Document MJLr52Nkx7pQEK1M5XwJmp179

) 1 A It is. Q Now, and what they said there with regard to this, Mr. Hudnall, isn't this true, sir, what they said there, "Mr. Hudnall complained vigorously about a 5 multiplicity of symptoms which included pains in the lower 6 extremities and hips, fatigue, loss of his teeth, which he 7 claimed was due to chloracne, poor appetite following work, 8 and a persistent cutaneous eruption. He talked continuously 9 throughout the examination and it was the unanimous 10 impression of the examining team that some of the 11 descriptions of symptoms were we 11-seasoned with 12 exaggeration." Isn't that what you all said at that time 13 with regard to Mr. Hudnall? 14 A That was a discreet way of putting it, sir. 15 Q Would you answer my question, please? 16 A Y e s . 17 Q And Mr. H u d n a l 1 at that time was 63 years of age 18 and he had indeed developed severe eruption of his face, 19 trunk, and extremities, had he not, sir? On Page 12, Dr. 20 Suskind, isn't that the way his problems are described, his 21 erupt ion? 22 A That's how he described it, sir. 23 Q Isn't that, well, th a t 's how your examining team 24 describes the complaints that he gave or the description that 25 he gave of his-- 122 1 A Those are the complairjits, sir, yes, sir. 2 Q And he was sent to a Clermatologist and continued 3 under dermatologic therapy until February, 1953, did he not, 4 sir? 5 A That's true, sir. 6 Q But the fact this dermatologist thought that he 7 should be treated, would that sup;;aort his comp 1aints that he 8 had a severe eruption in *49, that he was being treated with 9 therapy until February of *53? 10 A Not necessarily, sir, no. 11 Q, Doctor, wouId the fact, if the dermatologist was 12 treating it, he must have seen something there to treat or 13 else he wouId be taking money under false pretences. 14 A He was sent to the dermatologist because of his 15 c h 1oracne, sir. It co u 1d have been mild, it c o u 1d have been 16 moderate, it couId have been severe. 17 Q Doctor, if he had a condition that existed and 18 required him getting therapy from a dermatologist for a 19 period of four years, you co u 1dn* t very well call that mild, 20 could you, sir? 21 A I hadn't seen him, so I ca n rt tell you, sir. 22 Q Doctor, my question is, if he had required and 23 was being treated by a dermatologist with therapy for a 24 period of four years following the outbreak of his condition, 25 you couldn't very well call that mild, could, you, sir? 123 1 A I don*t know, sir. i N 2 1 Q Doctor, do you understand what I am asking you? 3 A Yes, I do indeed. 4 Or And Doctor, a dermatologist would not treat 5 somethin for four years if it were a mild eruption in 1949. 6 A Yes, they might. 7 Q They might? 8 'a Sure. 9 a A mild eruption could take four years to treat, 10 sir? 11 A Chloracne is not very responsive to treatment, 12 wasn't responsive to treatment in those years, sir, as I 13 pointed out in this report. 14 Q And Doctor, do you have any indication at all 15 that he exaggerated when he said it was a severe eruption on 16 his face that required this treatment for four years? 17 A On Page 13, there is a statement, some of the 18 descriptions of symptoms were well-seasoned with 19 exaggeration. Now, whether or not that pertained to his 20 acne, I don't have any idea. 21 Q Well, they c o u 1d have been pertaining to the 22 complaint about the loss of teeth, couldn't it, Doctor? 23 A It c o u 1d have. 24 Q Yes. And it could be that like the others who 25 got the pain in the 1ower extremities and hips and fatigue on 124 .y 1 exertion, he could indeed have had those problems- couldn't 2 he, sir? 3 A He could have. 4 Q It would be consistent with what these others 5 had, wouldn't it, sir? 6 A It might be. 7 Q And if he had pains In his extremities and hips, 8 that would be consistent with what the others had as well in 9 1953, wouldn't it, sir? 10 A It oould be. 11 Q Well, it c o u 1d be. We have twenty-three-12 A But it also could not be. 13 CL Excuse me, Dr. Suskind, if you let me finish the 14 question, please. He was one of the twenty-three that had 15 these complalnts of pain in the hips and extremities, wasn't 16 he, sir? 17 A On your chart, I believe he is listed. 18 Q He is one of the twenty-three that you said had 19 these complaints of pain, that you interpret the record as 20 having pain. 21 A That's true, sir. 22 Q. Sir? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Yes. And Doctor, your next one, Harold Young, is 25 he an exaggerater in your judgment, Doctor? 125 1 A No, sir. V 2 Q. According to the record here? 3 A His history, I believe, was accurate. 4 Q My question is, was he an exaggerater? 5 A No, sir, he was not an exaggerater. 6 CL 7 judgment? J.A. Hurl ey* was he an exaggerater in your 8 A No. 9 CL Now, Mr. Haro 1d Young at the time, four years 10 after this exposure, he had aching in his legs and feet, 11 didn't he, sir? 12 A He did. 13 And that is an indication of nerve damage, isn't 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q it, sir? A CL 126 It might be. Mr. J.A. Hurley also had pains in the hips and 1 have here that would suggest these findings were-,associated 2 with anything other than the exposure to these chemicals? 3 A Yes, sir. 4 a What is that, sir? 5 A His age. 6 Q His age? 7 A Urn h mm. 8 Q Doctor, you took a nerve biopsy of this man and 9 found that his nerve was destroyed? 10 A Urn hmm. 11 a Does nerve destruction come in a man that1s sixty 12 years of age? Is that a part of the process of aging, the 13 m y e 1in sheath and the nerve fibers are destroyed? 14 A If he had a disc-- 15 Q Any Indication that he had a disc here? 16 A We didn't examine him for that, sir. 17 Q Where do you find the nerve destruction if one 18 has a disc? 19' A Where do you find it? 20 Q Yes, where do you find the nerve destroyed? 21 A The peripheral nerve might be destroyed, might be * 22 damaged. I(23 Q Where is the site of destruction with a disc V problem of the nerve? 25 A The site' of destruction is the peripheral nerve. \ 127 1Q 2 Doctor? Where on the peripheral nerve is it destroyed, * 3 A It could be the full length of the nerve. 4 Q Oh, Doctor, that's if it atrophies and goesaway. 5 We are talking about nerve destruction that comes with a 6 ruptured disc. A ruptured disc, if it damages the nerve, 7 damages the nerve where the disc ruptures, does it not, sir? 8 A Not necessarily. It could impinge on the-- 9 Q. And, Doctor, that's where the nerve gets 10 destroyed, isn't it, sir? 11 A Andosteoarthritis might do the same thing. 12 Q Gut again, it is osteoarthritis at the point of 13 impingement-- 14 A And it could be bilateral. 15 Q And the nerve destruction takes p 1ace at the pi ace 16 where the disc presses upon the nerve, rubs it, makes scars, 17 destroys it, isn't that correot, sir? 18 A That is true, sir. 19 Q It doesn't destroy the nerve down in the leg, 20 sir? 21 A Oh, yes, it does, sir. 22 Q By rubbing and destroying? 