of the girls had a problem. I didn't 15 know about the other one 16 Q Doctor, 1*11 read to you some of the testimony 17 in this case from a doctor that examined these girls, and 18 ask you whether or not you know these abnormalities of your 19 own knowledge, or if you've heard of them, or If you know 20 these to be-*well, I'll.Just read them to you, then I'll 21 ask you about them. This testimony was-- 22 MR* HEINEMAN; Excuse me, Mr. Carr. 23 MR. CARR: -- June 14, 1984. 24 MR. HEINEMAN: May I make an objection? / ._ - ' . , . ; V; .1 HR. CARR: Sure. 2` HR. HEINEMAH: I'd like to object to the use in 3 this fashion asking this witness to comment on the testi 4 mony of somebody else. I think it's an improper use of 5 testimony. 6 MR. CARR: .I'm not asking for comment. I'm 7 . giving the witness some thoughts and I intend to ask'him 8 some questions about the. facts that ere in evidence in 9 this case. -* 10 THE COURT: Objection Is^overruled. You may ; f'"i":) '/ 'N. 11 'proceed. - >;' - e V' - 12 MR. HEXHEMAHs. He can ask him,to assume things. * . .1 *v .i\ r-<\ ' ' h 1 `1 ` "r 13 your Honor. I would object to it as improper use of 14 testimony. V r -.; ^ 0* <-''',, 1 5 THE COURT: I understand what your objection is. 16 It's overruled. You may continue. 17 Q (By Hr, Carr) Doctor, I want you to take us 18 back to what's been testified in this case that the girls 19 were examined and were found to have a wide range of 20 abnormalities, and that both girls that were examined 21 . developed heart disease, one at age sixteen and the other 22 one at age twenty or twenty-one, that the twenty-one year 23 : old girl had abnormal female hormones she had asymmetrical breasts, that they had seizures, severe seizures,,having 1 had no history of epilepsy prior to that time. One girl 2 had a couple of blackouts, they are not seizures, when 3 she was very young, and that she began to be having bad 4 seizures where she could fall and hurt herself after the 5 exposure. The youngest child had chronic anemia confirmed 6 by laboratory, that they had joint problems, costochondritis, 7 requiring injections of cortisone into the joints. The 8 youngest one developed mental aberrations, neural behavioral 9 tests, evidence of depression. The youngest one had re* 10 current urinary tract infections, bleeding from the bladder 11 shortly after the episode. And their mother also developed 12 heart disease. Doctor, would you agree that those problems, 13 if they were caused in children who did not have chloracne, 14 that those problems could Indeed be caused by the dioxin to 15 which they were exposed? 16 A I don't think so. 17 Q And Doctor, did I give you any hypothetical any 18 exposure to anything other than dioxin that could suggest 19 that a sixteen year old child would have heart disease other 20 than dioxin exposure? 21 A I don't know that dioxin will cause heart disease. 22 Q Doctor, even though you don't agree to the studies, 23 you do know that there are scientists that say that you can 24 have significant heart problems from exposure to dioxin? 1 You do know that, don't you? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And, Doctor, this heart disease at age sixteen Is 4 certainly significant. Isn't it, sir? 5 A Yes. 6 Q And If dioxin can cause that, as other scientists 7 believe, and you apparently do not, Monsanto doesn't, could 8 that be caused by the dioxin in your judgment to which they 9 were exposed, and which was reported to you in your November 10 the 17th, 1982 meeting? 11 A No, I don't think so. 12 Q Doctor, do you still-- the words of the last para-* 13 graph, the last sentence rather of this paragraph, "the 14 company Is concerned about this public delirium regarding 15 reported dioxin contamination because It does manufacture 16 polychlorinated phenols which contain traces of TCDD," were 17 those your words, Doctor? 18 A No, sir, 19 Q Whose words were those, sir? 20 A Dr. Olson. 21 Q Did you ever-- Robert E. Olson II. Did you ever 22 ask that the minutes be corrected to change the use of the 23 words "public delirium?" 24 A No, no we did not. ';;. -,r-' , . ' < - V./ .' ..-'A-, ?. r 'L . . 1 ' . V i , .* rJ " -V r',.- ' s ;.! J - - , , -I . ,- * :t, ^ t r " C .i, i - L / ` , -s i... . ,? -' J .V r . ` ' ' -, ' ." , F,, - ,'^J k . ,, * I ' V- - I. ,- - . .. -, r. ,': ' WV. ,-y t-'- * i J -- - r.r v.; - \ . ,, , ' . f 11 , w x . "' V, ' W X i _ \ '7?' Q y yX take -it then that you agree that the public*s 'V '2 - . "KT j ' :3>h 'v ` -> concern about dioxinj ^r at .easfc its concern in 1982 is a p u b l i c : ..v ' - v When he wrote this , thia was just a.way of saying '_ \ '|V?... ^ ` i?M '>y`ys:',, ':' ' .''"i . ' , . - fi 11' fit* I^dn' t thitik^ hemeant public delirium. ''''. 5 ;"' ;y j rv' '.y ..,. ` , > ' ^ . ` ,1" i * * 6: 5 V /; yQ Weil, Doctor# at each meeting you got these yil .- " I: jV ',*y1`- s - f\ ,\ \ ,, minutos # -and ; ;7 ;.;; N; Vi ' L. V . -* ` the minutos, after tho meeting-- `ty / 8,f \y'riA -Yeoy eir'i.^`'yv/\' V `,-vV;,n - V.. ' /vy :'y j l havo an opportiwiity to correct those ; '. - V. -minutas if it*o not ,accurately stating the consensus ofK " " .0 b -;i ` ^ ' - t , * f l ' V ' t -' " ' ' / . I t P <'?- ' . > r * j f ' > i ^ 1 ' `' - V 'r ; Yiv?'i `A y ' Q ^ - y i y - H - -V/t ' - * = / : ^ . 'ii:,; k";L the metit^; isn*t that^correctif air? y' < ' ; A;<y'Yes# s i x V ^ T X O;-,,r;>y y-' ;-* L.. , t') Y -ys.V ify? f --- -r-: . .'-Vyyyj 1 v 4-J ,V 'Nl';`i.3'. TV.; v<- . ., Q y A_nLd.'-t'h1-i's wVasy;.-''''sr-t*,atr'Ve',d' t-'h.at' th,>.,co.mpany was concerned.>*-, ''VO *t^'`*-*;> t-. *"v-'5. yyy f '' y.*".':;Vy"l y*iL !'-.Va*:J_:cv t *,''i ;. ;:andvof course Olsn ddesh^tymtk for the 'cba|panyj does 1m# 1 i '- rO B W . IL 2 4 B '. *' . y ' ' n . t ' ' / i f *' ' . '* ' ' ' L -, ' . ' \ ; '"is- yyvsir?11'Vj* `-; ^ .-.-"y v" y TV; '- Ij.'rr! l .: - ' - ' ... y.V* ,j*v 1'"V"' -...''cVv-'y ''yv'''"^* `r~i ^ -\ - v . ; s ? yy,-'" 'A -'. o. 1^.-y,^ ^ ^ - J ' T S x ' ^ C '.-' ,,. . ` V T "i.y**> r( ' vy.y /<" .-/.`fy y ,y'*L v.1*,*. -y ^ * _ * , ". ri7-'y- " Q Vou were the only employ the company therft# ,! . l . ' ' y . " . j - - - 1 ` f ; ,,-. ,V . ' r 'r r ' / i v "" ^`weren't y ^ v i r ? y ; ^ r0 ' b A V ' N E . ' .J .r ` 0 7 0 0 2 1 .19'V' :;- :'v^here were thoso who participated in presenting -, v *'**" * p, \ ' J V -'V *4 r - that would be there.v ,N*^ 2 ^; i;22V -^3^' ` 'i , r ,T--V 4^ ,'lO ' 24- - - 'is ^ . .-f-L' ' j ,, y o u 's a y .i#^ " t i r ? ; ... .. *<" , 1 ^ ,Jj . . T; _.'''j 1vi... _^ considered it :.. t'*-- . -p- .' *i. \- /: FENGAD CO., BAYONNE, N.J. 07002 F O R M .1L 2* D 17 '' ' 2'x ',`3 w . v' 6k .7 / '. --8 '9 . v,, 10. 11 12 ; 13 i 14 .15 16 . 17,, 18 - 19 20' 21 _ 22 , 23' ? 24. ''.v- A :-,,`No; '-No , sir, ,v it.. ' -A. 98 7. -VV Q And ao you say you believe that Dr. Olson is the one .that described it as public delirium? It :*i./A'-'"`Yes*'* V ~';-`y v v-V-r.'V, , Q ,. Any reason" why you dldn!t correct that-- well, first of'all; do you believe that it's publiedelirium? the publicfa concern aboutthis ,,that it*a -delirium? , 'A X wouldn't call public concerndelirium, : Q Ky question isn't what you would call it, but I'm asking or your {belief 'ffHow.^do ^yoii believe that this : `` 1 1,)-Jc l?f?."'i>>-'* '<>`'"v.-V) \'*.V >, \' * -c : - public connection or "thought or belief 'about the, dioxin i., j fT ^> r - - ^ iJVf".``i\^ 1V"1'' ?*' >^/: contamination is public' delirium?:n , - :: - V * 1 v.-.yv*.? '- 'V'" ^ ^ Av\-Ko.V - \ / / .- : `_ 7: Q ; All right; Did you believe it then at the time? ,.v A No. Q Then 1 take It youkdidn' t correct it singly by ov-evrsigh't; .A i\ Yes* >l" L j !> Q Doctor, do you feelthat the public is entitled to know whether or not there is T C D `in the soil thatjmay, be in their conmunity? 2f 3f 7V 8-TCD, do you believe that they are ^entitled" to know, that# sir? ' A Yes., - ^ -->Ty ^ -- - `t / V Q 'v1Doctor, but you don't,believe that the: people in Jv^y r' .j .. *<* .y ,.tSi' i r>nt* I Sturgeon are entitled to know that, do you, sir? 2 A 1 think they're entitled to know if something is 3 a hazard to their health. 4 Q But, Doctor, I didn't ask you that. What 1 asked 5 you, whether or not the public is entitled to know that 6 2, 3, 7, 8 is in the soil where they're working and living? 7 A If in fact it's there. 8 Q Well, do you think it would be wrong to tell the 9 people at Sturgeon that 2, 3, 7, 8 is in their soil? 10 A If in fact they find it there, they should be told. 11 THE COURT: I'm sorry, I didn't hear the last 12 couple of words. 13 THE WITNESS: If in fact it's present there, then 14 they should be told. 15 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, you know that it's in the 16 soil now, don't you, sir? 17 A At some level, I suspect. 18 Q Yes. And--do you recall when you testified in 19 December of *83, when I asked you the question-- 20 MR. HEINEMAN: I'm sorry, do you have a page? 21 MR. CARR: One moment, sir. Page seventy-two. 22 Q (By Mr. Carr) These questions were asked you, 23 starting at page seventy-one at the top of the page, line 24 three. Let me start at the bottom of page seventy to put it &l ^ 1 0 0 p '* >f . ik -V-v. . , pi. k in cotent, '''Now, Dr ^ Roush, were you ever told by anybody V' 1 \ concerned with Monsanto that it was confirmed that,the Isomer present in th tank car that spilled was indeed !\ 2y.3 ; 1 1 8-TCP?"\ And your Answer was "No." "Questioni la the extent of your present knowledge today that it has never been confirraed by Monsanto or anybody else at j*'V. Monsanto *s requeststhat, TCD contaminant in that tank car was 2v; 3* 7 S-^CD?" And your Answer then was "Thtfs, neyerben told to me that that had been confirmed." '.I- .-V .:--'; (%txp? **/ F'i/- Vi iV'"If' V ` vAnd then.the .Question-"Afteri the ,'initial> stages of the first? couple of r^nths foilowing -the .Spill,vdid you take V : ,V"`V. ``` VVjiU fi\\'V". VV*; V' ' it upon yourself tfyr inquire again at subsequent times or subsequent'"montk^or <s^bB^queto 'whether or ^ - j,i ,-v ;i;j?-* * ,14: ':; not it*s/ever .been, definitely been decided and confirmed 1.5 / that the contaminant,in that tank car is- 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD?" 16 ' -,> t17 And, your `Answer was "No.** "Question !\ You Just simply -* ' 1/1 * j c>, V ' - didn't do lt?" And yourAnewefwae "No." "Question! If . \ ' 18 J 19 you had know that it was 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD positively and r "^ ,, * 9 >* r . * i'-*- *,, v * '1 ' V \ ** 1,1 ' * -Is 4 j v confirmed,; would you have given any different advice to . 20. 7 the people that cameto you for opinions as to.medical V* 21 risks' and hazards then what you havestated here today?" " 22 - - And your Answer was ^No," Then this Question "Would you ' \ 23" ", have given any diffrant advice then what you gave afc,that ' ' -24 . ' .time had you known that it was confirmed that/It was V.:r, K N G A d 'CO.,1BAYONNE, n !j._ .0700* ,F0RM,,IL 4B y.- J ' ` >/' .:VO',*rVi?v, s'^r V- .. 101 *^,'>1 . si-ir.'-*V.."^-A-1v v J.i"- .-V ' 'f-p > 2, 3, :7;, 8-TCD?M "Answer: Ho. Just gave me-- X meati--" Andthen I:said, "I'raQorry?:" Yoiir Angv/ar was, "Ho, X n' L\ '*.>3t.1 ' : 4... would not have." L,"Question;C You would not.have advised *. -i **1 , " 1 ., i - -r Monoantoto play anydifferent role in the cleanup or any ' V '.'6 r <\ r / `'>:i: - ' *8 ' r - V \ io. * m '*>- '* 1 '. v v`12'"". different role in advising the public than what they in fact played; is that correct/ Dr/ Roush?" And your Answer was ,"That*& right Than this Question, "Would you have advised Honsante to toll the public that it'e confirmed that, there was 21 3; 1\ 8-TCD" in thevtank car if.Monsanto ' v>^yM >V, * St ; 1^ - f'1 _ , ^ 'T V ? f' * 7*J " `w ' ' ' * r -'C - -t had learncd that it was 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD?" And; your Answer.., ^' p *' ' ("j/- ^V t\it*l"* \^ 1 ' n4 was at that tir $:"Hov.11v'Were ^thoso? your -Answers to those Quastionsat that those? ' / ' . / 'i` y Yes; . s i r V ' . \ v ^ :: ; -- 14 j- . /y.;vjsy -7\^ 167 : -7: Q r And you s&id-- ^v'' '' ' 'AX<>- A /MR., HEINHMAN: I'm going ^to obJact, your Honor. -,1-i , - Was thatv supposed to be offeretd-i'aL'-isl'an impeachment of what . 1r . ,y:1>V'-` ^... .h i .' r * J, T ,, , v-.-w V' ' *. r . he just said? X don't.know what the conceivable use of - o 18 > that deposition testiiaony was. , 7 7' ^ /f THE COURT: Are you objoctihg? ...; '*i?<** J.* t-^ t- PENGAD 'CO.. BAVONNE i.W.j/ 07003 fORM IL 34 8 : 20 ./j 21 ' ' > 22' /.V-3:r ,/j*. t*-' ^ '-* r * ^ *1 % j * j 'X*mJdibJmt:las to it. ,i t K^^ z T" ' * v iy ^ , ,* -1 'p ^ ;;?V -V' ; .7THE COURT:; :pkay. I think It was impeachable. Overruled. _ ^- t.'