Document z333YeZ81qmjRxk50mqgGJVa

FILE NAME: General Electric (GE) DATE: 1979 Jan 23 DOC#: GE180 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Medical Evaluation of New GENAL Brochures with Cover Letter PLA S TIC S BU SIN ESS D IVISIO N ONE PLASTICS A V E N U E P IT T S F IE L D , M ASS. 01201 February 2, 1979 PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT 1 Attached for your review is a medical opinion on the new GENAL brochures that I requested from Dr. Taylor. Dr. Taylor has taken the adversary approach from the medical viewpoint which I believe to be constructive and I am sub mitting it to you for your consideration. GHHteh Att cc : AA Matthews PR Pluta WJ Taylor RC Wright G. H. Hiner FEB' 5 '79 ' t PLASTICS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ONE PLASTICS AVENUE PITTSFIELD, MASS. 01201 January 23, 1979 Mr. G. Hiner Office JAN 2 6 1979 G . H. HINER Subject. Medical Evaluation of GENAL Asbestos Free Brochures I expect the f i r s t reaction of the average person to the attached brochures would be that GE has done a very good thing to elim inate asbestos from it s products, startin g in 1972; and that GENAL ce rta in ly is a better product to purchase than competitive phenolics containing asbestos. The brochures are very e ffe ctiv e marketing tools. However, there is a major problem and ris k to PBD in using th is advertising and sales approach.. While we can be proud that we stopped using asbestos :in 1972, how do we ju s tify our use before 1972 when the suggestion that a re la tio n ship existed between asbestos and cancer was made in 1935 and confirmed in 1955? We lay ourselves open to attack on issues such as: Why did we continue to use asbestos when i t was a known health risk? What have our medical examinations on exposed workers shown (PBD did not do exams re lig io u s ly or at a ll over the years)? What special e ffo rts is PBD making fo r re tire d exposed workers? What e ffo rts have we made to track down and inform/examine workers exposed long ago who have l e f t GE or transferred to other organizations? What has GE done fo r exposed workers who have died of asbestos induced cancer and th e ir fam ilies? Any of these issues could p o te n tia lly give us very negative p u b lic ity in spite of the fa ct that we are doing a better job than our com petitiors. On a re la tiv e scale we are doing fin e . On an absolute scale, our performance leaves much to be desired. Consider that Asbestos exposure in industry is one o f the most serious issues facing American industry today. Heavy exposure to asbestos may lead to a related death rate of approximately 46%. Disease follows exposure by a period of 15-20 years. The disease that follows (cancer of the lung, pleura or peritoneum) i s f a t a l . No e ffe c tiv e therapy e x ists. Cessation o f use in 1972 does not relieve the issue o f dangerous exposure to workers and consumers in 1965, fo r instance. Mr. G. Hiner January 23, 1979 / . A ll MD's in the nation have received a Physician's Advisory Letter describing the e ffe cts of asbestos exposure (see attachment #1). A ll Social Security re cip ie n ts have received such an advisory le tt e r from the Secretary o f Health, Education and Welfare. A national TV campaign statin g the dangers of asbestos exposure is being planned. A $20,000,000 out of court settlement has been made to 455 asbestos workers and more are predicted to come (see attachment #2). In my view, the risks outweigh the benefits and my recommendation would-be to discontinue th is marketina strategy. I would use the "asbestos free approach verbally with purchasing agents and molders. I would not use i t in media advertising, on truck sides or in our m ailing campaigns. -w Attach