23 A Yes, sir. 24 Q Oh, Doctor, how can it rub and destroy the nerve 25 down in the leg--Doctor, let me finish my question, please, 128 1 air. 2 A I thought you finished, sir. 3 Q The disc is in the baok, is itnot, sir? 4 A Again-- 5 Q The disc is in the back? 6 A The disc is in the spine, sir. 7 Q Yes, whioh is part of the back, isit,not, sir? 8 A Part of the spine and the nerve goes outthrough 9 the or if ice. 10 Q, Doctor, If you don't mind answering my questions, 11 please, sir, and wait until I ask them before you answer 12 them. The disc Is between the vertebrae in the spine, part 13 of the back, isn*t that correct, sir? 14 A That's true. 15 Q And when the disc ruptures, it protrudes out and 16 presses against the nerve? 17 A Right. 18 Q Presses against the nerve rootsadjoining the 19 disc, isn't that correct, sir? 20 A True. 21 Q And it presses on that and sometimes if it is a 22 severe rupture, it will press and cause scarring on that 23 nerve root, won't it, sir? 24 A It w i 11 even cause atrophy. 25 Q. Excuse m e , Doctor. C o u 1d you answer that 129 1 question, please, sir? 2 A It causes scarring, among other things, y e s . 3 Q And, Doctor, if it is there long enough that it 4 deprives that nerve of its functioning ability, it can indeed 5 cause an atrophy of that nerve which in fact will cause an 6 atrophy of the muscles indeed, isn't that correct, sir? 7 A That could be so. 8 Q Was there any evidence of any atrophy of the 9 nerve and the muscles on the part of M r . Hurley to suggest a 10 disc disease? 11 A I don't believe that he had a-12 Q Excuse me, could you answer that question, 13 p 1ease? 14 A The answer is no, but you don't have to have 15 atrophy of the muscle. 16 Q. You have to have atrophy of the nerve, do you 17 not, sir? 18 A Any neurologist or orthopedic surgeon knows that 19 you do not have to have atrophy of the muscle. 20 Q. Don't tell me what any orthopedist knows, because 21 I have examined many, many orthopedists.' Please confine your 22 answers to your opinion and not what you think somebody else 23 might tel 1 you. Now, Doctor, in this case, if you don* t 24 mind, was there any mention--he was examined by a competent 25 neurologist, was he not, sir? 130 1 A He was. \ 2 Q. Did the neurologist make any statement that he 3 had a ruptured di so? 4 A I don* t believe that there Is a neuropathology 5 statement in this report, but the report of the neurologists, 6 I believe, Is not Included here. ) 7 Q Dootor, we have the report of the 8 neuropathologist, and It Is In evi dence in the 1949, 9 conneoted with the 1949 examination, isn't It, sir? 10 A Right. 11 Q And he was seen by a neurologist and by 12 neuropathologists at that time, wasn* t he, sir? 13 A The sections were read by a neuropatho1ogist. 14 Q Excuse me, sir, could you answer my question, 15 pi ease, sir? 16 A He was seen by a neuro1ogist, but not by the 17 neuropathologist. 18 Q The neuropathologistexamined his nervetissue. 19 A I believe so, right. 20 Q Now, did the n e u r o 1ogi st make any statement at 21 any time in 1949 or thereafter that his, the destruction of 22 this nerve tissue and of the m y e 1in sheath was caused by a 23 disc problem? 24 A The neuropathologist didn't concern himself with 25 that, sir. 131 't* " J?., 1 Q Doctor, my question was the neurologist--did the 2 neurologlst make any statement anywhere in the report that the 3 destruction of the nerve fibers and the myelin sheath was 4 caused by a disc problem? 5 A There is no statement by the neurologist at all, 6 sir. 7 Q Then is the answer to my question that the 8 neuro1ogi st did not make any such finding? 9 A Well, the neurologist didn't report in here. 10 Q Now, Doctor, the neurologlst did report based 11 upon his examination of Mr. Hurley, he found the things that 12 he discovered, did he not, sir? We have gone through this 13 before. He found the deep tendon reflexes were hyperactive 14 in both 1ower extremities; that he had a diminution to all 15 modalities, did he not, sir? 16 A He did. 17 Q And, Doctor, did he report at that time or any 18 other time that M r . H u r 1e y 's prob1ems were associated with a 19 ruptured disc or any other disc patho logy? 20 A He did not so state, sir. 21 Q Did the neuropathologlst make .a report that he 22 found an atrophied nerve? 23 A He did. 24 Q Where did he make such a report, Doctor? Do you 25 have the exhibit with you, Doctor? 132 1 A What the neuropathologist said here, -is that-- 2 Q And, excuse me, Dootor what I want you to do is 3 first find the report. 4 A I have the report in my hand, sir. 5 Q And where in the report, point it out to me, 6 please sir where he says the nerve is atrophied direct me 7 to the paragraph. 8 A The loss of neurof ibers as seen in some bund 1es 9 is atrophied sir. 10 Q Did you read the word "atrophied" in there? 11 Where is the word "atrophy"? Point that out to me w o u 1d you 12 please, sir? 13 A It is a refiection of that-14 Q Point out the word "atrophy" to me, Dr. Suskind. 15 A No, it doesn* t say atrophy. 16 Q You read that in there? 17 A No, sir, that* s what it means, sir. 1 am 18 answering as a physician who knows something about this. 1*m 19 ' answering correct 1y , sir. 20 Q Did I ask you to tel 1 me what it meant? 21 A I am tel 1ing you what it meant. 22 Q I know you are. But did I ask you to do that? 23 A That* s my responsibi1ity, sir. 24 Q Doctor, your responsibility is to answer the 25 questions that counsel give you and to follow the 133 1 instructions of the Court, it is not to tell me what 2 questions 1should ask you. Now, what 1 asked you, Doctor? 3 A The word "atrophy" is not in here, sir. 4 Q No, Doctor. Now, point out to me, sir, the 5 section that you say means atrophy of the nerve. Could you 6 point it out to me, please, sir? 7 A "There appears to be a--" 8 Q Point it out to me, sir. 9 A I w i 11 read it, sir. 10 Q I want you to point it out to me. 11 A It is on the fourth line and below that. 12 Q It is the last sentence in the first paragraph, 13 is that right, sir? 14 A That is. 15 Q And Doctor, what it says is, "There appears to be 16 a diffuse loss of neurofibrils in many of the nerves and 17 those remaining show in many cases distortion, tortuosity, 18 and localized swelling," isn't that correot, sir? 19 A That* s true, sir. 20 Q Now, Doctor, if a nerve atrophies, it diminishes 21 in size-22 A It also-23 Q. Excuse me, cou1d you answer that question, 24 please, sir? If a nerve atrophies, it diminishes in size, 25 doesn't it, sir? 134 1 A The fibrils are destroyed, sir. v 2 Q Doctor, would you answer my question, please? 3 MR. CARR: Would you read the question to him 4 again? 5 (Previous question, "Now, Doctor, if 6 a nerve atrophies, it diminishes in 7 size, doesn't it, sir?" was read- 8 by the reporter.) 9 A Atrophy may mean diminished In size. 10 Q Now, Doctor, atrophy does mean, among other 11 things, di minishment in size, diminution in size? 12 A Yes. 13 Q There 1s no question that 1f something is 14 atrohled, it is also reduced in size? 15 A As you state it-- 16 Q C o u 1d you answer that question? 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q It is always reduced In size, isn't it, sir, if 19 it atrophied? 