-V 'i'V \ - 23 ' *s " 24 Q / ( B y M r . ; Carr) Doctor, now you say today that the j.",''V' 't-. . f lV<J4 \ * I f\ leg ** )_ * Xi .*1 /;/ i- (I" t v /-.2 \ people should be.told that there's 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD in the soil; but ;in your deposition youoaid .that you would not *" ' 3 ; "" ^ ;*_r -4 * `' > \ .r * *. *v~ 6 , have advised Monsanto to. toll the .people that it was 2, .3v 7, 8. Doyousee an inconsistency in those two answers, hoctor? 7/ , * -A -'Yes.', V : . / -^.-7 k ` ^ '*r,i -v : * ^UAAV*; 1;Vi '` 7``7-'' 11 , Q All right Doctor, has something occurred now 8/; oince December of r83 ;.when, you gave that answer to today "*V i '-v for you to coma.to;the/opinionnow that"the;public should '-***. ,* ^ v. ^'*.** :> :10 be told7 ' . : ` ' -f s' .;7 ..1,1->: \ y?\ ~yi;f'?X^. r 'H ll} A;.; Changing definition ;of what-people should be PENGAD CO.. BAYONNE, 'N.j. ; 7003 . jpOPM:,IL 2*0 \^ ln. - kj t - - told; * rr.V''-;* * ' ' Cr'l3 ` - ' ' <* ( i ft ' * * * 14 , * 1- v Q You now'.td^y hiiv'a:diffrent view,as to vbae s t.J peopio ohould be told that you did not have prior to today j / r 715 ' is.that correct, 'sir? > ! . . 1 * :- ' 1V J *',V . ' .I.6. :' "J, ;7'7 rr _ `A /'Yes.; . ^'v ./"v'v V `' . - - //' - - 7' ';* Q When did you coxae-rdid you come to that view, ' . 1 8 > 7- 19 after this case waB 0tarted, and aftftr you leara5d that :j v I i. -V ^'r,\H>,+_v " 'h s^ - v\ ^ v'^ *V -i we were seeking punitive damages for what Monsanto has -20,': _i * ' ^j ^ r f1 v -1 done or failed to do in thia case, Dr. Roush1? '"21.:- ` A^- 'Hb, sir. ;;; 7 ^^ r/ ` ` '.22.'. ,,;7 7Q>" When did you ccme to the yiew 'then that the 23 -v,- , %*-m peoplo should bo^ told? J v\ 24. . A Part .of this* present right- to-know concern in ( `V-i = . -- ..\ *' ' '' .k\ ' y - ' , ' `f- #> ..* r sr- '."4 - ` iF, ' ' ' r /' ft r > A r .' * i F' 1JS. .-'y*. the nitd Stat(a, I,tnlreflecting that J v,,^ <,:-:V ,Q Doctor,the right-tQ-know concern .has been ln idetencesince 1776 We;have believed in this country that we are equal members of our society, that nobody Is ;if > v t r-y * v, r . i."*j .'C- superior one to; the other; and that we're all entitled to know. That's not something that has occurred.since 1963 ' MR. HEINEMAN: ! object to the ejpaech, your Honor. I ask; that the jury be instructed to disregard It, It's nothing-- Idon't knowwhethar ;I wasexpected to directs, , .y-v ^-VtllUvv^ V ^ V U :" , - . brass, band while that waa going on or what. But I object '.-`J. . T;-' fA"S f/i i/:/: f;'y ; "'t''1 1`' . , i*'i to it. It*a not -a question-;andl;ask 'that-the-Jury be `*. instructed to disregard it:; ,,. `\ ;-V. ,y:., '< >-.^ .THE COURT: Overruled. Please finish your question, Sfc. Carr; ;; 0 Q (By Mr. Carr)/-Doctor, what occurred in between ; *v )rX December of 1983 andtodayfor you to now believe that the , public has the right to lcnow? ;_/ --_yy 'y"-j^ - y / - "1 ' .t .A. I said it's yd reflection ;o f "the present concern *^vkr; of definition of right-to-know. v ; Q Well, Doctor, don't you, understand it's not. just ^VpnBWt^i^niMnRi;, that it was;a concern:of the people of Sturgeon in 1979 , that oayoral of them; three of them, two at least, underwent painful fat tissue biopsies, so; as to try itoyfihilbtitif there^'.was2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD there? \ : , ' Cl I . ' 1 MR. HEINEMAN: Thera*8 no evidence of that, your 2 Honor, and I object to It. There's absolutely no evidence 3 as to the reason why these people have had that test done. 4 MR. CARR: Your Honor, there is reason. It's 5 sworn testimony of Joyce and Frances Rim, your Honor. Maybe 6 Counsel wasn't here at the time. 7 MR. HEINEMAN: Oh, I was here. I also remember 8 that Bill Kemner said that he was never even told the 9 results in front of this jury. 10 MR. CARR: What's that got to do with the question 11 I'm asking? 12 THE COURT: Walt a second. Walt a second. Objec13 tion is overruled. Mr. Carr, you may continue. 14 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor Roush, do you believe that 15 it's just a recent thing that's occurred that people's 16 concern about 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD and the right to know about 17 it? Has it just occurred, sir? 18 A You have to put in context of whether it's a 19 lot or a little bit. 20 Q Doctor, you didn't differentiate a moment ago. 21 You said a moment ago if there was 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD in the 22 soil they've got a right to know. Don't they have the 23 right to know that, sir, whatever it might be? Don't 24 they have the right to know about it? 1 A That's what the world is struggling with right 2 now. 3 Q I'm asking you as raprasantative of Monsanto, 4 don't tha paopla hava tha right to know if thare's 2, 3, 5 7, 8-TCD in thair soil or in tha products that they use, 6 sir? 7 A Yea. 8 Q Doctor, tha right that thay had today, that you 9 concaivad thay hava today, thay have that right in 1983, 10 did thay not, sir? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Thay had that right in 1982, did thay not, sir? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Thay had that right in 1981 and 1980, did thay 15 not, sir? 16 A Yas. 17 Q Thay had that right in 1979, did thay not, sir? 18 A Yas. 19 Q Thay had that right in 1950, didn't thay, sir? 20 A If wa knew about dioxin-- 21 Q Doctor, thay had tha right in 1950 to know, did 22 they not, sir? 23 ME. HEINEMAN: Objection. Why don't you lat tha 24 man answer tha quastion? I THE COURTi Objection is overruled. It1 not 2 responsive. THE WITNESS: They have a right to know what we 3 4 know, but if we don't know-- 5 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, ray question is if they have 6 a right to know. Don't they, sir? I'm not asking you to 7 perform miracles. I'm asking you to agree whether or not 8 they have the right to know. The right to know has been 9 in existence all of your lifetime, the public's right to 10 know in this country. It's been in existence all that time, 11 hasn't it, Dr. Roush? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Obviously if you don't know something is there, 14 you can't say it, can you, sir? You don't fall down in a 15 duty if you don't know yourself. But, Doctor, if you know 16 that it's there, and you don't tell somebody about it, you're 17 failing in your duty, aren't you, sir? 18 A If it's my responsibility to tell them. 19 Q Doctor, if you are the one that has the knowledge, 20 then you have the duty, and you're the manufacturer that 21 created the product that put the 2, 3, 7, 8 in the soil, or 22 in the can, or in the bottle, or in the air, or in the tissue 23 you are the one with that knowledge, then you have the duty 24 and the responsibility to tell the people, do you not, sir? A- /. 1 HR. HEINEMAN: Object, to the question as invading 2. the province of the jury, your Honor. 3 THE COURT: Objection is overruled. 4 THE WITNESS: Repeat the question for no. 5 6 (The previous question was read by the court 7' reporter.) ' 8 THE WITNESS: If I'm the, only one that has the 9 knowledge. ; :-; , V \* 10 Q (By Mr. Carr). Are. you. saying that you can pass 11 the buck to somebody?" 12 A The responsibility^fotthat spill was not Monsanto. % * V`' ' r 1 3 For that.cleanup. 14 Q You're not responsible:for the spill, so therefore 15 if you know there is.2, 3, 7, 3 in that tank car, you don't 16 have to tell the railroad workers that get down into it and 17 work in it, and you don't have to tell the school kids that 18 cross the track while the cleanup la going on, and in the 19 school right next door; is that what you're saying, Dr. 20 Roush? Because you didn't spill it you don't have to tell 21 anybody what's in there? Is that what you're saying, Dr. 22, Roush? You're not saying that, are you, sir? You don't 23 mean that, sir. 24 MR. HEIBEMAN: You want to let him answer one of 1 tho8 questions. Or do you want to keep talking? 2 Q (By Mr. Carr) You don't mean that, do you, sir? 3 A 1 moan if va have the authority we can go and say 4 what wa want in Sturgeon. That the cleanup responsibility 5 was the responsibility of the railroad-6 Q I understand that, Dr. Roush, But my question 7 is you don't mean what you just said, do you, sir? 8 MR. HEINEMAN: Will you let him answer? 9 THE WITNESS: The EPA was a part of this. It 10 was between their responsibility what was told. They knew 11 what the concentration of dioxin was in that spill. 12 Q (By Mr, Carr) Doctor, they have their own re 13 sponsibilities, but now I'm talking about your responsibility 14 Each of us has a responsibility in this society. Simply 15 because my brother has a responsibility to do what is right, 16 that doesn't mean that I don't have the same responsibility 17 to do what is right. We each have our own burdens of re 18 sponsibility to carry. You understand that, don!t you, Dr, 19 Roush? 20 A Yes, sir. 21 MR. HEINEMAN: Your Honor, I object. First of 22 all it's an Incorrect statement of the law, if that's what 23 he's trying to do. 24 MR. CARR: I'm not even talking about the law. .-/A*`t A ' -iSi-; s -' "7-Tltf 109 'a . 1 there, is no lawexcept human morality involved at this . 2:' . pointy I*m just simply talking about-- rVV' *' * r"' ^, ' `' `.A '<`LJrl.- -i['A r'' . '- MR. HEXNEMAHs^ ACah I ask the court to instruct J\ T/ i ," .S' . ' . A S ^ the Jury- '5 S ''11 ^i^'f ...S 6S'' ;^ :7 ^ MR. CARRx:-..Human morality is what I 'm..talking about.: What;is right and. what is wrong. ,J ' a THE COURT: W a i t v ^ you making an 'J'8 V objection? *;-a . ^-', -: . i A >*" A? t> ^-A''v,\i/ >t`Y ..'.a i % *? - * \. ` S? ' " a ' j .'! ... A - . A i i .'A 1 K - ' f.'li C* i 1 j! \ A V a ;A- s-`j ^ A v.A ^ S ^ S >V -v 'MR;. HEltJEl^j / I'm.'ohjecting to. thft quftetion/. , T- ` "> r a o S * your Hohor*' ;- *? /.A-''.' ^ ;ii > V ;1 ;\v r- -A ^ ;x a THE COURTs The question was proper. ..V v-^ . "li""' -.A^ r 1 ` `r J ;J' MR. HEXNEMAn "it1 jury; speech, ^ v ^ s ; and it's tryirig to-be :a final.argument. Lp f . >tl, '^vaV; - ' 14 A y ^ THE COURT: The.objection ic overruled. It was /a .. .a proper question.: , ^ ,,A " *: \ ?/ av ;,\yi6A`v. *f ( ^ ;a v Q " (By Mr. Carr) ;Doctor; doh* t you,^tinderstand that 17 -_ t> v' C v ,^ K * ' * --18'.; ^lOnsanto has a raspohsibility ^notwithstanding what the -a V-j- ''`'7` ' ' - V v v ^ - *-.vl /' -'a , responsibility of .others might be? You do understand that , '/ ./ BAYONNE,'- n !j . 07002 FORM,,'IL.' Z* B ' -A.' . 1 9 - * -. ?~ dbnft you,, air? / " `` ' 2 0 S, i'r y " .:"A`.;"Yes , Sir! > * '^ ^kT''*^ 21 v Q And what you eaid a moment ago because you didn't ', 2 S S 23: '', '24 V spill it, you really didh't mean that. That was just an off the cuff response to a question of mine, wasn't it, sir? ^ ^ ' i * < ta. ^ s. ' " ' - J1 ' h- ; a ^i - * ,' ' A ';HO. ' '""-A-a J - ` .- r \T - ) l"* V` /<.': 110 1 Q All right, Dr. Roush. I have given you the 2 opportunity. 3 MR. HEINEMAN: I beg your pardon. I want that 4 comment striken, your Honor. If he were given the 5 witness the opportunity, he'd be letting the witness 6 answer questions instead of interrupting him and trying 7 to mischarnotarize his testimony. And I object to it. 8 If he wants to ask a question, let the witness answer it 9 instead of interrupting him all the time. 10 Q (By Mr. Carr) Dr. Roush, have 1 prevented you 11 from answering a question in any way? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Is there something that you want to say that I 14 haven't allowed you to say? Please say it. IS A The responsibility for the cleanup of that spill 16 was the railroad and the EPA. And Monsanto was there to 17 guide them in the cleanup of it. We told them that because 18 of the chlorophenol there, that is a poison that man cannot 19 tolerate, then it should be cleaned by men properly pre 20 pared to protect them. We also knew the concentration of 21 that dioxin in that chlorophenol was so low that it was 22 less than the concentration that is found in 2, 4-D that's 23 spread across the United States. Because of it being so 24 low, I did not consider it a hazard to man, and I therefore ! had no concern about tha dioxin contant. 2 Q Doctor, I'm not asking you tlutnow. What I'm 3 asking you, sir, is whether or not tha peopla had tha right 4 to know that 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD is thera, no mattar what tha 5 amount is, and you said thay do hava that right to know. 6 A Yes. 7 Q You agrae with that? 8 A Yes. 9 Q So you're talking about something else now, sea. 10 What I'm asking you, sir, you said that since you didn't 11 spill it that you didn't hava to tall tha people what was 12 there, and what I'm asking you, nearly pleading with you, 13 sir, to agree that Monsanto has tha obligation, not with 14 standing whose responsibility it is to clean it up, that 15 you hava tha obligation to tall tha people what's there, 16 that 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD is there. 