HudsonWatch.net & .org
Hudson-Voice.com

The GE logo is a registered trademark - � 2000-2001 General Electric Company - and is used on this Web site without permission.

This Web site can best be viewed using a Netscape browser.�������� -������� SITE INDEX���������� -����������� HOME� PAGE

Site Index

What YOU can do!

Web sites of interest

Articles

News stories of interest

Newspaper compilations

Press releases

Diagrams/Photos-dredges

F.Y.I.

A letter from the editor

Letters to the editor

Contact elected officials
Contact U.S.- E.P.A.
Contact G.E.'s board
Contact newspapers
Contact the editor

The following article is reproduced without permission from Rachel's Environment & Health News, a publication of the Environmental Research Foundation:
Rachel's Environment and Health News

#327 - How We Got Here -- Part 1:
The History of
Chlorinated Diphenyl (PCB's)

by Peter Montague
Annapolis, Maryland
March 04, 1993
���������������� If you had to pick one chemical that best exemplified our
���������������� modern situation, it might well be PCB's (polychlorinated
���������������� biphenyls).

���������������� PCB's were first manufactured commercially in 1929 by the
���������������� Swann Corporation, which later became part of Monsanto
���������������� Chemical Company of St. Louis, Missouri.[1] Monsanto then
���������������� licensed others to make PCB's and the product took off.
���������������� PCB's conduct heat very well, but do not conduct electricity,
���������������� and they do not burn easily. Furthermore, they do not change
���������������� chemically--they are stable--and they are not soluble in
���������������� water. Therefore they are ideal insulators in big electrical
���������������� transformers and capacitors (devices that store electricity).
���������������� As electricity came into widespread use during the first half
���������������� of this century, equipment suppliers like G.E. and
���������������� Westinghouse became major users of PCB's.�

���������������� Many of the characteristics that make PCB's ideal in industrial
���������������� applications create problems in the environment. Like many
���������������� other chlorinated hydrocarbons, PCB's are soluble in fat,
���������������� though not in water, so they tend to accumulate in living
���������������� things and to enter food webs, where they concentrate.
���������������� Larger, older predators tend to accumulate PCB's in their
���������������� fatty tissues, including their eggs (in the case of birds and
���������������� fish) and their milk (in the case of mammals). PCB's were
���������������� first recognized as an environmental problem in 1966 when a
���������������� Swedish researcher reported finding them in 200 pike from
���������������� all over Sweden, in other fish, and in an eagle.[2] For the
���������������� next decade, scientists accumulated information about PCB's,
���������������� finding them disrupting food webs all over the planet. By
���������������� 1976, the destruction wrought by PCB's was so obvious and
���������������� so well understood that even the U.S. Congress
���������������� comprehended the danger and took action, outlawing the
���������������� manufacture, sale, and distribution of PCB's except in "totally
���������������� enclosed" systems. Between 1929 and 1989, total world
���������������� production of PCB's (excluding the Soviet Union) was 3.4
���������������� billion pounds, or about 57 million pounds per year. Even
���������������� after the U.S. banned PCBs in 1976, world production
���������������� continued at 36 million pounds per year from 1980-1984 and
���������������� 22 million pounds per year, 1984- 1989. The end of PCB
���������������� production is still not in sight.[3]�

���������������� The whereabouts of 30 percent of all PCB's (roughly a billion
���������������� pounds) remains unknown. Another 30 percent reside in
���������������� landfills, in storage, or in the sediments of lakes, rivers, and
���������������� estuaries. Some 30 percent to 70 percent remain in use. The
���������������� characteristics of PCB's (their stability and their solubility in
���������������� fat) tend to move them into the oceans as time passes.
���������������� Nevertheless, it is estimated that only one percent of all PCB's
���������������� have, so far, reached the oceans.[3]�

���������������� The one percent that HAVE reached the oceans are causing
���������������� major problems. As noted above, PCB's tend to concentrate
���������������� in the food chain; the higher you are on the food chain, the
���������������� greater the concentration of PCB's. Large fish, and creatures
���������������� that eat large fish, tend to accumulate thousands of parts of
���������������� million (ppm) in their flesh. Furthermore, by a cruel twist of
���������������� fate, large birds and large marine mammals (seals, sea lions,
���������������� whales, and some dolphins) lack enzyme systems to
���������������� efficiently detoxify PCB's. As a result, PCB's build up in the
���������������� bodies of oceanic predators and are passed to their offspring
���������������� through eggs (in the case of fish and birds) and milk (in the
���������������� case of mammals). PCB's mimic hormones and are a
���������������� powerful disruptor of the endocrine system that governs
���������������� reproduction. Marine mammals are already having trouble
���������������� reproducing.[4] It is entirely possible that, as more PCB's
���������������� reach the oceans, all large mammals will disappear.[5]�

���������������� Humans, too, are contaminated by PCB's and are passing
���������������� these powerful toxins to their infant children through breast
���������������� milk. In the U.S. and other industrialized countries, PCB's are
���������������� present in breast milk at about 1 part per million (ppm) in the
���������������� milk fat. An infant drinking milk contaminated at this level
���������������� will take in a quantity of PCB's that is 5 times as high as the
���������������� recommended "allowable daily intake" for an adult, as
���������������� established by the World Health Organization.[6]�

���������������� Children exposed in the womb to PCB's at levels considered
���������������� "background levels" in the U.S. have been found to
���������������� experience hypotonia (loss of muscle tone) and hyporeflexia
���������������� (weakened reflexes) at birth, delays in psychomotor
���������������� development at ages 6 and 12 months, and diminished visual
���������������� recognition memory at 7 months.[7]�

���������������� How did we get here?�

���������������� In 1937--just eight years after Swann Chemical began
���������������� manufacturing PCB's in commercial quantities--the Harvard
���������������� School of Public Health hosted a one-day meeting on the
���������������� problem of "systemic effects" of certain chlorinated
���������������� hydrocarbons including "chlorinated diphenyl" (an early name
���������������� for PCB's).[8] The meeting was attended by representatives
���������������� from Monsanto, General Electric, the U.S. Public Health
���������������� Service, and the Halowax Corporation, among others.�

���������������� Before World War I, the Halowax Corporation began
���������������� manufacturing chlorinated naphthelenes as a coating for
���������������� electric wire and companies like General Electric began using
���������������� it. The president of Halowax, Sandford Brown, told the
���������������� meeting that they had observed no problems in their workers
���������������� until "the past 4 or 5 years... Then we come to the higher
���������������� stages [greater number of chlorine atoms in the mixture],
���������������� combined with chlorinated diphenyl and other products, and
���������������� suddenly this problem is presented to us."[8]�

���������������� By the mid-1930s, workers at Halowax and at G.E., and even
���������������� some of their customers, were breaking out with
���������������� chloracne--small pimples with dark pigmentation of the
���������������� exposed area, followed by blackheads and pustules. In 1936
���������������� three workers at the Halowax Company died, and Halowax
���������������� then hired Harvard University researchers to expose rats to
���������������� these chlorinated compounds, to see if they could discover
���������������� the underlying cause. The Harvard researchers made "a
���������������� number of estimates of chlorinated hydrocarbons in the air of
���������������� different factories," then designed experiments to expose rats
���������������� to similar levels. They reported that "the chlorinated diphenyl
���������������� is certainly capable of doing harm in very low concentrations
���������������� and is probably the most dangerous [of the chlorinated
���������������� hydrocarbons studied]."[8] And, they said, "These
���������������� experiments leave no doubt as to the possibility of systemic
���������������� effects from the chlorinated naphthalenes and chlorinated
���������������� diphenyls."[8]�

���������������� From a brief report on the one-day conference, we can
���������������� gather that problems caused by PCB exposures were serious
���������������� and widely known. Mr. F.R. Kaimer, assistant manager of
���������������� General Electric's Wireworks at York, Pa., said, "It is only 1
���������������� 1/2 years ago that we had in the neighborhood of 50 to 60
���������������� men afflicted with various degrees of this acne about which
���������������� you all know. Eight or ten of them were very severely
���������������� afflicted-- horrible specimens as far as their skin conditions
���������������� was concerned. One man died and the diagnosis may have
���������������� attributed his death to halowax vapors, but we are not sure
���������������� of that...."[8]�

���������������� G.E.'s medical director, Dr. B. L. Vosburgh of Schenectady,
���������������� N.Y., attended the meeting. He said, "About the time we
���������������� were having so much trouble at our York factory some of
���������������� our customers began complaining. We thought we were
���������������� having a hysteria of halowax mania throughout the country."�

���������������� Monsanto Chemical Company was represented at the
���������������� meeting by R. Emmett Kelly. Mr. Kelly told the meeting, "I
���������������� can't contribute anything to the laboratory studies, but there
���������������� has been quite a little human experimentation in the last
���������������� several years, especially at our plants where we have been
���������������� manufacturing this chlorinated diphenyl." He went on to
���������������� describe the results of Monsanto's human experiments: "A
���������������� more or less extensive series of skin eruptions which we
���������������� were never able to attribute as to cause, whether it was
���������������� impurity in the benzene we were using or to the chlorinated
���������������� diphenyl."[8]�

���������������� G.E.'s F.R. Kaimer described the HUMAN reaction of G.E.
���������������� executives to the disfigurement and pain of G.E. workers
���������������� exposed to PCB's: "[W]e had 50 other men in very bad
���������������� condition as far as the acne was concerned. The first
���������������� reaction that several of our executives had was to throw it
���������������� out-- get it out of our plant. They didn't want anything like
���������������� that for treating wire. But that was easily said but not so
���������������� easily done. We might just as well have thrown our business
���������������� to the four winds and said, 'We'll close up,' because there
���������������� was no substitute and there is none today in spite of all the
���������������� efforts we have made through our own research laboratories
���������������� to find one."[8] And so G.E. executives--contrary to their
���������������� personal ethics--reached a business decision to continue
���������������� using PCB's.�

���������������� [To be concluded next week.]�

Back to the top

To read: 'How We Got Here -- Part 2:
Who Will Take Responsibility For PCB's', Click Here!
���������������� =====�

���������������� [1] Robert Risebrough and Virginia Brodine, "More Letters in
���������������� the Wind," in Sheldon Novick and Dorothy Cottrell, editors,
���������������� OUR WORLD IN PERIL: AN ENVIRONMENT REVIEW
���������������� (Greenwich, Conn.: Fawcett, 1971), pgs. 243-255.�

���������������� [2] Soren Jensen, "Report of a New Chemical Hazard," NEW
���������������� SCIENTIST Vol. 32 (1966), pg. 612.�

���������������� [3] Kristin Bryan Thomas and Theo Colborn,
���������������� "Organochlorine Endocrine Disruptors in Human Tissue," in
���������������� Theo Colborn and Coralie Clement, editors,
���������������� CHEMICALLY-INDUCED ALTERATIONS IN SEXUAL
���������������� AND FUNCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: THE
���������������� WILDLIFE/HUMAN CONNECTION [Advances in Modern
���������������� Environmental Toxicology Vol. XXI] (Princeton, N.J.:
���������������� Princeton Scientific Publishing Co., [1992).] pgs. 342-343.�

���������������� [4] See, for example, Robert L. DeLong and others,
���������������� "Premature Births in California Sea Lions: Association With
���������������� High Organochlorine Pollutant Residue Levels," SCIENCE
���������������� Vol. 181 (Sept. 21, 1973), pgs. 1168-1170; and Peter J. H.
���������������� Reijnders, "Reproductive failure in common seals feeding on
���������������� fish from polluted coastal waters," NATURE Vol. 304 (Dec.
���������������� 4, 1986), pgs. [456-457.]456-457.�

���������������� [5] Shinsuke Tanabe, "PCB Problems in the Future: Foresight
���������������� from Current Knowledge," ENVIRONMENTAL
���������������� POLLUTION Vol. 50 (1988), pgs. 5-28.�

���������������� [6] Kristin Bryan Thomas and Theo Colborn,
���������������� "Organochlorine Endocrine Disruptors in Human Tissue," in
���������������� Theo Colborn and Coralie Clement, editors,
���������������� CHEMICALLY-INDUCED ALTERATIONS IN SEXUAL
���������������� AND FUNCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: THE
���������������� WILDLIFE/HUMAN CONNECTION [Advances in Modern
���������������� Environmental Toxicology Vol. XXI] (Princeton, N.J.:
���������������� Princeton Scientific Publishing Co., [1992).] pgs. 365-394.
���������������� For the comparison of U.S. breast-fed infants' intake vs.
���������������� World health Organization's standard for adults, see pg. 385.�

���������������� [7] Hugh A. Tilson and others, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls
���������������� and the Developing Nervous System: Cross-Species
���������������� Comparisons," NEUROTOXICOLOGY AND
���������������� TERATOLOGY Vol. 12 (1990), pgs. 239-248.�

���������������� [8] Cecil K. Drinker and others, "The Problem of Possible
���������������� Systemic Effects From Certain Chlorinated Hydrocarbons,"
���������������� THE JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE AND
���������������� TOXICOLOGY Vol. 19 (September, 1937), pgs. 283- 311.
���������������� Thanks to Bridget Barclay of the Hudson River Sloop
���������������� Clearwater for sending us this revealing article. Ms. Barclay
���������������� and her colleagues at Hudson Clearwater have worked
���������������� tirelessly for years to force a sensible cleanup of PCB's that
���������������� G.E. dumped, contaminating the length of the Hudson River;
���������������� Hudson Clearwater can be reached in Poughkeepsie at (914)
���������������� 454-7673.�

���������������� Descriptor terms: pcbs; ge; chlorine; sandford brown;
���������������� halowax corp; phs; westinghouse; electricity; monsanto;
���������������� wildlife; fish; mo; landfilling; oceans; swann corp.

��������������������������� Back to the top

To read: 'How We Got Here -- Part 2:
Who Will Take Responsibility For PCB's', Click Here!


Rachel's Environment & Health News is a publication of the Environmental Research Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403. Fax (410) 263-8944; E-mail: [email protected]. Back issues available by E-mail; to get instructions, send Email to [email protected] with the single word HELP in the message. Subscriptions are free. To subscribe, E-mail the words SUBSCRIBE RACHEL-NEWS YOUR FULL NAME to: [email protected] NOTICE: Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS free of charge even though it costs our organization considerable time and money to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution (anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send your tax- deductible contribution to: Environmental Research Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. Please do not send credit card information via E-mail. For further information about making tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F. by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888- 2RACHEL. --Peter Montague, Editor


Contact G.E.'s board of directors, as well as your elected officials!

Contact the Editor of this Web site�� -�� TOP OF PAGE�� - HOME� PAGE
SITE INDEX

(The GE logo is a registered trademark - � 2000-2001 General Electric Company - and is used on this Web site without permission.)
2000-2001 HudsonWatch.net/HudsonWatch.org/Hudson-Voice.com�/�
Copyright � HudsonWatch.net/HudsonWatch.org/Hudson-Voice.com�/�� All Rights Reserved.
�/� Trademarks of HudsonWatch.net/HudsonWatch.org/Hudson-Voice.com and its affiliates.