20 A The fibrils are reduced in size. 21 Q But they're there, aren't they, sir? 22 A They might not be, 23 Q No, they are there, but smaller, aren't they, 24 sir? 25 A N o , sir. 135 '1 Cl Oh, Doctor, you just got through saying they're 2 reduced in size. 3 A Atrophy may mean disappearance of, 4 Q Doctor, you just got through saying reduced in 5 size, didn't you, sir? 6 A Among other things you said, and I agreed with 7 you. 8 Q N o , you are the one that says reduced in size, 9 Doctor. Now, atrophy, the thing is there. In this case, the 10 neurofibrils were destroyed. There was a loss of 11 neurofibrils, wasn't there, sir? 12 A That is-13 Q It doesn't say a loss in size, does it, sir? 14 A That is part of atrohy, sir. 15 Q Could you answer my question, please? 16 A Yes, sir, I am happy to do that. 17 Q. It doesn't say the neurofibrils diminished in 18 size, it says there was a loss of neurofibri1s . 19 A Which is characteristic of atrophy, y e s . 20 MR. CARR: Your Honor, would you ask the witness 21 to answer ray question and ask the Jury to disregard the 22 statement he made? 23 THE COURT: Please answer the question, and the 24 last remark, the Jury is ordered to disregard it. 25 A I am doing the best I can to answer it. 136 1 THE COURT: Doctor, answer it. The question Is 2 clearly stated. Answer it. 3 Q Would you answer the question, please, sir? 4 A Would you repeat the question, sir? . 5 (Previous question, "It doesn't say 6 neurofibrils diminished in size, it 7 says there was a loss of neurofibrils," 8 was read by the reporter.) 9 A That is true, sir. 10 Q Yes, and Dootor, it goes on to say that those 11 remaining after discussing, after mentioning there was a 12 diffuse loss of neurofIbrl1s, it goes on to say that those 13 remaining show in many cases distortion, does it not, sir? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Tortuosity? 16 A Yes. 17 Q And localized swelllng, doesn't it, sir? 18 A Yes, sir. 19 Q. Now, the nerve'swe 11s , It Increases In size, 20 doesn* t it, sir? 21 A Yes. '> 22 Q And if a nerve is atrophied, I think you said 23 earlier that it always is diminished in size, didn't you, 24 sir? 25 A Not always, sir. 137 1 Q Oh, Doctor, but I Insist that you did, say If it 2 is atrophied it is always diminished in size. 3 MR. HEINEMAN* Objection, your Honor, the record 4 speaks for Itself. 5 MR. CARR: Indeed, it does. 6 THE COURT: The objection is overruled. 7 Q. Did you not say that, sir? 8 A Atrophied means diminished in size. 9 Q Yes, Doctor, and a nerve, a neurofibril that is 10 swollen is not diminished in size. 11 Q Yes, Dootor, and a nerve, a neurofibril that is 12 swollen is not diminished in size, it is Increased in size, 13 isn* t it, sir? 14 A Yes. 15 Q. Yes. Now, Doctor, have you stated anywhere that 16 this nerve destruction was a result of a disc injury? 17 A We have not, sir. 18 Q Have you ever said it even orally any place? 19 A We have considered it. 20 Q My question is, have you ever said it even orally 21 any p 1ace? 22 A You mean in public? 23 Q That this man's nerve destruction, myelin sheath 24 destruction was a result of disc injury. 25 A 1 don't believe so. 138 1 Q As a matter of fact, you have published in a 2 number of oases that it is the result of exposure to dioxin, 3 haven't you, sir? 4 A Yes, sir. No--okay, yes. 5 Q And you have told the world that the myelin 6 degeneration problem that he had and the nerve destruction 7 that he had was one of the human health effeots of exposure 8 to TCDD, haven't you, sir? 9 A It might be, sir. 10 Q Now, Doctor, that's what you said, did you not, 11 in Monsanto's exhibit right here and in other exhibits? 12 A A 1 1 that indicates-13 Q Excuse me, Doctor, isn't that what you said in 14 exhibit-15 A A 1 1 it indicates is what is reported-16 MR. CARRs Would you direct the witness to wait 17 u n t i 1 I've finished the.question? 18 THE COURT! Doctor, I've asked you four times 19 this afternoon, you are supposed to wait unti1 the attorneys 20 finish the question before you answer. *> 21 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 22 Q Doctor, isn* t it stated in Monsanto's Exhibit 23 1629B that human health effects from TCDD, whether it is 24 subacute or subchronic on a laboratory finding, you w i 11 find 25 a myeI in degeneration on biopsy? 139 1 A . I n one case, sir. 2 v.. MR. CARRi Your Honor, would you direct the 3 witness to answer my question? 4 THE COURT! Doctor, that was not responsive. > 5 A Yes. 6 . THE COURT! 11m sorry, I didn't hear your answer. 7 A Yes. 8 Q And, Doctor, the case in questionwe are talking 9 about, Mr. Hurley, isn't it, sir? 10 A It is indeed. 11 Q And you didn't say that one of the findings on 12 TCDD exposure would be a ruptured disc, did you, sir? 13 A No, sir. 14 Q. And you didn't say that this nerve was atrophied 15 any place, did you, sir? 16 A I don * t believe s o . 17 0 All right. Now, Dootor, theproblems of Mr. 18 Hurley are indeed prob1eras that you believed then and that 19 you be 1ieve now are associated with the dioxin exposure, 20 isn't that correct, sir? 21 A Yes. 22 1 And, Doctor-23 A We didn't believe it then because we didn't know 24 It was, sir. 25 Q You knew he was exposed to something, you 140 1 couldn't Identify what it was at that time. We went through 2 that. 3 A That is correct, sir. 4 Q But you believe that the loss of his nerve, the 5 problems that he had were associated with whatever he was 6 exposed to, did you not, sir? 7 A At that time, we believed it, yes, sir. 8 Q And you sti11 believe thattoday? 9 A I'm not sure, sir. 10 Q Doctor, have you ever stated anywhere except 11 perhaps in this Court for the first time that it could be 12 caused by anything else other than the TCDD exposure? 13 A In our record, I think, of M r . Hurley in 1979, 14 there is a statement about his having osteoarthritis, sir. 15 Q Doctor, in 1979, the man would surely have 16 osteoarthritis, wouId he not, sir? 17 A But he had the same symptoms, sir. 18 Q Doctor, did you find in 1953 that he had 19 osteoarthritis? 20 A We did not examine an x-rayof the spins, sir. 21 Q You looked at x-rays, didyou not? 22 A* Not of the spine, sir. 23 Q Doctor, did you make any statement at a l 1 in 1953 24 that this might be caused by osteoarthritis? 25 A We did not. 141 1. Q And Doctor the osteoarthritis that he would have 2 in the spine would not cause this destruction of nerve tissue 3 in the leg would It sir? 4 A Yes, sir. 5 Q. And Doctor, if it did, it w o u 1d have had to 6 destroy the nerve tissue the entire length of the leg, 7 wouldn't it, sir? It would have to be the atrophy that we 8 just went through. 9 A Not all the fibrils, sir. It depends upon the 10 pressure. 11 Q. r Doctor, did you ever have any evidence of 12 pressure upon any nerve by osteoarthritis at any time? 13 A In this man? 14 Q In this man. 15 A We only discovered it in 1979. 16 Q Excuse me, Doctor. My question is did you ever 17 have any evidence in 1979 or any other time that his 18 arthritic condition was causing nerve destruction or pressure 19 on a nerve? 20 A No, but it could be associated with it. 21 MR. CARR: Your Honor, would you ask the Jury to 22 disregard the last statement of the witness? 23 THE COURT: The Jury is so instructed. It was 24 not responsive to the question. Doctor, I'm asking you again 25 to keep your responses limited to the questions. 142 1 Q Doctor, is there anything In the repart dealing 2 with Mr. Hurley to suggest that his problems in 1953 so far 3 as you are concerned was caused by anything other than the 4 dioxin association? 