17 A No mattar what tha concentration? 18 Q Absolutely. Isn't that what you just said 19 earlier? 20 A The problem 1s-21 Q Isn't that what you Just said earlier. Dr. Roush? 22 A That's right. 23 Q All right. Now, so that's what I'm asking you 24 about is what you said earlier. Now, sir, you don't mean ;.n. r - : J,' - -- ' - '\ _ ,,^ . . <x -y'vV-: * .rT ''Jv ,/ * - - . ,ilt- .yk r'i* *V- ', 1 "'.'t'i'1'- r ' . , - _- * *,, :- > ' vi m > **a * . , v v11 K... * < then* doyou,; air, that you ion't have the responsibility to tell the, people :simply because you didn't spill it? You didn't mean that,''did you, sir? w .A I'm not sure whose responsibility it is to tell 'V .-V '\ the,people. ->A'V '*' , ' "" ''. -k ` y/yxy.y^ -- * ,`\ 1 ^1 "' " l ' I ^ 1,^' t* * -4. * * , * 'i ' ** _ ; ^ V - V + h , *" "" , ^ f fc' - \ 1 J \ Q, Doctor, you*VC;agree thatVit is your-- you made the product, you khotFfcha OCP, you know it, end you had V. - L. ^ ^^ y^> y ,?y." T' * '1 r* \ 1 *t - _,v-fT \ y k % p* ^ chemists^, analyze - it* `So.you are;the one, and you're 'l '-V-o*'.*'- ":.r- '<i*vC JX J ri ViVi *. 'l- ' < ,. i .* f * v ._ - r-T,- - - the:one that people called up, the EPA called you up and -v*'"*e - . ^?">'-;;*-/-H.,? " ; '> -1"' , >- `XI W ' f>\ * '' V.* - said*?-somebody at thia|meeting'asked you could there "-'j: possibly be dioxin 'This is. a .month later. , Could there *V- : c v - . "v , - '^ V ' 'ft/ ' . ',? 1` - possibly be.dioxin in an OCP You are the peoplerthat' ^ v\-v, . `. ^-v.'j' '-\'V^-'*.`1 " t; r'y made it *yrYou have this knowledge. It is your responsibility, y r '*y :ryyV- :^y ,y ^ y y y y. *' ^ ^ ", lsn^t-it,;'Dr.JR o u s h ? / y * ' ' /-r. : V; , A When we confirmed it was.there, we told them it " was there. V- Q Dr. Roush^ that'-s another point. Hy question is ' * - ' ' r\l it ^ V^ '' r'4'' ' ' > `V it is your responsibility,: isn't it, sir? / . . A . , to do what? y" ; - : yQ To tell them that 2, 3 f 7, 8-TCD is in there if it's ih there. -`-<'y.\y'y, - * ' '* ^ .` ^ , '* ` ? - " . i i f . ' " >v v \ .. ' " V* ;. ; , ' ' 'j t 7 Lf -."A. We. did tell the EPA, and we did tell the rallroed Q Doctor, youjust told us earlier that the first time .you leamed;.that it was confirmed that it was *-' r-' .. V- . r 1, .. i '' \ ^v *.fyV\)<,.1\`^' j-' - k f 113 vrJ \ Aa* 1 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD woo Just recently./You weren't aware of the >1 2 fact that your lawyer stood/up In front of this jury and *, * ** -c .* 3 - admitted for the first time that it wad 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD, 4 don't you recall you just said that yesterday? 5 . / -A Yes, sir, .; 6 Q Doctor, nobody var told the people at Sturgeon 7 that,it was 2C 3/7, 8-TCD in that tank car, did they, air? 8 .X !lV!' in A A- X don't .kspn*oi.w.?;v, %* 9 Q Doctor, it was your belief in 1983 that.the public , j . - -,,, /'`V ' L\:: ;'' -V . 10 shouldn't be told that'-.it/waa 2, 3, 7; 8:in the tank car. ;. 11 Ti-h'at was -your`<beliveftr-h?evn:;^,-t.siiZ"rs,. , Y.otur now;:ht*:avw said, <*' you-- ` 12 i you Agreed that it is,. And uhtil Mr. Heineman stood in 13 front of this jury in February or Mcrch of last year and V-,j l' 14 told this jury that w stipulate for .the purpose of this 15 case, we stipulate that It/was 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD in the tank 16 car; haying denied it earlier under oath ^that's, the first 17 time there was a public acknowledment that it was 2, 3, 7, 18 \ 8-TCD in that tank car. Are .you aware of that/ sir? " ^ ~J 4 19 . A Ho, ' ;//\ , ' ' '*}. 2 : Q You ore not aware of that, are you, sir? 21 A (Indicating no) r /. .22 MR. HEINEMAN: .Excuse.me, Hr. Carr, did you . A ; ;^ '* `: , A ; r, ' ' "I ' ,. 4 , 23 represent that X denied it under oath?' fv *.V 24 ' HR. CARR: X said Monsanto denied It underneath. .v .v, 'V^i trt !. Th V * .\-s*' PENG*D CO.. BAYONNE. N.J. 01002 FORM >L 1*P 1 I don't know who signed th denial. air. 2 HR. HEINEMAN: 0h9 sur, It'a an exhibit in the 3 eeae here, lan't it? Didn't you queetlon Hr. Nasslf about 4 that? The jury hae heard all about that. 5 Q (By Hr. Carr) Doctor, there haa been 2. 4, 5T 6 or haa been Lyaol. there haa been 2. 4. dlchlorophenol 7 throughout the United Statea. Haa Honaanto to your knowledge 8 ever told the public, ever told the EPA. ever told anybody 9 that there was 2. 3. 7. 8-TCD In those products that 10 Monsanto was putting out? 11 A We told If there was dioxin in them and what the 12 concentration was. 13 Q You told them that there was dioxin. Did you 14 understand my question to say dioxin? IS A You said 2. 3. 7. 8 16 Q You heard me use the words 2. 3. 7, 8. didn't 17 you. sir? 18 A Right. 19 Q I used those words specifically that way. sir. 20 Would you answer that question that X asked you. sir? 21 HR. HEINEMANi I'm sorry, your Honor. I'm going 22 to object to that question as being misleading to the 23 witness, because Hr. Carr already cross examined him at 24 length about why TCDD means 2. 3. 7. 8. that It's all the 1? .* 2'.i, \-;yfr *- , > S' ' f&. ^ tfr< f- , *\..v5Y ,, same thing * . ' ` -T` j That'swhat Mr .Carr waG ' -* >" f ` _kr ' 'I'''1-,- .* . ^ v' J`\<? ,?-*>/tyV '.{VS inlying. ^ ' ' -yx 1j " |'l 'MR. CARR: Hedidrft even say TCD, tie said dioxin. f -v,r i J r! Vi >- ;; :THE' CX)URTii :^ihe objection is overruled.,; The ' C 1} ` "l* r - \ f* T1 a ' * - 11. * < \ ` " ,^ 'K ` * #' * ^ T ^ , question is clear. Ttio teminology was clearly stated to 'the Jury and to the court, please answer the question. .L6 ^. `;8' sTHE WITNESS ; If there was. 2, 3, 7, 8 in it. we ,V \ .. ' p^v ~i;'v \ - * n- 14 t " ,t jv 'T *+ * m * ml * *n would tell our, c u s t o m e r s V . '' i* 4 ? vi , * _j p * T` -ivV;'`? -.--Vv.:- ' ' : . . Q (By Mr..Carr):- My question Was did you, air? . c-*-. *-./ 9 v ;lo u ; ; v A ` It's nqt tsy--^ . ^ ;L'* '' * L ., v 'i x,i>.r<.*v.'v.fa.` -r :' `1. \ Q Bo you have any knowledge that; you told any v ` 1 >' L> v: . - - , . .. . customers'about the prescehce of 2v^3; 7/ 8-TCD in Santophent \ 12 \ for instance? *xt' #"1 1 13 ,yJw LV' t t, rA , VI don*t think there is any 2, 3, 7, 8 in Sahtophen '; Q Doctor, haven't you semyour own analyses done ^ 15 V; A. Jk 16 c .-V"- '* " v ` , ''/V V>y!Mr. Taulli and by others that show there was 2, 3, 7, 8- -TCD in tha Santophen drug, havne't you seen those, sir? v : ,u l^ ht i /BAYONNE, N.J. 'tO7001 F O R M A L iA B 1 7 i' Av.'Yes# .. - '/ ;V " J ' -18 ' `I?/ 20 - ^ h'N - ^ Q Then, Doctor, you could know that 2, 3, .7, 8-TCD was in Santophen then,Vif you'veseen them, % r.f _ \a ; -yes/- vv ; ' / /' .v Q Then you.want to take back the statement, that you '22..1 . 23 ' Just said? ' 'Y e s -v v s ; . 2 4 n- ^ .A W right. V r M T' 1 MR. HEINEMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Carr, are you 2 representing to this witness that that's what those docu 3 ments show? 4 Q (By Mr. Carr) Nov, Doctor, do you know whether 5 or not any customer has rer been told that 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD 6 is in Lysol or was in the Santophen? 7 MR. HEINEMAN: You don't want to ask that question, 8 do you? 9 THE WITNESS: I know we told them about the dioxin 10 content, if there was 2, 3, 7, 8 in there we would have 11 told them. 12 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, you're speculating, aren't 13 you? Do you have any knowledge, do you have any documents, 14 anybody ever told you that they've ever told any customer 15 of yours that the Santophen contained dioxins? Even 16 dioxins, sir, not just 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD. But dioxins? 17 A I don't recall. 18 THE COURT: Gentlemen, could I see you up at 19 the bench for a minute please. 20 21 (At this point colloquy was held at the bench 22 out of the hearing of the jury.) 23 THE COURT: I heard the last comment, and I heard 24 it up here. Wasn't that last comment being, "you don't want 1 to u k that question, do you." It vat not directed to the 2 court. It was not dlractad as an objaction. It was 3 Improperly made. I am going to tall you and ordar you 4 outsida the prasanca of tha jury that I don't want anymore 5 extracurricular comments like that made. If you to maka 6 something for the record, if you want to make an objection, 7 if you want to ask for a conference at tha bench, that's 8 one thing. I've bean vary liberal to all of you as to what 9 goes on as far as that's concerned. But I'm really tired 10 of these extracurricular comments Ilka that. I'm telling 11 you that it won't be tolerated any longer. 12 MR. HEINEMAN: Your Honor, is that an issue 13 directed to both sides? 14 THE COURT: It is dlractad to you since you just 15 did it. I have not had that problem with Mr. Carr. If I 16 feel that I have it. it will be directed to him. 17 MR. HEINEMAN: May I address the point on the 18 record since we're on the record? 19 THE COURT: Sure. 20 MR. HEIHEMAN: Your Honor. Mr. Carr throughout 21 the year and a half that this case has been going on has 22 been making extracurricular comments just like that in the 23 course of Interrupting my examination of witnesses, making 24 extracurricular comments when I said that I didn't choose 1 to ask a certain question that ha suggested I ask. Ha 2 would say things like "1 didn't think so, I didn't think 3 you wanted to ask that question/' and ha said it many times 4 during the course of my examination both of the plaintiffs 5 and Dr. Camow. I don't think it's fair for the court to 6 pick me out on this occasion for such a comment when 1 7 think the record will amply show that it's been going on 8 by Hr. Carr for months and months and months in this case. 9 THE COURT i Do you have anything you want to say? 10 MR. CARRi Your Honor, I don't recollect making 11 such comments. There may have been occasions when I vent 12 beyond what would have been a proper objection to make. 13 If I do, and X have in the past, I think I should be 14 chastised, reprimanded for doing so. I don't think that-- 15 the fact that X may have done it, and X know X have done 16 in the heat of the moment things that might not be consider 17 ed completely appropriate in the courtroom. Xt would be 18 ing>ossible not to do so. But Mr. Helneman has reduced it 19 to a science. He has done it consistently today. X have 20 Ignored his comments and proceeded a number of times. 21 He has been harassing me today. X would think the court 22 is quite properly suggested to Counsel that he has to stop. 23 THE COURTt All right. How, to reiterate what 24 X said before, X am making this particular point, when X I feel that anything la being dona by any of you that la 2 Improper, I will note It and do something about it. It 3 la my Judgment, it la my discretionary Judgment, It la 4 made within the context of everything done, and whether 5 someone else la the recipient of such an order or not la 6 something that depends on their-his and their actions 7 alone, and not on anyone else's, which is basically what 8 I said before. Your comments of both of you are noted 9 in the record. Let's proceed, 10 11 (At this point colloquy was held at the bench 12 in front of the hearing of the Jury.) 13 Q (By Hr. Carr) Dr, Roush, at the same meeting 14 of November the 17th, 1982 there was a Dr, Timothy Long 15 that was Introduced and reviewed with the Biohazards 16 Committee of the toxicology of dioxins; isn't that correct, 17 sir? 18 A Yes, sir, 19 Q MR. CARRs Would you mark this 1438B, if you 20 would, 21 22 (Plaintiff's exhibit 1438B was marked for 23 identification by the court reporter,) 24 Q (By Mr. Carr) Fourteen thirty-eight B is 1 that page or part of pages dealing with what Dr. Long 2 presented to the committee, Is It not? 3 A Yes sir, 4 MR. CARR: I have that to pass to the jury your 5 Honor, 6 MR, HEINEMANt May I have the number, please? 7 MR. CARR: Fourteen thirty-eight B, 8 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor while that's being done 9 with regard to the notification of the public of the 10 customers of the presence of dioxin In your products were 11 you a part of the meeting In April of 1979 when people at 12 Monsanto KcPhllllps and Rosen and others discussed whether 13 or not to tell the Santophen customer Lane and Fink 14 Sterling Drug, whether or not they should tell them that 15 dioxin was In the Santophen? Were you a part of that 16 meeting, sir? 17 A Mo, sir. 18 THE COURT: I'm sorry, I didn't hear your answer. 19 THE WITNESS: Ho, sir. 20 THE COURT: Thank you. 21 Q (By Mr. Carr) Wfcre you ever asked for advice 22 at that time as to whether or not Lane and Fink should be 23 told about dioxin In Santophen? 24 A Mo, sir. I Q Was your view in 1979 about the public's right 2 to know the same as it was in December of 1983 when I asked 3 you about telling the public about the presence of 2, 3,7, 8- 4 TCD7 Do you understand my question? 5 A Would you repeat it? That was a complicated 6 question. 7 Q Well, I'll break it down a little bit. You've 8 indicated that just recently, since December of 1983, you've 9 come to the opinion that the people have the right to know. 10 What I'm asking you is was your view before December, 1983 11 with regard to the customer's right to know the same as 12 your view about the public's right to know about dioxins or 13 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD in the product? 14 A Customers have a right to know. 15 Q All right. Now, I know they've got the right to 16 know. I'm not asking you that. 17 A All right. 18 Q What I'm asking you is your view of the customer's 19 right to know the same today as it was before December of 20 1983, and was your view before December of 1983 that the 21 customers have the right to know? 22 A At that time we thought that the definition of 23 a contaminate in a product has not been established, and 24 it isn't established today. When we sent--on our safety 1 data sheets today it is not clear that we have to write on 2 the safety data sheet that we give to our customers based 3 on what O.S.H.A. says that it contains dioxin. The document 4 says today if it contains more than a tenth of a percent 5 you have to tell. Beyond that, there's no clear definition 6 of what our responsibility is. 7 Q Doctor, perhaps you misunderstood my question. 8 My question was not what you may legally have to put on 9 your safety data sheets. My question was directed at your 10 view-- you said the customers have a right to know. Now, 11 all I'm asking you, Doctor, do you have the view--is the 12 view today that you've pronounced clearly that customers 13 have a right to know if dioxin is in the product, no matter 14 what the level, or in the soil, no matter what the level, IS that'8 your view today, and you clearly stated.it. What 16 I want to know is was that your view in regard to the 17 customers back in 1979, or that is before December of 1983. 18 A If I thought it was a hazard, I thought I should 19 tell them. 20 Q All right. Now, your view then was that you were 21 the one to determine whether or not it's a hazard, and if 22 you believed that 2, 3, 7, 8 was no hazard and then you 23 didn't feel that you should, or had-- you didn't feel that 24 the customer had the right to know that? 1 A Didn't feel that was our responsibility to tell 2 them. 3 Q What you felt was that if they are going to know 4 about it, they have got to dig in and find it out for them 5 selves because Monsanto is not going to tell them; is that 6 correct, sir? 7 A If we thought it was a hazard we'd tell them. 8 If we didn't think it was a hazard, and talking about con 9 taminants, we didn't have to tell them. 10 Q That isn't what I asked you, Dr. Roush. I under 11 stand why you're giving that answer. But could you read 12 my question to him. Would you listen to that and see if 1 3 you could answer that. 14 A Right. 15 16 (The previous question was read by the court 17 reporter.) 18 THE WITNESS: At that time it would be, yes. 19 Q (By Mr. Carr) And it has been just since that 20 lawsuit started that that view has changed-- 21 A No, sir. 22 Q -- isn't that correct, Dr. Roush? 23 A No, sir. 24 Q When did it change? A This problem of public responsibility, and we 2 still haven't decided how we're going to do it. 3 Q My question is when did it change, sir? 4 A 1 don't have a date. That-5 Q You said today that they do have the right to know, 6 and that you would tell them, but at that time in '79 7 and before 1983 they didn't have the right to know, and 8 you wouldn't tell them. Now, this lawsuit started in 9 February of 1984, Dr. Roush. Did your view change after 10 February of 1984? 11 A No, sir. 12 Q When did it change? 13 A I can't answer that. I don't know. 14 Q Well, your view in December of 1983 was that the 15 public did not have the right to know, wasn't it, sir? 16 A Yes. 17 Q So your view changed from December of 1983, 18 sometime between December of '83 and February of '84 19 is that correct, Dr. Roush? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Was this the company policy that changed at that 22 point in time? 23 A No, sir. 24 Q Did you attend, shortly before this lawsuit 1 started-- strike that. Were you aware at the time that this 2 lawsuit started, Dr. Roush, that we were suing for and 3 seeking not just compensation for injuries that may have 4 been done our clients, but indeed Mr. Seigfreid and I were 5 seeking punitive damages from Monsanto because of what we 6 conceive thay did wrong that they should be punished for? 7 Were you aware of that fact after December of '83 and before 8 February of '84, sir? 9 A Mo, sir. 10 Q Well, were you aware of that fact before December 11 of '83 that we were seeking those punitive damages? 12 A I know nothing of that. 13 Q When did you learn that we were seeking punitive 14 damages? 15 A Recently. 16 Q Mow, Doctor, did your view as to the people's 17 right to know, did it change at the time, or nearly at 18 the time that you at Monsanto-- no, strike that, not at 19 Monsanto, but that you learned that we xrere seeking punitive 20 damages? 21 A Mo, sir. 22 Q Doctor, then I am somewhat at a loss to understand 23 just when sometime between December of '83 and February 24 of '84 your view changed. Let me explore that. Was there a meeting of top Monsanto officials that took place between 1 December of *83 and February the 6th of '84-2 A No. 3 Q -- in which this case was discussed? 4 A Not--I was never present at one. 5 Q Well, that isn't what I asked you. 6 A I don't know about anything else. 7 Q All right. You don't know whether there was or 8 was not-- 9 A No, sir. 10 Q -- is that correct, sir? All right. Did you have 11 a conference with somebody, yourself, whether it was a 12 meeting or not as to the public's right to know, as to the 13 customer'8 right to know, and Monsanto's responsibility 14 with regard to those rights? 15 A No, sir. 16 Q Doctor, then did this view that's changed the 17 attitude of yours, this changed opinion of yours, did it 18 just come about then on your own volition? 19 A It's a part of this public discussion that's 20 going on about public right to know. My responsibility 21 has always been to protect the customer. That has been 22 what we controlled by. Our concern is about dioxin in the 23 environment. We work to protect them. The Sturgeon spill 24 1 was very much involved in whether the dioxin content was PENGAD cb,, BAYONNE. N.J. 'OTOOI' EOR* "lL 2 4 B 1 2 3 4J s' 6 7 8 J' 9 * 10 11 12 . 13 14 15 16 . 17 18 19 20 ' 21 22 ` 23 24 vr~- *.<} '*fA' & "r i.\* f"4'P' *^ * ;-V'J / 'VV,'' `At ",- 7 *\ r*.!1" 1 V. V'.'-'. going to be a problem for-Sturgeon. I didn/t think bo. 127 And because of that,rethought I was doing right . Now;.* - *, It *` in determination of what man has got a right to know when there is no hazard is that I don't know how to answer. that, when there is .no hazard, it's the sam'sort of thing that the fact that there is dioxin.in their cigarette smoke, does the public have a right to know that, should, they be told that, too? Q - In a word,;absolutely. / The public has the right to know where anything, any damage that may affect their health, and their happiness, and their children. You r, know, dioxin is not just said by reputable scientists to be causing cancer it's said to be.a teratogen, a 5 mutagen. It,:s said td be fegenic. 7 77 77 ? '7* of these things, is it not, Doctor? 1 -A" r . i j*-* - . t 4 * J1` * '- , *> --ii' > In animal apeles,';yes. It's . . - said to be all ,- 7 - 1** ; , '1 *J rt Q And some scientists say that it may well happen 7 . * ';'7 " Ifr'o - V 7 1 .* 7 ' in.humans as well;1 don't they, sir? - - A Yes. Q Doctor, in this society,don't I have the right to decide the risks-- if I want to smoke, and I see the warning on the label--my wife smokes like a smokestack. Now, shefe an intelligent V7oman. And I did too for many years. She's an intelligent woman. She has the right, / i: i * n *- V *? ' *' 7 7: H' -'/r ' 1 and she knows that, she has the right to make her own 2 choice. 3 A But-- 4 . Q Now,: Doctor, but if the U.S. government hadn't 5 told, hadn't forced the tobacco.companies to put the warn 6 ing on the cigarette package, the tobacco companies to 7 this day wouldn't be telling my wife not to smoke. You 8 know that, don't you, sir? 9 A I would suspect that's right. 10 Q Now, the tobacco company, they take the position 11 that cigarette smoking doesn't cause cancer, that it doesn't 12 cause these bad effects, but the rest of us, you included, 13 take the contrary position. Now, the tobacco companies 14 have a financial stake in their beliefs in what they say. IS But nevertheless', we th public have;the right to know. 16 You may believe that the 2, 3, 7, 8--and you may be per 17 fectly right that' the''2,' 3, 7,.8 in this can of Lysol 18 couldn't harm a flea. Bt Z might differ with you. You 19 said yourself that there are reputable scientists that 20 believe that 2, 3, 7, 8 is a carcinogen, that reputable 21 scientists believe that 2, 3, 7, 8 is a promoter. And 22 you know all these other things that were presented to 23 your Biohazards Committee, which we'll get to, things that 24 you know about. You are not, Dr. Roush, do you really believe that Monsanto^ has the right to make a decision for 1 me as to Whether or not I can use Lysol and be exposed to 2 it or not,; that you've got the right to make that decision 3 for me*' 4 MR. HEINEMAN: .Your Honor, may I object, to the 5 speech,, that forty or fifty second speech that finally 6 precededVa question and had nothing to do with the question, 7 I object to it and ask that it be striken, and ask that 8 the jury be instructed to disregard it* 9 THE COURT: Overruled., Please answer the' 10 question, Doctor. 11 THE 'WITNESS:% Would you repeat the question for 12 '' !,j:'r\ > `v me. ; ' ` 13 ` 'i; ' 1 ' 14 `"jt .f . (The previous question was read by the court 15 reporter*)- . i'7,/ J6 = THE WITNESS:. The problem of definition of 17 right, when they're talking about contaminants of a product, 18 at what level the company has responsibility to tell, and 19 20 how to tell it, to be meaningful has not'been described yet 21 Q Doctor, my question is do you at Monsanto have 22 the right to decide for me whether or not I should or 23 should hot be exposed to 2, 3, 7, 8. 24 r1 ,2. - 3 'V S' 'fp" 6 7- '8> - 9 , *> , 10 il; 2 13 14 . IS, 16 1 7 J; 18 19 - 20 21 , 22 23 ; V 24 Li` 130 -4 -A; r* L ,*v !* It ty y , depends- on the concentration that's,-i-in there. * r , j" i '*** i '4 " `-4 ' j L * t'* a :.Q- Thsi you're-saying that you do .have the[right to . decide what I should know; dependent upon the concentration? That's what you are saying-- - - j A''`-That's right. Q; r--aren't you; Doctor? jc ; \ v.--, v.< - --.V' :" . THE COURT: Mr.. Carr/ is this a good point for a*;short break? J '' MR. CARR: '"> " - ' j|a Yes,sir* * ^ * V, 1v .. f 7 'V;, .THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, we'll takela break.at: this tiine.it-The 'admoni8hrnehtst*that I've given , ; l.tvr i' 1 - y, -v X-': 'I 1 ^ v..; / , ','ir . ! youearlier will apply. The courtis in recess.! , ^ 7- > v':; :rV -`X .*}< L? $ 'v-*1-"} v. ... *' '-r- ' -r' , _ '-.-f. ' :(At this point a short recess was taken.) \ *- -1-..^" * ' I ' i )>*/ iv7 tV.J-.f j'. * ; -- Q (By Mr .; Carr);v D r !Roush, 1 'd.like to 'make it . -* / - ''- .! ` `7-- clear that it is stillyour present view that the public . V '`'a *' - * and customers have the right to ^know that the presence 1 .- ,-v-. ^' j ^j J ,i "t- 'T of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD in the product or in the soil , no. matter what the level that 'it niay be, .that is your preient view? A ;The only problem I've got with'what you just > . J " - 'y . t": said is the concentrationrT. , -,v I ' ,i Q Excuse me,;Doctor.. I hate to interrupt' you, ' ; ' ` .u ' , \But did you.not testify^ to that earlier today?, j ' - A Yes, but I didn't finish-:- BAYONNE. N.J. 070I : FORM IL 24 B 4- . 1 Q On two occasions? 2 A Yes, but I didn't finish what I wanted to say. 3 Q X understand that but I want to get this point 4 established and then you can go on and say what you want 5 to say. It is your view as you stated several times this 6 afternoon that the public and the customers have a right 7 to know if 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD is in the product or in the 8 soil no matter what, the level; isn't that correct, sir? . 