5 A We didn't know about dioxin at the time, sir. 6 But, no, we thought it was due to the exposure. 7 Q. And Doctor, was he considered-- did you answer my 8 question, did you consider--you did not consider him an 9 exaggerater, did you, sir? 10 A 1 don't believe so. 11 Q Doctor, D. Meadows, was he an exaggeraterin 1953 12 to your judgment, sir? 13 A No. 14 Q Mr. Donald Stover--Doctor, if you don'tmind, we 15 w i 11 never get finished if you continue to volunteer 16 something beyond the question that 1 have asked you. Dona 1d 17 , was he an exaggerater, sir? 18 A No. 19 Q Char 1es Arthur, was he an exaggerater, sir? 20 A No. 21 Q William Workman, was he an exaggerater, sir? 22 A I don* t be 1leve so. 23 Q H.0. Young, was he an exaggerater, sir? 24 A No. 25 Q William H. Smith, was he an exaggerater, sir? 143 V 1 A . No. V 2 Q Mr. E.U. Beckman, was he an exaggerater, sir? 3 A No. 4 Q Mr. Uillard Forbes, was he an exaggerater, sir? 5 A No. 6 Q You be 1ieve that he had those pains, did you not, 7 and they persisted? 8 A Yes. 9 Q M r . Char 1es Far 1ey, was he an exaggerater, sir? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And what in his statement in the report makes you 12 cone 1ude that he was an exaggerater, sir? 13 A His answers about hl's symptoms were glib and he 14 seemed anxious to impress the examiner with his symptoms. 1.5 Q Doctor, we discussed Mr. Farley before, and the 16 fact that a man Is glib by itself or may appear to be gllb 17 doesn't mean that he exaggerates, does it, sir? 18 A Not necessarily. 19 Q And the fact that he is anxious to 1mpress the 20 examiner with his symptoms, that doesn't mean he exaggerates 21 either, does it? 22 A That's right, sir. 23 Q And this man told you, did he not, sir, that he 24 has lost no time from work because of the problem? 25 A Yes. 144 1 Q And Doctor, then what in this report^ is there 2 that indicates to you that Mr. Farley was an exaggerater? 3 A - That he seemed to--he wanted to impress the 4 examiner with his symptoms. 5 Q And Doctor, because somebody wants to impress the 6 man with his symptoms, that means he exaggerates them? 7 A He might, yes. 8 Q He might, again, Doctor, you are speculating. 9 A In our judgment, that means exaggeration, sir. 10 Q In our judgment, that means exaggeration? Did 11 you put that in there about M r . Farley that he may be 12 exaggerating his symptoms? 13 A No, but I think one can-- 14 Q. Excuse me, did you put in the record that he was 15 exaggerating his symptoms? 16 A What you said is the same thing. 17 Q Would you answer my question, sir? 18 A No, I did not. 19 Q You did put in your report' on the earlier 20 individual, Mr. Hudnali, I believe, that you thought his 21 statements were we 1I-seasoned with exaggeration, didn't you, 22 sir? 23 A Yes, sir. 24 Q But you didn't say that about Mr. Farley? 25 A No, I did not. 145 1 Q Maxwell Galloway, Is he an exaggerater? 2 A I don't believe so. 3 Q B a s l 1 Hoffman, is he an exaggerater? 4 A No. 5 A Emmett Null, was he an exaggerater, sir? 6 A No. 7 Q Mi 1lard MoClanahan, was he an exaggerater, sir? 8 A No. 9 Q. W i l 1iam Simmons, was he an exaggerater, sir? 10 A No. 11 a Ervin G. Bailey, was he an exaggerater, sir? 12 A No. 13 Q Ear 1 Harris , was he an exaggerater, Dr. Suskind? 14 A No. 15 Q George Farrell, was he an exaggerater, sir? 16 A No. 17 ft Roy Wright, was he an exaggerater, sir? 18 A No. 19 Q Ul 11 lam Saxton, was he an exaggerater? 20 A No. 21 Q Dona 1d Payne, was he an exaggerater? 22 A No. 23 Q Harold--Ron Jones, rather, was he an exaggerater? 24 A No. 25 Q Harold M c C 1anahan, was he an exaggerater? 146 1 A No. 2 Q. Was Harold Newcomer anexaggerater? 3 A No. 4 Q. James Kyle, was he an exaggerater? 5 A Yes, sir. 6 Q And, Doctor, what in the report tel Is you that he 7 was an exaggerater? 8 A In the report we regarded him as a-- 9 Q Doctor, what in the report-- 10 A A s a comp 1ainer. 11 Q Doctor, what in the report? 12 A May I finish, sir? 13 Q No, you may not, unless you respond to my 14 question. 15 A I'm going to respond, Page 39, sir. 16 Q Thank you, sir. And on Page 39, there is a- - in 17 the column under abnormal clinical findings, April, 1953, 18 there Is the word comp 1ainer, question mark, is there not, 19 sir? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Now, Doctor, if one is a -complainer, does that 22 1ead you to the conclusion that he Is an exaggerater? 23 A Could be, yes. 24 a Simply because he complains? 25 A Ye s . 147 / Q. Now, Doctor, anybody could be, but my question 1v is because someone complains, does that mean he ekaggerates? 2 A Exaggerated complaining is what 1 am talking 3 about. 4 Q. 5 \ But, Doctor, you didn't say the complaints were exaggerated, did you, sir? 6 A When we have "complainer", it means exaggerated 7 complaints. 8 Q My question is, you didn* t say that he 9 exaggerated his complaints, did you, sir? 10 11 A No, he did not. 12 Q You said he was a complainer,didn't you, sir? A Right. 13 14 Q And Doctor, there are a lot of people that are 15 complainers in this world, aren't there, sir? It is the 16 nature of some people to be a complainer, isn't it, sir? 17 Just like some people are stoic and never complain about 18 anything, some people complain, don't they, sir? A That's true, sir. 19 0. And what you found in this instance that this 20 gent 1eman was one of those persons categorized as a 21 complainer, questionably so, i3 that .right, sir? 22 23 A Yes, sir. 24 Q Now, Doctor, was Mr. Asbury an exaggerater? 25 A No. 148 1 Q And Mr. Dent, was he sir? 2 A No. X 3 Q Now, we have gone through all thirty-six, haven't 4 we, Doctor? 5 A Indeed. 6 Q And Doctor, of those thirty-six, you have 7 described three, possibly four people as exaggeraters, have 8 you not, sir? 9 A I have. 10 Q And, Doctor, that means that thirty-three of the 11 thirty-six you did not consider to be exaggeraters or thirty- 12 two to thirty-three, isn't that correct, sir? 13 A ThatTs true, sir. 14 Q Doctor, do you now be 1ieve that many of these 15 workers were exaggeraters or lied about their complaints of 16 pa in? 17 A Some of them did, sir. 18 Q Some of them, Doctor? I agree with you that some 19 of them did exaggerate according to your record, a 1though I 20 wouldn't agree with the conclusion, but you did report that 21 some of them complained, didn't you, -sir? 22 A Yes. 23 Q But you told us, told this Jury that many of them 24 complained, were exaggeraters, didn't you, sir? 25 A I said some of them. 149 1 Q No, Doctor, what you said was in your expansive 2 answer was that many of these workers exaggerated their 3 complaints and didn't tell the truth about them, isn't that 4 right, sir? 5 A Well, P m not sure 1 said that, sir, and P d like 6 to see it in-7 Q Well, that's the reason for the entire 8 examination here is that you made the statement that many of 9 these workers were exaggeraters. 10 A I'd 1ike to see that. 11 Q You may like to see it, but you can see it on 12 your own time, D r . Suskind, beoause that's the reason for 13 this examination, and in point of fact, there weren't many 14 that were exaggeraters, were there? 