9 A Yes. i :. 1* 4 10 Q Thank youy Now, you can, go ahead and say what 11 you wanted to say. 1i 12 A. The problem with what I^ve just said is that 1 3 there is a level, at some.low level that doesn't have rany 14 meaning, then you can always find it down at some low IS level that we're not going to report. We can always 16 measure to a lower level, and someone will say we are re 17 sponsible to go down there, and we're not going to be able 18 to do that. 19 Q Well, Doctor, nobody is. asking you what you cannot 20 do. We have seen how you have progressed in your ability 21 to, detect dioxin ,from parts per million back in the '60's 22 and '70's, down to parts per billion, and today you're 23 down in parts, per trillion. 24. A Right. I Q Nobody has suggested to you that you need to 2 report that which you cannot report; But when you do know 3' that there are levels, no matter' what the level might be, 4 of dioxinLin the product and in the soil, it is your present 5 view that the public has the right to know that; isn't 6 that correct, sir? 7 A I am struggling with.that definition of where we 8 have decided we should be telling customersand how far '_ , ' T, F N ' i .. * ; -j , V * * \ s -v ' ri * "" 9 we should go in looking'for dioxin. ' 10 Q You're mixing up the two things, sir. You're * i1' f 11 *t - - f^ r j * 11 mixing up how far should, you ,gd-with what should you tell ^ 12 the customers. All I'm asking, .isn't it your view, as you ' 1 -*. ^,, r' r"\ i 'i'1' 1 'J 1 . *,, j *. * s 1 3 have stated two or three.times today, the customer has the 14 right to know of the presence.of 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD in the 15 product? 16 A Yes. And my struggle still is-- 1 7 Q . I'm not asking for your struggle. All I want to 18 know is that is your present view? - *. 19 MR. HEINEMAN: Objection, your Honor, he told the 20 witness he was going: to let him have his say in this matter. f 21 MR. CARR: 1 did let him have his say, and I 'm 22 back to wanting ah answer ,. 23 THE COURT: The objection is overruled.; 24 Q " (By Mr. Carr) ^Have we now passed from that point, Doctor? ' ^ . A-` ,1 really haven't stated what I wanted .to say. -- j ( i- ' * *- Q Well, then say what you want to say. / / A What I'm saying when we're talking/about what : level of.contandnation.that we <are going to report is I'm not clear where that .should, go.- At what level; we^ are re- . ':, `'V . - / Vj '*-:-tr > ' L 1 ' sponsible, to. tell about contamination of any product with , ' J;-f;> :^ t-r--- *.-. ,s v*- 1 1 v--'V'v* ',i'' ' ; ",; ' . : any chemical/ --That'Incrdes dioxin./ There's wholes issue ' -1 \ : V- J 'V ';v;'*- / L,;: v, of what we should tell -people about levels that are not .' v *- V' .1 ' - '1 i^ r. i 11 1 ' * ' *, hazardous,'is a-.most. difficult one :to deal with/: rvi 'don 't/know the/answer^ tQi that. , V ,, , . /,; } >'& 7 s-. /. \' Q - Well, at least the way you're operating;at the r* . , . * 1 ^ * * 4 L* nr * `+ * *1 1 ij # - jP) r j present time is that the. public has the right to know the dioxin, the 2, 3,7, 8-TCD'is present no matter;what the level at the present time; isn't, that correct,!,,sir? A ' ,I'm not sure; at no matter .what the level part , ". _ 1 r * c . vt m *r * i # * -* I agree with you, except 1 don't-.-. / . " .- . .,Q ; Currently has there been any level of dkins since this .lawsuit4started, has there been any products ,that you've beenaware of at Monsanto that has had rany level whatseyr.of. 2, 3, 7, 8-TCD that you have not told to the customer, or to the! public, or that you have discovered? . ; r A -I don't know. I 2 Well, within the knowledge that you have, sir. I'm 2 not asking for something you don't know, has there been any 3 levels that you are aware of that have not been reported to the 4 public in your products or in the soil, wherever it might be, ' 5 at the Lining Plant, at the Queeny Plant, the Krummlch Plant, 6 or the Nitro Plant, or in Santophen-- well, you don't make that 7 anymore-- or tetra-soil, or whatever it is that you are making a 8 the present time, is there any 2, 3, 7, 8 contaminate in any 9 of those circumstances; that you have discovered-- by you, I mean 10 Monsanto to your knowledge-- that you have not reported to the 11 customer or to the public? 12 A It's not my responsibility to do the reporting* 1 3 Q I'm asking you not your responsibility, Dr. Roush, 14 I'm asking you to your knowledge hasrthere been any such 15 levels that-have not been reported. 1 6 A NO e ,, -_if ' '; , 17 Q All rights ^ Now, then, you have 1438B in front of 18 you, do you not, sir? v- r, * { I li s v * r * r t 19 '-A Yes, sir. And Lcv-jj 20 Q Yes, sir. And Dr. Long is a toxicologist, is he 21 not, and he reported to your meeting, did he not? 22 A Yes. 23 Q And among other things he described to your 24 committee all about the toxicology of dioxins, and he discussed the1effect of dioxin on various animals including 1 man, did he not? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And he said one thing that X wish to discuss 4 with you, no one is sure where man stands in this spectrum j* , 5 o animal sensitivity, did he not, sir?, 6 A Yes. LV / ' 7 Q He's talking about the fact that one animal, I 8 think it's the guinea pig,;, is,notrsensitive-- 9 A The guinea pig is very sensitive. 10 Q But the hamster*;.'Is at the other end of the 11 spectrum. 12 A Guinea pig most sensitive, but the hamster is 1 3 the least sensitive. 14 Q Vice versa. I got them mixed up. He says no 15 one knows where man stands in that spectrum, doesn't he, 16 sir? > ./ 17 A For sure. 48J Q We will add for sure, if you want. But no one 19 is sure where man stands in this spectrum of animal 20 sensitivity. That's exactly word for word what he said, 21 isn't it, sir? ;. 22 A Yes, but he's reporting what he read in the 23 literature. 24 Q Well, sure.< Unless he's done all the work 1 himself that is the method by which you, and other toxicolo 2 gists learn, isn't it, sir, what's reported in literature 3 by other reputable scientists? 4 A Yes, but there are those who say that man is not 5 nearly as sensitive as the guinea pig* 6 Q Doctor, I'm not quarreling with you on that point. 7 No one is sure where man stands, in fact; isn't that right, s 8 You're not sure where man stands, are you, sir? 9 A That's right. 10 Q And no one else is, are they, sir? 11 A The only thing I want to add to that -- 12 Q Dr. Roush,;could you answer,that question before 1 3 you add it, because I have to get an answer to the question. 14 Then you can .add what you want to.add. 1 5 A The answer to that is* yes. 16 Q Yoii do know where man stands? 17 A No, that we don't know where man stands. 18 Q All right. Now, you can add what you want to add. 19 A It has been stated many, many times thatbecause 20 of man's exposure to dioxin, and it has not produced death, 21 that man is not nearly as sensitive as the sensitive 22 animals. '\ 23 Q Now, Doctor, you know that that isn't true, that 24 man has died from exposure to dioxin. 1 A No ; X don't. 2 Q Well, I haven't got the file with me today because X was going to save it for later on, but documents in 3 , V -* (* ^ - * Monsanto's file referring ;to a man at BASF-- 4 'A- Yes. 5 6 Q Well, then you do know what I'm talking about. A But that case has not been established as being | 7 8 connected. ' *l` `` 9 ,Q Doctor, scientists that, studied that case had a 10. man exposed to dioxin and he developed-- X forget what it 11 was now-- soma kind of-- they discovered it in his pancreas, 12 I believe it was, and he died from pancreatitis,, that the 1 3 attending physician reported was caused by the dioxin. 14 Isn't that correct, sir? . . 15 - A Yes. 16 Q All right. Now, Doctor, if the man died from 17 pancreatitis., and the pancreatitis was caused by dioxin 18 * according to the treating physician; don't you interpret 19 that as a death caused by dioxin? 20 A No, sir. 21 Q Doctor, If I had a gun in my hand, and I aimed it ' 22 at you, and I pulled the trigger, now the bullet actually 23 ...is traveling from the gun tq you, and it actually strikes ' i 1 ' -L * 24 :you and, kills you. The bullet did.the killing. But didn't 1, X cause it by pulling the trigger? Didn't I cause the 2 death by pulling the trigger of the gun? H J" `^ ^ j * f' 1 J ` J" J 3 A Yes*. `The;`relationshipr- ^ 4 Q* All right. Now, Doctor, if the dioxin causes A f J 1 4 *" i * 5 the pancreatitis, just as I caused the bullet to leave the 6 barrel of the gun, and th#j man dies from pancreatitis, 11 'j * ^ J- r . i. 1 i ,* ; " i r 7 didn't dioxin cause the death of the man? 8 A If the pancreatitis was caused by the dioxin. 9 Q Yes, that's right. That's what the doctor said, 10 the attending physician said that. Didn't he, sir? 11 A Yes. But--* 12 Q All right. %Doctor, that's all I'm asking you: 1 3 MR. HEINEMAN:. Objection, your Honor * He con- J 14 tinually.cuts the man off and won't let him explain his 1 5 answer. ,, 16 'MR. CARR: .He' can explain all he wants, Counsel, 17 but I want an answer to my question first. 18 1 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor* the evidence; that you have, 19 that we. all have, is that which was reported in this lit 20 erature. It was reported that the attending physician 21 said the man had a massive exposure to dioxin, which caused 22 pancreatitis, which caused his death. Isn't that correct, 23 sir? 24 A 1 He had-- the man who did that and developed 1 pancreatitis a n d . d i e d . . .c v . ' f 1 ,<> 'y`s rit *j 2 Q Isn't tha^correct,; slr? -,r 3 A 'Yes. ^ A V J' 4 Q Now, go ahead and say what you want to say. 5 A But that: doesn't mean'that association is real. 6 Q Oh, I understand that, Doctor. But you have no 7 evidence other than what was reported, do you, sir? 8 A The literature on dioxin would indicate It doesn't 9 cause acute pancreatitis. 10 Q Doctor, there was a lady at Seveso who died of 11 cancer of the pancreas. * 12 A Yes. 1 3 Q The lady we just talked about. 14 A Yes, sir. 15 Q We know--you don't know-- you don't agree that 16 dioxin is the promoter, do you, sir? 17 A .Yes, in animals. 18 Q In human beings I'm talking about. 19 A There1s no evidence that it is. 20 Q Well, Doctor, then you understand that when you 21 give me an answer to ,a question that you say pancreatitis 22 isn't, caused by dioxin, that I can't accept that because 23 you also say that dioxin is not a promoter. I'm going to 24 get to in a minute, very shortly, ,in your own meetings with 140 1 your own people, your -biohazards 'people say that it is a .. 2 promoter, I mean. I've got the documents here,. You will . V, ^ : ;; 3 agree that I should ba-- I should not accept what you say 4 when I have the documents where your own people counter `5 what you say; Do you understand that, Doctor? 6 A Yes, I understand that. . 7 Q All right, Now-- 8 A Let's go-- 9 Q The literature states, why don't you agree with 10 it, the literature states that a man did die from dioxin 11 exposure, does it not say that? 12 . A It does say that. 13 Q All right. Now, Doctor, your toxicologist goes 14 .on to say here that it has been reported in man not only 15 chloracne, but that neuromuscular changes occur, porphyria, .16 and .hypertriglyceridemia occurs following acute exposure ` 17 .to dioxin; doesn't it, sir? 18 A Yes. 19 Q And he also--now, that's a lot more than chloracna, 20 isn't it, sir? 21 A Yes. / . 22 , Q He also goes on to say that these dioxins produce 23 hyperplasia of hepatocytes, hepatomegaly, and in some 24 animals hepatic necrosis; doesn't it, sir? PENGAD CO., BAYONNE, N.J> 07001 FORM IL 24 B ] A Yes;., rL 2 Q He goes on to talk about how--let's talk about 3 animal studies forVa'while.^ reason animal studies are 4 done is to help you understand what can.happen to human 5 beings without subjecting human beings to the same process; 6 isn't that correct, sir? 7 A Yes,, sir. $ Q And while we all are beings on this earth, and 9 we love animals, we do, iike humans more than wa like animals, IP and therefore if people are going-- if things ate going to n be subjected to experiments, we much prefer that it be 12 animals rather than humans; isn't that correct, sir? You 13 have to say-- 14 A Yes, sir. 15 Q And now in .regard to these animal studies, your 16 toxicologist did report that low doses of TCDD causes 17 reproduction failure and cancer, didn't ha, sir? 18 A - Yes, sir. "1 19 Q And that's in animals. L 20 A Yes, in rats. 21 Q And it's also a teratogen; correct, sir? 22 A Yes, sir.. VJ 23 Q He says it*s'probably not a mutagen, however, 24 doesn't'he, sir?. *' ` 1 A Yes,, sir. , ^^ 2 Q And he says It's probably not a mutagen, however, * i - 3 doesn't he, sir? 4 A Yes, sir. S Q He also says that there's a possibility that it 6 can alter the chromosomes,, doesn't he, sir? 7 A Yes, 8 Q Now, the chromosomes is part of the DNA change 9 that makes up our--it's basic genetics, isn't it, sir? 10 A Yes. 11 Q We pass that on to our children, people that 12 come behind us. 13 A If it's in our reproductive genes. 