15 A There were some. 16 Q There were some, relatively few, isn't that 17 correct, sir? 18 A There were some. 19 Q. My question is, sir, there were relatively few, 20 weren't there, sir? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Yes. Now, Doctor, back to your meeting at the 23 Kettering Laboratory with the Monsanto p e o p 1e where you 24 recorded before we got diverted down this path, the statement 25 that you are reputed to have said there that there was no 150 1 sign of such disorder, that is evidence of nerve damage in 2 any of those people, isn't that what is reported there, sir? 3 The bottom of Page 2, Dr Suskind, It is what we were reading 4 when we got waylaid on this trip down--through the woods? 5 A And I indioated that was incomplete. 6 Q Doctor, if you don't mind, sir, have you found 7 the place? 8 A I have. 9 Q And it was stated there at this meeting by the 10 recorder of the minutes of the meeting that D r . Suskind 11 stated there was no sign of nerve damage in these peop1e .that 12 he examined in 1953, Isn't that correct, sir? 13 A That's what he wrote, sir, yes. 14 Q But in point of fact, there were signs of nerve 15 damage in twenty-three of these people, wasn't there, sir? 16 A No, sir. 17 Q How many were there, sir? 18 A Well, as I look at my record, and I have done 19 this.because you've asked me to, there is a signlficant-20 Q Doctor, what 1 asked you was how many people had 21 signed--Doctor, if you don't mind, please let me finish my 22 question. 23 MR. HEINEMAN: Objection, the question 24 interrupted the answer, your Honor. 25 THE COURT* Objection is overruled. 151 1 Q How many people-~how many people had signs of 2 nerve damage in 1953? 3 A I count ten. 4 'Q Now, Doctor, we went through it and what you.said 5 earlier was that ten had signifleant signs of nerve damage, 6 did you not, sir? 7 A Significant complaints, sir. 8 Q And those were significant sighs of nerve damage, 9 weren't they, sir? 10 A They might be. 11 Q ' All right. Now, Doctor, what we also went 12 through, though, is that aches and pains are also signs of 13 nerve damage, aren* t they, sir? 14 A They are not, no, no. 15 Q. Dido* t you agree ear 1ier that pains were, in legs 16 and arms and neck and back, were signs of nerve damage? 17 A 1 did not, sir. 18 Q You did not? You didn't do that? 19 A No, I said it might be. 20 Q Sir? 21 A It might be. ' 22 Q All right, Doctor, I will accept that it might 23 be. 24 A It might be, and it is a big might, sir. 25 Q And these pains, that these men had in these arms 152 1 and legs and backs and shou1ders might be evidence of nerve 2 damage? 3 A It might be. 4 Q But it was said here that there was no sign of 5 such disorder, wasn* t there, sir? 6 A That's an Inaccurate statement, sir. 7 Q That is Indeed, Isn't it, sir? 8 A Yes, it Is, and It is not mine. 9 Q Because you did find significant signs in ten and 10 other signs that might be in another thirteen, didn't you, 11 sir? 12 A No. 13 Q Didn't we go through that, Doctor? Didn't we 14 just say that these complaints of pain, if they were real and 15 existed, might be evidence of nerve damage, didn*t you just 16 say that ten seconds ago? 17 A I did indeed. 18 Q And Doctor, you went on to report there, you went 19 on to urge strongly according to this reporter that there 20 shouId be pub 1ication of all these results, did you n o t , sir? 21 A Not these results, sir. '1 ws^s talking about 22 laboratory studies. 23 Q, Excuse me, doesn't it say there that D r . Suskind 24 strongly urged that consideration be given to pub 1ication of 25 a l 1 experimental results? 153 1 A These are not experimental results, xsir. 2 Q. May I finish my question, Doctor? 3 A Sure, please. 4 Q. Does It not say in this III, which is discussing 5 these claims of damage, sir, in the very next sentence does 6 it not say, **Dr. Suskind strongly urged that consideration be 7 given to pub 1ication of all the experimenta 1 results obtained 8 to date so that it could be used most effectively in 9 defending Monsanto* s position**? Doesn*t it say that, sir? 10 A That* s what it says. 11 Q All right. Now, Doctor, you did, in fact, urge 12 that publIcatlon be made of a l 1 experimental results? 13 A I said consideration should be given. 14 Q My question Is, did you strongly urge that 15 consideration be given to publ1cation of experimental results 16 obtained to date? 17 A The experiments 1 results, yes. 18 Q Is the answer to my question that you did 19 s t r o n g l y u r g e i t ? 20 A Y e s , for the experiraenta1 results. 21 Q And did you urge it so that'it couId be used most 22 effectively in defending Monsanto* s position?" 23 A No, that*s Weger's view, not mine. 24 Q That was what was reported that you said, w a s n *t 25 it , s ir? 154 1 A He reported it that way. x. 2 Q And Doctor, it was reported-- 3 A But I*m not sure that I attributed that part to 4 me. It doesn't say that he attributed that part to me, sir. 5 Q Doctor, the sentence says, "Dr. Suskind strongly 6 urged it so that it couId be used most effectively in 7 defending Monsanto's position," isn't that right, sir? 8 A That's what it says, sir. 9 Q And in counter to that, it was pointed out that 10 none of the group present, that is from Monsanto, c o u 1d , are 11 in a position to give approval for such publlcation, lsn't 12 that right, sir? 13 A Correct, but that's inaccurate, too, sir. 14 Q Doctor, 1 wonder if you would, just try to 15 restrain yourself. Everything in this report may be 16 inaccurate. A 11 I have to go on, however, is this report. 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q All this Jury has to go on is this report. It is 19 the only report in existence. So my question to you, sir, 20 doesn* t it say that? 21 A It says that, sir. ' _ 22 Q And Doctor, is it your judgment that you did not 23 urge it so that it couId be used most effective1y in 24 defending Monsanto's position? 25 A I don* t know. 155 1 Q Do you have any memory at all, sir?\. 2 A No, sir, but I know-3 Q Is your answer that you have no memory, sir? 4 A I know how I would have answered it, sir. 5 Q Dr. Suskind, did you hear the question that I 6 asked you? 7 A Yes, sir. 8 Q I asked you whether or not you had a memory, and 9 you have no memory, do you, sir? 10 A 11 1s ray best r e c o 11 action, sir. 11 Q Dr. Suskind, do you have a memory or not? 12 A I have a memory of what I might have done, sir. 13 Q You have a memory of what you might have done. 14 Doctor, my question is do you have a memory of what was said 15 and what was urged by you or not urged by you, or what was 16 said by you in this meeting that took place on June 22, 1956, 17 nearly thirty years ago? 18 A I cannot reoa11 it accurate 1y , sir. It is 19 thirty-three years ago. 20 Q. Doctor, didn't you tell us earlier that you have 21 no recollection of this meeting whatsoever and challenged me 22 to find a record of it? Didn* t you do that, sir? 23 A I wasn't sure what meeting we were talking about, 24 sir. 25 Q Excuse me. Didn't you do that, sir? 156 1 Yes, but I wasn't sure what you were talking 2 about. 3 And Doctor, are you now saying that you do now 4 have a memory of what went on at this meeting, of what you 5 said? 6 A In my best recollection-- 7 Q Doctor, my question is do you now have a memory of 8 what went on at this meeting? 