14 Q Yes. And, Doctor, it goes on also to say that 15 there have been in two year lifetime studies, there have 16 been found tumors of the lung, the liver, the tongue and 17 nasal passages, does't it, sir? 18 A Yes, sir. 19 Q And he also describes how TCD might be a particular 20 promoter. He's talking about cancer there, being a promoter 21 of cancer, isn't he, sir? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q He gives a reason for it, doesn't he, it appears 24 to react with the estrogen receptor; correct, sir? V i * *- ~t X l 1 - ;' t.yy V/ * 'iv ' '-'v \ i .r \ , ' h i J` , A , M. i j / j U i t . 1 ' l< ^ 1 ' l V^C:;*v Mif'-'iK , ! ^^ ^ i .- * ^ L - r. J J ' \ - - L ^ 1P X ' - ' 4 ': h \ `r fc. ** T 143 11 2\ ^ rr * * jJlv ^ ->* y ^ , *i - * "~;f" J -*i1ik;-"'w Jjj-i Iv-iV ; * ; fc'-ir *F*' * .A';-:-Yes.*- ,v ~V 'y -. -Vy v , ;V / Q All right; Now, Doctor, in addition to your 3 other duties, youbave had occasion in the past to serve 4 on what's been called The Governor's Task Force in ;5 t, *! 6, , 8. ; Missouri on the dioxin problem, haven't you, sir? C ' * F '< r v r f *> ^ * , - / J r' J " ' -- * f- ^/j: ,A .Yes, sirV; ; ,\y *-^ / ^ ~y.\- . , '>/'J-./ ' ; ,Q; `When did you first join that committee, Dr . f Roush? 9* A j/X don't recall the date. , f 10 i ,;'^ .Q X'm sorry* 1/ v ,. ,*_tY.r - J , 11 , v J -A - I don11 recall the date. ;: . ' V: ; > '' 12 1 f ^ Q Well, could you give mecthe approximate year? . 13 * - , , A' I .think It was in late '83 . 14 Q -And you've served on that committee up to "the 'r15 .-present time?'"/ - / / . , ^ b a y o n n e . ' n .j . w o o * L e o h m i l j a b . 16 ' ,--v A -^Nb.;' : 'r" ` ' ,17" . 18* Q ./when did you leave the committee? J . t . A , That committee was disbanded after about a year* 19 ~ 20 ' 21 22 . . 23 24 . Q Well, during that period of .time you were also , ; bn a subcommittee of the Task Force, were you not,;that dealt .with health effects of dioxin in man? '-J- *. A Yes, sir. / ^ .v;/ .:'y ..- ^A ^ / ;1 Q And. you served on- that committee, at least you were, serving on it in September of '.83, were yqu not? y . \ -y': 'iv '. -.^ ,r ; -/ vJf .fC - /y -y `j;y i, ^ r I A -- Yes, sir. . 2 Q And that subcommittee of which-- did you participate 3 in the activities of the subcommittee? 4 .A Yes, sir., . ` ' 5 Q And participate in the documents that `/it-drafted 6 and prepared, sir? ,.r ,' 7 A Yes, sir. 8 Q And it prepared a report, the subcommittee prepared 9' a report on the health effects of dioxin, did it not, sir?- " 10 A Yes, sir. 11 Q And you participated in the preparation of that 12 report, did you not, sir? 1 3 A. Yes, sir. 14 Q I thought I had four copies. 15 J V. r 16 (Plaintiff's exhibit 1439 was marked for' 17 identification by the court reporter.) 18 Q (By Mr. garr) Doctor; I'll now hand you what's 19 been marked 1439, and ask you if you recognize that as a 20 document that bears your-- not your signature, your name in 21 the upper left-hand corner. That's a report of that sub- 22 committee that you just described. Your Honor, I ,,was sure 23 I had a fourth copy. 24 , J THE COURT: That's okay. ' k p r ? i j' f * * *' * ' * rf 1 THE WITNESS: I don't think this is our final 2 report. This is only.an early draft. 3 Q (By Mr. Carr) Wellp do you have another report, 4 because as far as I'm aware of, I could be wrong, this 5 is the only report .of that subcommittee that I've got/ 6 A No. No. There's a final report. This isn't 7 the final .draft, 8 Q When was the final draft compiled? 9 `N A Within a month of this. , 10 Q>- All right. Did it vary substantially from this k hl J r, J i 11 report? 2 A I think a great deal. 13 Q Perhaps I can offer this into evidence. We can 14 explore where the variance was / because I-- 15 A I have a copy. 16 Q With you? 1 7 A No. . r 18 Q Well-- ': 19 A But I don't think this reflects what we had in 20 the final draft &t all. 21 Q It doesn't, reflect at all? 22 A No. 23 Q Let me direct your attention to just one part of 24 , t 'i n r i,,- it right no1w^,\ but ^ itv;^wc1o`1ntc*^ern^s t-he".are./a*, t"^hat`I Hwant' to talk 146 1. 1. ,, ,to youLabout , page six, ,where it talks about the chloracne. -2 That1s the area- that I'm. in ..right now. .Without reading it, ,. ',.3.`! Doctor--without reading it out loud, tell me.if you would, ' 4 * if.the final report contains a statement similar to the last s sentence in that paragraph dealing, with chloracne and dioxin 6 ; .intoxication. Did the final report contain, an equivalent ^ J + - , I V r r ' r*. . , k 'L *- 4 *J rv ' ,Vr *. ,, t ^ 1r '7 ' statement?;" X want to* ask questions about it if. it did, r 8V .I can11 .answer that. t \ .v = 9> y Q You don' t know? ' ** s Kk , ^ .: - v rv ' ' ** Ji - r' -* r, _^\ n UI 'f '"'l - > "' ,," 10 ' A No,.I don't remember. '' 11 * ' : Q .All right. Doctor, without a specific reference * 1 , ,* * , '4* . .,r 1*'* *' 1 ' 4 * ,1 11 ^ L ' i *" 1 j',L , k K ** " ~ "1p"'*" fJ'Z > *, N^ 12/k to it, does the subcommittee of which yo are member J * J( 1 3 believe that chlorabne is not a prerequisite./to dioxin . 1 4 ', . intoxication? ' / ;- v ' 1 5 , *r* /A It says unequiyocally under some circumstances. ,16-, ^ -- 0/ Xs that the subcommittee's belief? . 17- , ' ,. 1A That was' theVqpinioh of some of the members of the - - c\ r ' - ^ .V \ - .P h '* * . ^ r " f ` ^ _ Ta 18 y. subcommittee, ^ ^ v ,' v 19 ^ ^ -1J f r,` . Jt * ** - ' 'J- '^ ^r' ` . ` ^' ' '* ' Q .Well; that's, the opinion--well, what I'm asking .2 0rf:' you, * - Doctor , Is whether r j or hot the ' *.v' , L subcommittee as whole, , a .;* ;a ,-. ^ ^ \r ' . . ' -.. ' W..,-''- .: i 2 1 ^ of which you are-a member^- * .v W ,22 l-'-A J 1' - " ; ,A Yes-- : \ J!` * " V.*- - . - ' r t" ^ \ /, :>7,' {{--'?rV C l , ' ' r' ` J-1 23 Q- --published ,its -view that"you cannot state un- 24 equivocally that chloracne is a prerequisite to; dioxin: V>. - t C - -;r . : ' ' 1 ; 1- L 1 ' 'J- 1 FENGAD CO,, BAYONNE. N,J, OTOO FORM IL .ZA B' 1 Intoxication. 2 A 1 can't fell you whether this appeared in the 3 final report or not. This is one of the issues that we 4 spent a great deal of time. So the quarrel was about that 5 word "unequivocallyv", Under some circumstances it could be 6 without chloracne. But" I'm not sure that we have left it 7 in that form. 8 Q Well, what about the statement that some soft 9 tissue sarcomas developed in individuals without previous 10 chloracne. Did you all agree on that statement? 11 A Yes * 12 Q, All right. Doctor, and X have a file on soft 1 3 tissue sarcomas, I'll get to that later on, but the fact 14 that Hardell and others have reported that soft tissue 1 5 sarcomas can be caused by dioxin exposure; isn't that right, 16 sir? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And your,subcommittee, .and you as a member of that 19 subcommittee, would agree that soft tissue sarcomas have 20 developed in people without prior chloracne; isn't that 21 correct, sir? 22 '' `- ;rv A Yes,fSure. A J,V;' ; \ 1 23 Q Doctor, doesilt'that tell you, sir, you said 24 earlier that it's Monsanto's-view that you can have no bad I effects from dioxin without chloracne. You can't get a much 2 worse effect than a soft tissue sarcoma, can you, sir? 3 A /That's correct. But that doesn't mean it's related 4 to dioxin exposure. 5 Q Doctor, the soft tissue sarcomas came about, and 6 I don't want to jump ahead, but came about in people -- it's 7 a very, very rare type of cancer. It only occurs in. point 8 zero seven percent of the population. Very rare kind of cancer, 9 Doctor* it happened .to people that were exposed to dioxin, ; * >.- - ,4 P 1,, ^ ^ 4 * 4 , 1 T i* *p r 1 f` 10 and they didn't get 'chloracne' Isn't that suggestive to 11 you as a medical person that .the dioxin caused this very 12 rare form of dancer?'. * r ' 1 3 A j No,, sir. ,, f *, . . ... > j 1 4 Q It doesn't suggest it to you. All right. 1 5 A Can I explain why? 16 Q If you'd like, sure. 17 A You've mentioned the Hardell study, that says asso 18 ciation between exposure to dioxin and soft tissue sarcomas. 19 You did that twice and came to the same conclusion. There are 20 two other studies-- three other studies done just exactly like 21 it that did not find soft tissue sarcomas in the same,circum 22 stances. So the Hardell epidemiology study is open to 23 question because it wasn't found in others. If you can't 24 find it every time you do it, you can't draw a conclusion i as to association. To go further than that, in occupational 2 exposure there's little evidence such as a soft tissue sarcoma 3 problem. " . 4 Q Dr. .Roush, to jump ahead for a moment. It was 5 point zero seven percent that Is the rarity*of the soft tissue 6 sarcomas, but soft tissue sarcoma in the chemical Industry, 7 when you take the Dow".... Jsoft tissue sarcomas and Monsanto 8 soft tissue sarcomas, reputable scientists have concluded ' 9 that thiree percent of youir,workers have soft tissue sarcomas, 10 two point nine percent, I'm sorry,, I exaggerated slightly, 11 two. point nine percent had soft tissue sarcomas. That would 12 be a factor' of seven-- seven into-- four times higher. Four 1 3 times higher rate. J 14 A -. Yes, sir . o 1' * r 1 5 Q Four hundred percent greater rat of soft tissue 16 sarcomas In the chemical industry; 17 A Yes. 18 Q - Of those workers that wereexposed to dioxin. 19 j K L f'1 *' Isn't that suggestive in your own backyard of a connection 20 between dioxin and soft tissue sarcoma, disregarding HardellV -' /. \ \ ' ' ' 21 A Yes.' This statement you just made-- , 22 ,Q Excuse me., Could you; answer that question please, 23 vsir. Isn't that evidence of soft tissue sarcoma causation. 24 by dioxin in your own backyard, sir? I A No. Can I finish on that statement? . 2 Q Sure. 3 A When you reported those are based on seven soft 4 tissue sarcomas/ in the epidemiology studies that have been 5 done on man;, fand four of-those soft tissue sarcomas have been 6 discredited by NIOSH as being related to dioxin exposure. So 7 it isn't all that common in terms of occupation, and it's 8 common enough without exposure. 1Four-of the cases of soft 1( ru 9 tissue sarcoma have been taken out. One or more of those were 10 taken out because they .were diagnosed as being soft tissue 11 sarcomas, and since they have been diagnosed as other tumors. 12 Q Doctor, who took them out? 1 3 A NIOSH. 14 Q Do you have some documents -- 1 5 A Yes, sir. 16 Q We'll get to the soft tissue sarcoma. I won't 1 7 quarrel with you on that point at this time. All right? 18 Doctor, in regard to the ability of dioxin to promote, you had 19 a meeting just a year ago, February 17 of 1984, did you not, 20 sir, of your Biohazards Committee? 21 A We have one every month. 22 Q All right. Would you mark this. 23 24 (Plaintiff's exhibit 1440 was marked for 1 identification by th court reporter.) 2 Q (By Mr. Carr) I'm handing you now what's.been 3 marked,plaintiffVs exhibit 1440 and ask you if you recognise 4 that as the minutes from the Monsanto Biohazards Committee 5 of February 17, 1984? 6 ..MR. HEINEMAN: This was 1440? 7 MR. CARR; 'Fourteen forty. , 8 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. t 9 10 (Plaintiff's exhibit 1440A was marked for 11 identification by the court reporter._ 12 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, I hand you now what's 13 been marked 1440A and ask you if you recognize that as a 14 page from those minutes we'va just described * I'll offer 15 1440 and 1440A* . 16 MR, HEXNEMAN: ;.No.objection.' 1 ^ \ * C\ ' * / 17 THE COURT: They're both admitted without 18 objection, Counsel,; - 19 * v; ' ' * t > i'. j t, i Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, when it comes to whether 20 something is a promoter or *an initiator, it really doesn't 21 make much difference because in the end the result is 22 going to be the same; is it not? That is, more cancers? 23 A .Everything suggests thats right. 24 , Q Yeah. And so the dispute ag to whether or not 152 1 2, 3, 7, 8 is an initiator or is initiator and a promoter 2 Is really just kind of an academic dispute that you scientist! 3. like to engage in, is it not? As far as the end result is 4 concernedi whether it's an ititiator or promoter, it really 5, makes no difference. You're going to get more cancer in 6 either event, aren't'you, sir? 7 A Except for one point. A promoter, first of all 8 initiator is thought to be a carcinogenic response in which 9 there's no threshold. In other words, the dose goes back to 10 the one molecule three. But the promoter isn't that way. 11 A promoter is thought to produce the cancer by stimulating 12 something after the cell has been initiated. And that 13 promoter affect is dose related, and there is a threshold 14 for response for promoters. 15 Q If I-understand correctly*, what you believe to be . * i .* ' *1 |V u ' i1 \ L, - * .? t - a 1 16 the.case, one molecule of an ititiator can cause cancer? 17 A That's a-- ^ ; 18 Q But one molecule of a'promoter cannot cause an 19 initiator to cause a v? c a n c e r ? v \ i I r S' -L * 1'r " C ' * " 20 A That's right. 21 Q So if it has to have a certain amount to be1able ' 22 to cause a cancer if it's a promoter, whereas if it's only 23 an initiator it doesn't take a certain amount, one molecule 24 can do it theoretically? ' BAYONNE, >.J.' 07002 FORM 1L 24 B 1 A Yes, sir* 2 Q All right. And hue anybody determined the level -VA- *- - *1 * ,' 3 at which TCDD will promote cancer in humans? 4 A No, 5 Q All right. Then what theyW e dene, and this 6 study deals with, and Xvll direct your attention to th 7 report of Dr. Levinskas at this meeting, ho reported the 8 work being done at the Chemical Institute, did he not, sir? 9 A Yes. 10 Q How, on this Chemical Institute, it*e been some 11 time the jury had a deposition read of Dr. Heal 12 last spring, a year ago.. The Chemical Institute is an 1 3 organisation funded and operated--not operated by, but 14 funded by chemical companies, isn9t It? 15 A> Yes,' air," f t v '' * 41 -P f* % i. p - ' , . s _ 16 Q And Honaonto is on the board.of directors, or 17 has representatives on the board of director of that? 18 A Yes, air. ' 19 Q And are you .that representative? 20 A Ho, sir. *i 21 Q Hho is? 22 A Hr. Singer. 23 Q All right. And in any event, Dr. Heel who was 24 with the Vanderbilt University is now at Chemical Institute, 1 and he's the director? . 2 A Yes, sir. 3 Q And he comes to Monsanto--well, he was, prior 4 to becoming a director, he in fact was a member of your 5 Biohazards Committee, wasn't he, sir? 6 A Yes, sir. 7 Q And he still returns to Monsanto from time to 8 time to give you the benefit of what he has learned in 9 the Chemical Institute, doesn't he, sir? 10 'A There is no regular time. He may have been II there once or twice. But he really hasn't bean to St. 12 Louis on a regular basis since Biohazards. 13 Q I didn't say.on a regular, rI,really said from 14 time to time. . *^ `; 1 5 A Once or twice in the last four or five years he's ; /'.)r,L) k'' . 16 been there. .'v L 1 ^ 17 Q All right.- -And you discussed with him projects 18 that you at Monsanto want the Chemical Institute to under 19 take, don't you, sir? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And as a matter of fact they undertook certain 22 studies at the request of Monsanto, didn't they, sir? 23 A The only thing they have done for us, they have 24 initiated studies on certain chemicals of interest to us. 1 Q That's what I've asked you, they have in fact 2 done that, haven't they? . 3 A More as V7 give the chemical to them, they decide what they're going to do on that chemical, 4 Q I understand. Doctor, in any event it was 5 6 reported by Dr. Levinskas that they had discovered in their investigation as to whether dr not TCD is a complete 7 8 carcinogen, that is an initiator and a"promoter or simply ? a promoter, they have discovered at least that in the mouse, 10 while it doesn't induce a malignancy, it is a potent 11 promoter, didn't they? 12 . A Yes, sir. . . . ? \\ _L,>' y r(- - " . 1 3 Q And actually/lt's ten thousand times more potent 14 than some other, chemical substance. What is that other 15 substance; that phorbdi myristate?' ` 16 A I don't know,,. But^it's, one-that they use as a 17 standard for promotion. 18 Q This TCD is ten jtimeB more potent than that 19 standard? 20 A Yes. i 21 Q All right. Now, Doctor, he goes on to tell you 22 that they've done-- now, this work being done by the ciTT, 23 you accept that as fact, don't you, sir? You're not challenging what the chemical Industry says is a fact, are 1 you, sir? 2 A Sometimes. We question a lot of things that they do. 3 4 Q You're not challenging what they report as far as TCD being a potent promoter, ten thousand times more potent 5 6 than the standard?. 7 A . The way I look at that, that's in one modelt8 Q Excuse me. My question is are you challenging 9 that,. Dr. Roush? Are you accepting this as fact? 10 A I don't accept it as fact. 11 Q You don't accept It as a fact. All right. Doctor, i, * _ 'r1'\i/\ *- r 'f' 12 they also reported to your-- that point for a moment. Did 1i > *' T 1 1 3 you, after this Biohazards Committee, or any other bio 14 hazards committee,*did,you ,say "look,. I don't accept that, 15 X don't think that's so, X. don't.think that's a fact, ten . / *,- f' 'r 16 thousand times more potent- than phorbol myristate?" 1 7 A No. 18 Q Have you ever stated that on the record? 19 A No. r 20 Q Have you ever said that anywhere? 21 A No. 22 Q Is today the first time you're saying it? 23 A No. It's a fact, but what the implication of it-- 24 Q Doctor, I don't want to confuse you. I'm simply 1 asking you toaaccept as fact that TCDD in this particular circus 2 stance is ten thousand times more potent as a cancer promoter 3 than phorbol myristate. 4 A I would say probably so* That's the way I think 5 about that. 6 Q All* right.- ,Did you even put that down on the record? 7 A - No. , 8 Q Now, Doctor, the next thing that was reported to 9 you had to do with the fact that TCDD in human skin cells -- ii * 10 now, this is;*not working with animals, it's working with 11 human skin cells, is it not, sir? 12 A Yes, sir. 1 3 Q And that it was found to have a profound effect 14 on a skin growth factor; isn't that right, sir? 1 5 A .Yes. 16 Q Now, do you accept that report, from C U T that we ' *1 - 17 used in human skin cells, that TCDD has a profound effect j 18 on this epidermal growth factor? 19 A Yes, sir. t 20 Q And, Doctor, that 'is in humans, right, not talking 21 about animals? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Doctor, the next thing reported by CIIT, on the 24 immune system. The immune system, Dr. Roush, you will agree 158 is extremely important/ .not just in every day. health, biit in the preventionor the destruction of, or the . curing of;cancer by the human's own system." ..You will agree to that, ,will you, Dr. Roush, that the immune system is important in. those aspects that I told you? .. . * A `Ithink it probably is, but,I'm not sure it is. W . Q Doctor, isn't: it'accepted by all scientific work- - ers in the field;of -immunology that/our immune system ,\j ; y protects us against cahcer;;that we rhave-the ability in our body to send out/cells to take,thebe perspective rcarcrhr , ; rvt r t .. L . .. ogens; and-dp'things'with "them, and'.destroy them. Isn't it just about a basiclaccepted scientific premise? . ,, A *No1. "i-.. . Q It is not? \ / L '- ; "'A What we do .know is that ifyour immune system Is severely crippled by. taking something so that you don't ^reject, if-vyojc've got a..heart transplant, those people who . .1 j " . , - *' . i .j 1 `r " have theii: immune system almost destroyed have an increased incidence of' cancer* Butr in' the :^ normal-range of people .. who've got; immunologic 'abnormality, there's no evidence ^ bn how that's related,iwhether there's an immune function .v in that. `` V.': . Q . Doctor / you're talking about, I takeit from the way.you've answered, proof positive. ^ V ' 159 1 A Pardon? 2 Q You're saying there is no proof positive of it; 3 is that what you're saying? 4 A No.. Under some circumstances, I know it's active, 5 and whether it's active in.all types of cancer, with all 6 immunologic responses, that hasn't'been established. 7 Q Well, 1DocFto'ri, perh*aps my question was too broad. I i *. ^ 8 wasn't saying that the immune system is that'which protects us 9 against all cancers. I'll ask you simply,the immune systemUdoes 10 have a significant role in protecting us against carcinogens, 11 doesn't it, sir? 12 A Probably, yes. 1 3 Q Doctor, this report on the immune system that'.was 14 being studied by C U T found that there was a significant decrease 1 5 in the weights, the spleen cellularity, the antibiotic platform- L6 and cell responses, and the mitogenic responses to T&D lymphaciie 17 mitogens. 1 8 A Yes. 19 Q Now, Doctor, I won't get into it with you, the T&D 20 cells, but we've had that discussed at some length by Dr. Zahouski 21 here last year, and this is evidence from CIIT that in the studies 22 they conducted that TCD does have an effect upon the T&D cells; 2 3 isn't that correct, sir? i 24 A Yes, at the level of exposure used. Q Doctor,, are you familiar with the results of the OKT 10 studies for the plaintiffs incith'is-case? A NO. I Q No one has advised you as to what-- are you familiar 2 with any of the health effects claimed by the plaintiffs 3 in this case? 4 A Not enough for me to discuss. 5 Q All right. Doctor, there was another meeting. t' ,, ' 6 Would you mark this/please, j 7 8 (Plaintiff1s.exhibit,1441. was marked for 9 identification by the court reporter.) 10 i '*, ` t/ t- Q Handing you how what1s been marked plaintiff's 11 exhibit 1441 and I'll ask you if you recognize that as the , 12 minutes of your Biohazards Committee for April the 21st, 13 . 1983? 14 A Yes, sir. 15 Q I offer that into evidence if it please the 16 court. i- v 17 MR. HEINEMAN: Fourteen forty-one, your Honor? 18 THE COURT: Right, 1441. 19 MR. HEINEMAN: No objection.1 20 THE COURT: Admitted without objection. 21 22 (Plaintiff's exhibit 1441A was marked for 23 Identification by the court reporter.) 24 Q (By Mr. Carr) Doctor, I hand you now what's been >* * v." r* 161 1 2--'V 3 , '4/' '5' .6 ; .V. 1 ' " - / 8: -; 9 10 - /- 12. . - 13 14 15 J \* ^ Y 16 1 ' 17 ' * 18 19 .20 "` '-: 2I , , 22' y1 ` * 23 j-: 24 . marked plaintiff*s 1441A. Do.you recognize that as a page 'from,.those minutes? \:Do you not, sir? '/ * , " 'A\ Yes, sir..'-..-. \ ' - '- : *-/ - . MR. CARR: I offer to the court 1441A. ` `t .. "7? ;'<...'iYY v - : v . - ' rr.THE, COURT:,:.(Any objections on that page? VY;:Hii yW v V'^V-` . MR. HEINEMAN: .No objection, your/Honor; ; -' r h v ; * *v -THE c o u r t ::!; iWitKouiyobjection!.' ^ - L V s-* ' r s i Y Y v. r ~ * ~ r - - ' i\ , 7 ' . ! v Q .f(By Mr. Carr) What's the .date of those, minutes,' Doctor? Y 'ifU^\V1 ^.*. K vi \ -j T A -- A.; April 2lV '83v . J ` ;^.r. ' . ' ;V MR. CARRY Fourteen; forty-one B,/please. Y y - j 'r j J t '? * t v p * i4 " ., ( ,. . ' fcr *.* '\ " *~* ' -* - " ' -r _ ; . (Plaintiff's exhibit 1441B was marked \ for identification by the court reporter.) J; . :Q .\(By Mr. Carr) Doctor, yourecognfze 1441B as a blow-up of 1441A; do you not, air? A Yes, sir.. S^ Q X offer .to Che court 1441B,.your Honor. .. MR. HEXNEMAN.: /.No objection.- . t *. ,,;t^B -COpR?)*' . P k r & m ? : \ ,./ / i //'MR! HEINEMAN: / No objection. \ - /- ' ' .THE COURT!1 Th^lk you. - It'will. be admitted , ,-U- " -- ` ^ 'r J without, objection.;. Q (By Mr. Carr) -Doctor, the subject of that> '3 i B A Y O N N E , N.J. 070 0 2 'F O R M tL 24 B 162 l meeting had "ittoif^do- Wi;th/n'^EPA.paper/, "and a paper from the u'V''Y/* -;V 'isi-:? ,,2 Canadian Health Department,m did it not, sir? ';- 3 . .- A Yes, sir..: ; .'X ,/ .. c\? i... ' . .. <** `*il< ;V'*- 4' -r. ` ~s i f ? - f. / " t I '^ *- *- - ^ T^ v- 4 Q , .-And the point is what they' are trying, to do was to c . 5 develop ari a c c e p t a b l e ' ' l e v e l /fdr ,,exposure to TCDD? isn't 6 that correct, sir? \ * / - .> ; 7 ' Yes, sir. * v / J ' ^ ^ :\ '8 Q ` And, Dr. Levinskas points out, that'it.is difficult r t" "- , _i \ 9 to do it because TCDD is one of the most toxic man-made man- 10 inade organic chemicals known"given in a single dose, that it is U persistent'in the environment, and living organisms with-a half--, 12 time .life of, one' to/ten years, that it has a pronounced cumulative r 1 3 toxicity and has been shown to promote carcinogensis and.ffeet 1 4 reproduction* .hepatic function and immune function? isn't-that- 1 5 correct/ sir? " 1. , - .` 1, J ' ';. 16 - '"A". .,Yes,* sir. " ` //%;. ' ; "``v; / *v 1 , PENGAD CO.. BAYONNE. N.J. 07002 17 Q / Doctor, .he is ,,talking about, at this point in time, - 18 about human beings, isn't he,, sir? what is acceptable risk lev^l ' 19 for exposure to human beings? . / .' - 20 ."\-A v `;iesi' Y /:y ; /' -/\//' ' 21 Q ' j/isn' t he, sir? ' . ^ . 22 .A Yes, sir.1' : ^/ ,,- - ' j! , 1 ^^ * " ' y* ' 23.- ' Q-. And he has reported to your cpminitt'ee that TCDD has t 24 .a'pronounced cumulative,-toxicity, didn't he, sir? , A , Yes. _ "V '' .. - Z1''. 