9 A 1 know what I might have said, sir. 10 Q Doctor, my question is, do you now have a 11 memory of what went on at this meeting? 12 A I'm giving you my best answer, sir. 13 Q You can say yes, you do have a memoryor you oan 14 say no, you don't have a memory. 15 A Y es, 1 do have a memory. 16 Q All right. Now, Doctor, when did that memory come 17 back to you, sir? 18 A In reading the thing that you gave me, sir. 19 Q A1 1 right. And you can now reoal1 that you did 20 not urge that it couId be used most effectively in Monsanto's 21 position? 22 A No, I didn't say that. 23 Q Sir? 24 A I didn* t say that. 25 Q Well, then, do you recal1 whether you did or did 157 1 not urge the use of these experiraenta1 results in defending 2 Monsanto* s position? 3 A 1 don't recall saying that, sir. 4 Q Then what you are saying is that you could have 5 said it, is that r1ght? 6 A No, it would have been unlike me to say it, 7 sir. 8 Q. Well, now, Doctor, it may have been unlike you, 9 but we do things that are unlikely. You told this Jury to 10 start with that you did not testify on behalf of Monsanto 11 this afternoon. 12 A I did, Indeed. 13 Q And you told this Jury a number of other things, 14 and you are saying it is uniikely, Doctor. But in this 15 instance, these gentlemen recorded what you said, didn* t 16 they, sir? What they perceive that you said? 17 A That is the perception of Mr. Weger, which i s ; 18 consistent with my character, sir. 19 Q Doctor, since we don* t associate with you and 20 have not associated with you, we have on 1y the written record 21 to Judge your character, isn't that right, sir? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q And really, whether or not you would or would not 24 effectively defend Monsanto's position for that purpose is 25 not a character trait, is it, sir? 150 1 A It might be, certainly, v 2 Q. That you would be employed by or used by 3 Monsanto at the compensation hearing of published data, sir? 4 A Yes, sir, as an independent investigator I would 5 not put myself in that position. 6 Q That's right, sir. As an independent 7 investigator you should not put yourself in that position. 8 A Which I am, sir. 9 Q Which you say you are, Dr. Suskind. 10 A I say I am, sir. 11 Q Doctor, we do know that you signed a contract in 12 1979 to testify for Monsanto about your results in the *79 13 study for five years, we know that, don't we, sir? 14 A Yes. i 15 Q. Now, Doctor, do you conceive that being under a 16 contract to Monsanto to do this means that you are 17 independent? 18 A I am independent to defend my studies. 19 Q f Doctor, do you understand that if you are under 20 contract, you believe that being under contract is the 21 equivalent to saying that you are independent? 22 A Yes, the way the contract is written, I am. 23 Q Then it is your judgment that a person, a 24 contractor is free to disregard the terms of the contract and 25 do as he willfully wants to? 159 1 A No, sir. v 2 Q. But you do know that the contract diminishes your 3 independence, it requires you to do certain things If you 4 1Ive up to the contract. N 5 A Not necessarily, sir, no. 6 a That's what contracts are for, sir. 7 A No, sir. 8 Q You don't understand that contracts are made for 9 the purpose of requiring people to perform certain actions? 10 A Which we did. 11 Q You know that? 12 A Ue performed a study, sir. 13 Q My question is relating to your position as a 14 contracte. You are bound by contractor Monsanto with regard 15 to the morbidity study, aren't you, sir, for a period of five 16 years you are bound? 17 A We received support from Monsanto. 18 Q Doctor, could you answer my question? You are 19 bound by this contract, aren't you, sir? 20 A To do what, sir? 21 Q To do whatever the contract c;al Is for you to do. 22 A That* s true, sir. 23 Q Yes. And Doctor, with regard to this meeting at 24 the Kettering Institute, you were being paid by Monsanto to 25 examine these men, to perform your experiments, weren't you, 160 1 sir? 2 A Those were the experimerits, sir. 3 Q Exouse me, Doctor, you did perform experiments on 4 human VO 1unteers, did you not, sir? \ 5 A We did. 6 Q Which you did under contract with Monsanto, did 7 you not, sir? 8 A No, sir, no, sir, there was no contract for that, 9 sir. 10 Q. Oh, there was not, sir? 11 A No, sir. 12 Cl Didn't Monsanto pay you for doing that work, sir? 13 A They gave us a grant, sir, a grant is different 14 than a contract. 15 Q A grant is a contract, Doctor, by the terms of a 16 grant, you agree to do certain things under that grant, a 17 grant in this instance is just another word for a contract. 18 A No, sir. 19 Q Oh, Doctor, do you believe under a grant from 20 Monsanto that you can spend that money any way that you want 21 to spend it? . ' 22 A Yes, sir, according to what we believe we want to 23 do, and that's how it was constructed. 24 Q. You apply for the grant, you tell them what you 25 want to do with that money and if they agree they want that 161 1 done, they give you the money to perform that, don't they, 2 sir? 3 A No, sir. 4 Q Oh, they don't? How do you get your grant, Dr. 5 Suskind? 6 A By proposingstudies-7 Q Yes. 8 A And may Ifinish, sir? 9 Q Sure. 10 A As a principal investigator, I propose a study to 11 determine the acnegenic properties of some of their 12 trich1oropheno1s , and that was the nature of the study, and 13 they thought it was a good Idea. 14 0 Yes. And so they paid you to do it, did they 15 not? 16 A And when we did the study, they paid for the 17 costs such as it was. 18 Q Yes. 19 A Of these studies. 20 Q Right, it is like somebody comes to my house and 21 says, "Look, you need a paint job. f'11 .paint your house for 22 a thousand dollars." I say that's a deal, he paints ray house 23 and I give them a thousand dollars. Now, Doctor, that* s what 24 you did with Monsanto, you went to Monsanto and said, "I've 25 got this study to do. It will benefit you* it will show 162 1 whether or not your 2,4,5-T ,is going to cause ch-loracne. I 2 can do it for X amount of dollars." They say, "That's fine. 3 Go ahead and do it. Here is X amount of dollars." Isn't 4 that correct, sir? 5 A No. 6 Q Isn't that correct? 7 A No. 8 Q Isn't that what happened, sir? 9 A No. 10 Q. Did you give them a proposal, sir? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And did that proposal outline the work that you 13 were going to do on these human volunteers to discover 14 whether or not Monsanto*s product caused c h 1oracne? 15 A No. 16 a You didn't do that, sir? 17 A No. 18 Q What did you propose then if you didn* t propose 19 that you were going to study among other things Monsanto's 20 products? 21 A We proposed to determine 'the .acnegenic properties 22 of three different trich 1oropheno1s. 23 a One of which was Monsanto 's 2,4,5-T, wasn* t it, 24 sir? 25 A Tr ich 1oropheno1s, sir, not 2,4,5-T, 163 1 Q Doctor, you took 2,4,5-T at that sartia time, did 2 you not, sir? 3 A That was another experiment, sir. 4 Q Oh, another grant from Monsanto? 5 A It was another, it was a previous experiment 6 In 1953. There were several sets of studies, sir. 7 Q No, the only inaccuracy then in my statement to 8 you is that it was Monsanto* s TCP that you proposed to study 9 rather than Monsanto's 2,4,5-T, is that correct, sir? 10 A We had a 1ready studied 2,4,5-T. 11 Q Excuse me, is that correct, sir? 12 A Among other things, yes. 13 Q You proposed to Monsanto for X amount of dollars 14 you would study their sodium TCP, wouldn't you, sir? 15 A Ye s . 16 Q And they said all right, we will do it. Here is 17 the money to do it, isn't that right, sir? 18 A Frankly, I can't recall how the physical 19 arrangements were made, because I didn't make them, sir. 20 Q Doctor, they paid you the money that you said it 21 would cost? 22 A They didn't pay me, sir. 23 Q They paid Kettering the money, didn't they, sir? 24 A They paid Kettering on a cost basis, yes, that's 25 the way the university w o u 1d-- 164 1 Q And that's what Monsanto paid for, didn't they, 2 sir? 3 A They did. 4 Q And you then did this work under payment from 5 Monsanto, didn't you, sir? 6 A They supported this grant, sir. 7 Q Is the answer to my question you did this work 8 with money supplied by Monsanto? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q And that's the same thing as the painter painting 11 the house with the money that I have proposed, that he 12 proposed to me he could do it for, isn't that right, sir? 13 A No, sir. 14 Q How is it different, Dr. Suskind? 15 A It differs, because a scientific experiment Is 16 not synonymous with painting a house. 17 Q Dootor, you do n 't mean to say that you can't 18 contract to do a scientific experiment just like you can 19 contract to paint a house, do you, sir? You eaoh can be the 20 subject of a contract, can't it, sir? 21 A It might be. 22 Q It can b e , can it not, sir? 23 A This was a grant, sir, not a contract. 24 Q It can be the subject of a contract, a scientific 25 experiment or to paint a house? 165 1 A It might be. V 2 Q It is not that it might be, it can be, can't It? 3 Isn't that right, sir? 4 A I said It could be. . 5 Q Doctor, every grant that a university gets Is In 6 fact a contract that they have entered into with the person or 7 agency or government that he Is giving the grant, isn't that 8 right, sir? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q And what you do, the grant then is just another 11 name for a contract, isn't it, sir? 12 A N o , sir. 13 Q. Doctor, don* t youagree in thegrant to do 14 certain things with the money given? 15 A Ye s . 16 Q And If you don* t spend that money under the terms 17 of the grant, you are obligated to give it back, aren't you, 18 sir? 19 A Not necessarily, it all depends upon the grant. 20 Q It a l 1 depends upon the terms of the contract, 21 doesn't i t , s i r ? ' ', 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q Yes. And if you should spend that money under 24 that, for some purpose not specif ied in that grant or not 25 allowed by that grant or prohibited by that grant, you would 166 1 be obligated to return itf wouldn't you* sir? v .2 A It might be* it depends upon the grant* 3 Q These grants that you received from Monsanto* 4 there were certain terms associated with them, weren1t there* 5 sir? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And you did as best as you could to live up to 8 those terms* didn't you, sir? 9 A The terms were the protocol of the grant. 10 Q You did your best to live up to those terms* 11 didn* t you, sir? 12 A Yes, sir. 13 Q And you reported toMonsanto the results of your 14 experiments, didn't you* sir? 15 A We did indeed. 16 Q And now in this instance, you are urging that 17 these results be pub 11 shed, aren't you* sir? 18 A According to Mr. Weger'smemorandum. 19 Q And you have no memory to the contrary* do you, 20 sir? 21 A No, sir. ~ ', 22 Q All right. And Doctor* in point of fact, it was 23 following this meeting on June 22, 1956 that you did testify 24 In front of a workmen's compensation commission on the 25 results of your experiment with the 2*4,5-T* isn't that 167 1 correct, sir? v 2 A Yes, sir. 3 Q And It was at that time that you told the 4 workmen* s compensation commission that the 2,4,5-T that you 5 experimented with from Monsanto did not cause oh 1oracne, 6 didn* t you, sir? 7 A Yes, we did, sir. 8 Q And of course, that was a -- not the 2,4,5-T that 9 the workers were exposed to, it was a pur 1fled 2,4,5-T with 10 the contaminants removed as we have established before? 11 A 12 sir. We also used the 2,4,5-T from the wringer cake, 13 Q But you didn' t tell the workmen* s compensation 14 people that It could cause chloracne, did you, sir? 15 A Because it didn't. 16 Q Oh, it did not? 17 A No, the wringer cake did not cause c h 1oracne. 18 Q Where does that say that,* Doctor? 19 A Well, it is in the report. 20 Q What report is it In that 2,4,5-T from Monsanto 21 not purified did not cause ch 1or acne,~ sir.? 22 A It is in the report that I submitted to Monsanto. 23 Q. And when did you submit that report, sir? 24 A July 1, 1954, sir. 25 Q And it was 2,4,5-T that you said did not produce 168 j 1 it? X 2 A That' s true. 3 Q. In 1954, sir, two years before you testified 4 before the Commission and you told the Commission that 5 Monsanto1s 2,4,5-T would not cause it? 6 A That *s right, sir. 7 Q And Doctor, you knew that these men got chloracne 8 from working with the 2,4,5-T, don't you, sir? 9 A The experiment that we did did not. 10 Q Excuse me, Doctor, you knew that these men got it 11 from the 2,4,5-T that they hauled and worked with, isn't that 12 right? 13 A The 2,4,5-T process, sir, not the wringer cake. 14 Q The wringer cake? ; 15 A The wringer cake is .crude 2,4,5-T. 16 Q 11 is not 2, 4,5-T, it is something that you take 17 before you turn it in to 2,4,5-T, isn't that correct, sir? 18 It is not even TCP at that time, it is in no way 2,4,5-T, is 19 it, sir? 20 A I'm not sure 1 understand the question, sir. 21 Q Doctor, your work with the wringer cake was not 22 2,4,5-T, was it, sir? I 23 A Yes, sir, it was. 24 Q I thought you just said it was crude 2,4,5-T? 25 A Well, that's 2,4,5-T as It comes out of the 169 i 1 p 1ant. V 2 Q That's what is sold to the public? 3 A Yes, sir. 4 Q That is what comes out Is called 2,4,5-T? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Is crude 2,4,5-T? 7 A And then the final product is used as a weed 8 killer, the 2,4,5-T acid, 2,4,5-T is trichloro-- 9 Q I know that, Doctor. 10 A --aceltic acid, trichlorophenoxyaceitic acid, and 11 that* s wringer cake. 12 Q And the wringer cake, however, is turned into 13 2,4,5-T, isn't it? 14 A No, the wringer cake is turned into the esters of 15 2,4,5-T. 16 a Y e s , and then what happens? 17 A And then it is sold on the market. 18 a As from the esters of 2,4,5-T? 19 A Esters of 2,4,5-T. 20 Q And it is not wringer cake that is sold, is it, 21 sir? 22 A The wringer cake is usually not sold as the acid. 23 Q No, it is the esters that is sold. 24 A But this is the material that workers are exposed 25 to, wringer cake, 2,4,5-T is the material that workers are 170 1 exposed to.. \ 2 Q Doctor, the workers are exposed to everything 3 from the beginning to the end. 4 A True. 5 Q Aren't they, sir? 6 A Some of them are. 7 Q. And some of them, and you did not report to the 8 Commission, did you, sir, that 2,4,5-T that the workers were 9 exposed to caused acne in your experiments, isn't that right? 