1 - Q That means in the human body as it accumulates it 1 i ,, " 1r ' 1 . , . i ` ('" J gets more toxic# doesn't it# sir?v 2 A No." it means with continued exposure you'll get an 3t effect. Xt doesn't mean it's building up. 4 Q What does cumulative mean# sir# if it doesn't mean 5 building up# accumulate? 6 A Cumulative can be either with accumulated effect or 7 accumulation of the chemical# either way. You can't' tell which 8 it is by what's stated here. Cumulative toxicity doesn't mean 9 cumulative of dioxin. 10 Q That's what you're talking about is TCDD? 11 A Yes. But he says cumulative toxicity# nt cumulativi 12 dose. 13 Q Well#, what he's saying that over a period of time th;. 14 can cause it's a toxic over a long period of time as well 15 then# is that .what he's saying? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Well# that- even makes it worse, doesn' t it, sir? 18 What he's saying is it's not an acute problem, that it's a 19 problem because of it's being in there for a long period of 20 time# one to ten years# it can become toxic then; isn't that 21 what he's saying then? 22 A That's true.' But he also says it's also one of the 23 most acute toxic chemicals in the first statement. 24 Q X don't think that helps us any. Doctor. If it's r"* ,, i1 s iT *'r.(V-/'j;1 V **- 1 o v .*1 164 on of the most acute toxic substances, and it's also one 1 of the-imosfr acute.substances on-a chronic or cumulative * 2 . r,, ' ' - ' . - ' 1 >' ^- 1. , , - ' ' .r. r. - V ~ - 1 '7- ' '-\-s*l'rryt , \ r*. V - .-.v basis, that makes it doubly .bad, doesn't it? V- L . 3.- ; * r .S; . ^ ` '*'*"*' ""a ? *J ^b 1- - b i i ' 4 's.l;* A This is. based von-animalv'data. . That's correct ^ ?!"7v .- , Q He'e talking bot human beingfl, he's not talking about, anisis*' t''6 ' ., ' - *, ,' r-*V i i.W ^ y ' 4 V', ' -* . ^F r; , A H*s talking aboutextrapolating from animal* to 8/ man*,. ' -r . *` \' * - ... - i , .*, - . \v ;: Q That's exactly what he's /doing ` 9' rvfB" io; . .*A, 'That*8' right* ; 7- 7- .r- ,* Q He' s saying it' s been shown to promote ,cancer 11 j j ? -i n ' He's talking about humane ;v1 c ,,v. -y.-;7 ''.;\7 ^ * \ v .13 / A No* he isnib; 7 ;-r" ;;/ 1 4 7 ; Q Sir? ,y; ". " 7/7' ' ` * 15'. V`*A. ,'Kb, ,he -Isn't,.?-r/' ";7^ \ '.. 16. . /. ; Q /. iboctor, ,X thought" you just agreed`that he was talking, about/what-is exposure toTCDD in. the human body, BAYONNE. N.J. 07001 FORM IL' 24 B r18.' v' A 'Tbs.'.-. 1 7" ' ; :V 19 > 7 ; .Q In the human being. . ; 1 V ,, 20 Av\'-Ha**a basing-** :r^ , i '' 7"^// ,- *2.1 * '22 . 23; " 7 :. Q He's basing his judgment bn what has. happened to ..L ^ ' " S ' - - r >-. r* . .J % animals. - ' ' / , -L A " Yes', .sir.\r :-v "l-. "J * J r-i. r 24 ' Q But it's his judgment that based upon what is happening to animals,, it is;a risk' to human beings because v 7< of what it can be to animals,-- j* ' ; * A ' Yes* .. r' > * 'i - *lr *, ; - VH , i 1-11 Q It may do that to human beings. That's what 1 * 4. , t r f, * 'J animal* studies are all'bout:; * ~ A That's right, Q He's also saying that it affects the reproduction the hepatic function and the immune function. Again that's a lot more than chioracne, isn't it, Dr, Roush? A Yes. Q Dr. Roush, it is Monsanto's view, notwithstanding what's been reported to the--back up a little bit. Was it ever contemplated that what was going to be said in the Biohazards Committee meetings would ever be made public? A Ho,. No, these were internal minutes so that the committee.can refer back to them on,subsequent times, Q . I understand. I understand perfectly, what you are saying* You can be more forthcoming and frank, and honest In the minutes of a meeting that you think won't be made public than you would be in a document that you would think that would be made public; is that correct, Dr, Roush? A X think you have to be more careful, in the preciseness of your words, at least. V 166 r* rJ ,,,*r' * ^ -s * A ,, .' \ ,` 1 /'r ;' % .1 * .. K' ' ; ^ i ^ " ,'' ' iL; *" \ JTir1* ` ,,-rJ'Tw,,' J" /!t'J ,. '< " .'. if- ;Vr V-- !.<:iV.JUlif iifii,V .: V' v -..,7'iV ' // >.fA > - . ;-1 ' ,.- 1 V Q Well, youv a l l w h e n y o u ware^saying-' these;things,; 2 .3 r 4 ;. 5 '6 . -7 you; didn't ekpact;thatiit would-be read in court someday, , .-v , ' <;*;' f H /:r>; iry.'&; - / v/-v ^ .did-you, Doctor? ..o r' - ,, "j J 1. ^ ^ f A No; Iait1; v \u % . f* ~* '. * `Vtl:i ' ' 1 \ ,V - ` Q All right. -And Doctor, this does hot support i1 v > ' " I k* ' * *v f # -your position, your public-- your publicly pronounced 1 " r* * l "f ^ t j. " * _ * ^ ^ 1 * ^ F \ ' T j V J, i*< w" t ` ,1 '* , .- , '* P poaitiony Dr# Roush,* or;Monsanto that the only ,thing that '8. you can get wrong with you, from dioxin exposure is chlor- ; 9 - acn^ ItdoQsn'tsupportthat, does it, sir? " 10 " A It doesn* t -quarrel with it. ,, 11 r Q - Doctor, it 3 aysi here' that you can get cancer ^ ' 12 it affects' reproduction. it affects hepatic function,' c 13- it affects the inasiine function. /Now that's one hell of r , - v `" - -r. ' J''; - , `. . r , - - * " ' '-'V-`'r , : -f 14 ` a lot more than chloracne, isn't it, sir? J- PENGAD.CO.. BAYONNE, N.J, 0TO02 FORM IL 24 B 15 A Yesf but;this is in a rat. ." ^ r v j 16 V q .I'm ^crry?;;v^|::/;. _V- ' v> r;v:- ; r_ L'r. 17 * A This is in aJratv - J, A' ' v ` 18- Q But we just es :abli8hed that your toxieologist 19 extrapolated that- to human beings, and that^ he believed 20 !` 21 that it represents a;risk to human beinge, didti't we just ,, ; j -j v `:>` - establish that, Dr.; Roush? 22lf - A - ``Yes. *; \*- '^r / ' v._ - 23; ; Q Yes.* Doctor; he goes on to say things that we've, 24 discussed earlier with other witnesses about how-it persists /1 1 in subsurface soil, how it volatilized under some conditions 2 and though it has a relatively low vapor pressure, and 3 that soil bacteria doesn't affect it. Does he say that, 4 sir? 5 A Yes. 6 Q And, Doctor, that again is consistent with a 7 view that if somebody is living on and walking over soil 8 that has TCD in it that they may well be exposed and be 9 taking in that vapor; isn't that correct, sir? 10 A Albeit small. 11 Q I'm sorry? 12 A But it'8 very small. 1 3 Q The answer to my question is yes, that's true, 14 but it's small? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Doctor, he goes on to point out that it is 17 extraordinarily difficult to extrapolate these toxlcltles 18 to man simply because the sensitivity of man to dioxin is 19 not yet known, doesn't he, sir? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And, Doctor, he goes on to talk about how the 22 estimating*-the variation in estimating no-effect levels, 23 species sensitivity to acute and chronic intake, skin 24 intake and the absorption from the gut would lead to a 1 variation of thirty thousand fold in estimating risk to man* 2 A Yes. sir. 3 Q Mow, that shows indeed that the difficult problem 4 of predicting what's going to happen in each human being, 5 doesn't It. air? 6 A Yes* 7 Q Because we know that just as animals differ from 8 man, individuals differ from one another as to how they 9 resist cancer, how they can resist diseases, how they 10 resist infections. We know that too, don't we, sir? 11 A Yes. 12 Q One person not with the same strong genetic 13 background that another might have might be one that's 14 more susceptible to disease, a person, an elderly person IS in a nursing home, or a hospital more susceptible to 16 disease, might be more susceptible to the risks of t c d d , 17 would he not, sir? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Doctor, the conclusion that was reached by your 20 committee after Dr. Levlnskas reported these things is that 21 it was impossible to determine what is a safe level of 22 dioxin. 23 A That's right. 24 Q And that is still true today, is it not, sir? 169 1 2 -- 3' 4. 5 6 7- 8 .9 10 11 12 13 14 ' 15' 16 17. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A .GDC came ut with a p 6sition-- Q Excuse ma, Dr. Roush. You have a committee made of prestigious men, Duke University, New York University, ^ 4j University of Pittsburg, and yourself, and that committee said that It's presently Impossible to determine what is a safe level of dioxin, did it not, sir? A Yes. Q And that Is still presently that committee's view, is it not, sir? , A I can't answer that question. Probably yes. Q Have you seen any committee meeting,bulletins,, memos, statements in which they say now they can determine what is a safe level of dioxin, or is this the last pro nouncement of the committee on the point? A. This is the last time we've discussed it with them, Q All right. ; ; ,J , THE COURT:. Gentlemen, could I see you up at the * bench for a minute, please. MR. CARR* Your Honor, X know what you're going to do, t forgot one thing. , Q (By Mr. Carr) The Crump extrapolation, Crump by the way, isn't he one of the experts that's going to be called in this case? J A X don't think so. .r PENCAD CO:. 1 Q He may not be. I may be confusing him. He is 2 a risk assessor, is he not? He assesses risks? 3 A He's one who worked out one of the models for 4 testing of risks. 5 Q All right. He said that in his judgment from 6 this extrapolation that it's one tenth of a minimum ex 7 posure, calculated from one part per billion in soil, 8 isn't it, sir? 9 A Yes. 10 Q What he's saying, what's a tenth of a billion? 11 It's not a trillion. 12 A No. It's one in ten billion. 13 Q One tenth of a billion Is some fraction thereof. 14 What he's saying there is the risk level, the minimum 15 exposure is from an even smaller amount than one part per 16 billion in soil, Isn't he, sir? 17 A Yes. 18 Q One tenth of one billion. All right. That's 19 all I wanted to point out. 20 21 (This colloquy was held at the bench out of 22 the hearing of the jury.) 23 THE COURT: Is there anything that we have to 24 do in chambers? * - ;'* l \C * ' -J. J { 1 MR, HEINEMANj Not that I'm aware of. 2 THE GOURTi Fine. Then we'll break then until Monday. 3 4 (At this point colloquy was held back in the 5 6 hearing of the Jury.) 7 THE COURT: All right. Ladles and gentlemen 8 it's a pretty afternoon and it's Friday so we're going to break at this time. Me will start again Monday morning 9 10 at ninethirty. I would remind all of you on any overnight v 11 break, Including the week-end break, that you're not to 12 discuss this matter among yourselves, with anyone outside 13 the jury panel, or as yet form any opinions or conclusions 14 about the matters on trial. I'd also remind'you that you 1 5 are not to read, or listen or watch anything about this 16 case, in particular, or subject matter in general in any 17 of the media, print or electronic. Thank you for your 18 attention and patience this week. Me*11 see you Monday. 19 .Court is adjourned. 20 21 (End of day 5-31-85) 22 23 24 -i * 1 wi 1 r 3 4 '5' 6, 7- , 8" -9 - IQ' n 12 Y 13 14 15 16 17 : 18 19 2' 0V :v 21 22 'J 23 , 2 4 STATE OF ILLINOIS . ) \- ) COUNTY OF ST. CLAIR ) Vr ': f I, KATHLEEN W;: BRUNSMANN, CSR, RPR, Official; ,, Court Reporter in and for. the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, do hereby certify that the foregoing transcript of / S 1 \ri V \ ^ ` '- proceedlng is a true and accurate; record of th pro-. V I, ' T t *' V- L .* y' , * f: ^P r L ceedings had in the case ofi Frances. E.JRessner, et al v. Monsanto Company, cse number 80-L-970 had on the 31st. day of May, 1985, These proceedings;had before the *- m* j * 1p ^ ^ j. ,, i/ . ^^ ^ ^ Honorable :Richard P *.Goldenhersh, Judge. z1 Dated this day,,of June, 1985. ; , , -/ Kathleen W. Brunsmann, CSR, RPR .Official Court Reporter ; % t .i. ` * :1'- * r - ' 11 -'f'.$>C,i-v'/> i",* ,, \y 1 t.* 1-' ,J -^ rV\v;, ^ /- * it*'. . i r Li v .v1;1 . "V l ^* *:\,if V v4*--/ ?\\ "*.W-. *J(r ' 4` ^ - w 1"' I ^ STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) 2 COUNTY OF ST. CLAIR ) '` \, 3 4 If KATHLEEN W, BRUNSMANN, CSR, RPR, Official 5 Court Reporter in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, 6 do hereby certify that the foregoing transcript of 7 proceedings is a true and accurate record of the pro 8 ceedings had in the case of: Frances E. Keraner, et al 9 v. Monsanto Company, case number S0-L-970 had on the 10 '31st day of May, 1985. These proceedings had before the 11 Honorable Richard P. Goldenhersh, Judge. 12 Dated this 7^day of June, 1985, 13 14 15 16 OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS ) .) 2 COUNTY OF ST* CLAIR ) 3T * -V 4 , I, HONORABLE RICHARD P. GOLDENHERSH, Circuit Judge 5 in and for the Twentieth judicial Circuit* do hereby certify 6 that the foregoing transcript of proceedings is a true and 7 accurate record, of the proceedings had in the case of t 8 ' Frances E. Ksmner, et al v. Monsanto Company p case number 9 80-L-970 had on the 31st day of May, 1985* 10 Dated this- -- day of June, 1985. 11- 12 13 M 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24