10 A Because it didn't. 11 Q Sir? 12 A Because it didn't. 13 Q Wei 1, Doctor, don't you recal1 the report that 14 you made, sir, relating to your experiments, Doctor, 15 that we have gone through before? 16 A Which on e , sir? 17 Q That* s a good question, because I--1et me see 18 where my file is on that. Your reports on the various 19 reports that you made on c h 1oracne and associated problems, 20 one of which is Plaintiff's 1728, sir. Do you have that with 21 you, sir? '* 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q, And in the--in that exhibit, you report, do you 24 not, that you use the sodium 2,4,5-T trichlorophenate, one 25 from the plant process itself, don't you, sir? 171 1 A Right, that was one of the substances we use. 2 Q And you report that that was the most aonegenic of 3 the three tr1c h 1orophenates, was that which came from the 4 involved plant, isn't that correct? \ 5 A Yes, sir, we did indeed. 6 Q Now, you didn't tell the Commission that, did 7 you, sir? 8 A Oh, 1 believe I did. 9 Q We have been through this, Doctor. If you would 10 point out the page where you to 1d the Commissi on that, 1 11 would appreciate It, because we have gone through this, if 12 you will recall earlier. 13 A Well, I believe if you look through the--if you 14 look through the section in which I discuss that study on 15 humans, you w i 11 see that we have-- 16 Q If you would turn to the page you responded 17 before, Doctor, to Page 52 and 53, you will find that you did 18 not. On Page 52, Dootor, did you not say to the Commission, 19 "Now, in the laboratory we have applied 2,4,5-T to animal 20 skin and we have applied it to human skin and we have not 21 been able to produce acne with it," isn't that what you said? 22 A In that first(experiment we did, but if you will 23 turn, sir, to Page 33, 34, and 35, you w i 1I see that we 24 describe the human experiment in which we demonstrate or show 25 that the trichlorophenate from the plant was acnegenic. 172 1 Q And would you describe that to me, p-lease, sir? 2 Would you tell me on what place, sir? 3 A It is- -- 4 Q Page 33. \ 5 A Well, it starts with 33 at the very bottom, sir. 6 Q Page 33 that I have at the very bottom says, "We 7 mixed Halowax or the 2,4,5-T In a suitable, this happened to 8 be a petroleum plastic, It was called--" and on and on and 9 on, and you said, "We examined them week 1y to detect any 10 possible systemic manifestations, and after twelve weeks we 11 discontinued," and you don* t say there, sir, do you, that you 12 had any problems of chioracne? If you did, I sure can't read 13 it, because if you look on Page 33, you said, "We have not 14 been able to induce aone in humans with 2,4,5-T." 15 A That was true, that* s so, sir. 16 Q Now, Doctor, I want you to point out to me where 17 you told this workmen* s compenstion-- 18 A T r 1oh 1orophenate, I*m talking about 19 trich1orophenate. 20 Q Doctor, what you said was, "Ue have not been a b 1e 21 to induce acne in humans with 2,4,5-T,"'now, where did you 22 tell the Commission that you did induce acne with 2,4,5-T? 23 Would you find that for me, please, sir? 24 A I say on Page 33, "We have not been able to 25 induce acne in humans with 2,4,5-T." 173 1 Q Yes. Now where did you tell them that you could 2 induce it with 2,4,5-T, sir? 3 A We didn't. We didnft induce it with 2,4,5-T, we 4 induced it with trichlorophenate. 5 Q And where do you say that, sir? That you lnduoed 6 it with triohlorophenate? 7 A Yes, during the whole study of our subject-- 8 Q What page, Doctor? 9 A P m sorry, sir, Page 36. 10 Q Where on Page 36? 11 A A1 1 right, "During this whole study," may I read? 12 Q Direct me to the line first, sir. 13 A It is, "Except that the induced--" 14 Q What 1ine, what part on Page 36, whereabouts? 15 A It is the sixth line, sir. 16 Q. Yeah, go ahead. And where do you say that that 17 you induced c h 1oracne? 18 A There were no, "Except the Induced skin changes 19 in the case of Halowax and this trichlorophenate." 20 Q I*m sorry, on Page 36, sir? 21 A Right, 36. 22 Q Six 1ines down? 23 A I'm sorry, it starts with, "During the who 1e 24 study, all of our subjects," and this is probably a 25 transcription-- 174 1 Q Doctor, I can't find the--excuse me,\Doctor, ws 2 so we can get together here, where on Page 36 did It say, 3 "During the whole study"? 4 A Page 36, yeah, I am talking about-- \ 5 Q Mine is such a bad misprint, 1 am reading 35 6 instead of 36. 7 A It is the hearing report, sir, the hearing 8 report. 9 0. Yes. 10 A And it starts with, "During this whole study, all 11 of our subjects," and we were very grateful for it, "remained 12 asymptomatic, this is the Halowax trichlorophenate study. 13 There were no physical or laboratory findings except the 14 Induced skin changes in the case of the Halowax, chloracne, 15 and this sodium trichlorophenate. There are no alterations 16 in liver function tests which were done, as I indicated." So 17 we did report that we found skin changes with the Monsanto's 18 trich1orophenate, but we didn't find it by applying 2,4,5-T, 19 pure 2,4,5-T, to human skin or wringer cake, which is crude 20 2,4,5-T. 21 Q Now, Doctor, you did apply 2,4,5-T to human 22 volunteers and you did induce c h 1oracne? 23 A N o , sir . 24 Q Well, Doctor, I'll see where-- 25 A Well, I would like to see that, sir, because I 175 1 can* t recal 1 that. \. 2 THE COURT* Walt a second, Doctor. Just a 3 minute, I think we're out of time for today. Ladies and 4 gentlemen, we will break for the day, and as I told you v 5 earlier, we are not going to have Court tomorrow. We will 6 come back Thursday at 9130. I would remind you as I do for 7 any overnight breaks that you are not to discuss this matter 8 among yourselves or with anyone outside the jury panel, you 9 are not to read, 1isten to, or watch anything about this case 10 in particular or the subject matter in general in any of the 11 media. Thank you for your attention and cooperation. Court 12 is adjourned. 13 (At this time, Court was 14 adjourned for the day.) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 176 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS 2 COUNTY OF ST. CLAIR )) s. s. ) V 3 4 \ 5 6 I, Patricia A. Gandy, CSR, RPR, Official Court 7 Reporter in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, and the 8 Official Court Reporter who transcribed the above-sty 1ed 9 10 cause had on Maroh 4, 1966, do hereby certify that the 11 foregoing transcript of proceedings is a true, correct and^ 12 complete transoript of the proceedings had on said date. DATED this 12th day of March, 1986. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 177 1 STATE OF ILLINOIS 2 COUNTY OF ST. CLAIR > ) SS. ) 13 4 5 6 I, RICHARD P. GOLDENHERSH, Circuit Judge;in 7 and for the Twentieth Judicial Cirouit, hereby certify that 8 the above is a true and correct transcript of the proceedings 9 10 had in the case captioned: FRANCES E. KEMNER, et al., v. MONSANTO COMPANY, 80-L-970, heard on March 4, 1986. 'll DATED this 12th day of March, 1986. 12 13 ENTER: 14 15 16 RICHARD P. GOLDENHERSH, Circuit Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 178