PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Susanna Rankin Bohme

Publications and source records attributed to Susanna Rankin Bohme.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2004

Attorney-directed screenings can be hazardous.

BACKGROUND: The history of occupational health screenings indicate that they are often necessary to protect the health and interests of workers. However, medical screenings for asbestos and other occupational diseases which are organized and funded by attorneys may result in serious adverse outcomes to those screened. METHODS: We report a case of death that appears to have been heavily influenced by an attorney-initiated and -directed screening program. RESULTS: While well-run medical screening programs are essential to disease detection in workers, attorney-run and corporate screenings can be fraught with ethical and practical problems. Screenings have been used by corporations to identify workers with occupational illness in order to terminate their employment and avoid legal liability. Screenings can also be used to motivate workers to stop smoking and implement workplace controls. However, these screenings must be conducted responsibly. CONCLUSIONS: Although this is only one case it illustrates the gravity and potential danger of attorney-directed screening programs.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

Exposing the "myth" of ABC, "anything but chrysotile": a critique of the Canadian asbestos mining industry and McGill University chrysotile studies.

BACKGROUND: Beginning in the 1930s, the Canadian asbestos industry created and advanced the idea that chrysotile asbestos is safer than asbestos of other fiber types. METHODS: We critically evaluate published and unpublished studies funded by the Quebec Asbestos Mining Association (QAMA) and performed by researchers at McGill University. RESULTS: QAMA-funded researchers put forth several myths purporting that Quebec-mined chrysotile was harmless, and contended that the contamination of chrysotile with oils, tremolite, or crocidolite was the source of occupational health risk. In addition, QAMA-funded researchers manipulated data and used unsound sampling and analysis techniques to back up their contention that chrysotile was "essentially innocuous." CONCLUSIONS: These studies were used to promote the marketing and sales of asbestos, and have had a substantial effect on policy and occupational health litigation. Asbestos manufacturing companies and the Canadian government continue to use them to promote the use of asbestos in Europe and in developing countries. Am. J. Ind. Med. 44:540-557, 2003.

Asbestos↗
PubMed2003

The beryllium "double standard" standard.

Brush Wellman, the world's leading producer and supplier of beryllium products, has systematically hidden cases of beryllium disease that occurred below the threshold limit value (TLV) and lied about the efficacy of the TLV in published papers, lectures, reports to government agencies, and instructional materials prepared for customers and workers. Hypocritically, Brush Wellman instituted a zero exposure standard for corporate executives while workers and customers were told the 2 microgram standard was "safe." Brush intentionally used its workers as "canaries for the plant," and referred to them as such. Internal documents and corporate depositions indicate that these actions were intentional and that the motive was money. Despite knowledge of the inadequacy of the TLV, Brush has successfully used it as a defense against lawsuits brought by injured workers and as a sales device to provide reassurance to customers. Brush's policy has reaped an untold number of victims and resulted in mass distribution of beryllium in consumer products. Such corporate malfeasance is perpetuated by the current market system, which is controlled by an organized oligopoly that creates an incentive for the neglect of worker health and safety in favor of externalizing costs to victimized workers, their families, and society at large.

Air Pollutants, Occupational↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Over a barrel: corporate corruption of science and its effects on workers and the environment.

Although occupational and environmental diseases are often viewed as isolated and unique failures of science, the government, or industry to protect the best interest of the public, they are in fact an outcome of a pervasive system of corporate priority setting, decision making, and influence. This system produces disease because political, economic, regulatory and ideological norms prioritize values of wealth and profit over human health and environmental well-being. Science is a key part of this system; there is a substantial tradition of manipulation of evidence, data, and analysis, ultimately designed to maintain favorable conditions for industry at both material and ideological levels. This issue offers examples of how corporations influence science, shows the effects that influence has on environmental and occupational health, and provides evidence of a systemic problem.

Communication↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Maximizing profit and endangering health: corporate strategies to avoid litigation and regulation.

Corporations and industries use various tactics to obscure the fact that their products are dangerous or deadly. Their aim is to secure the least restrictive possible regulatory environment and avert legal liability for deaths or injuries in order to maximize profit. They work with attorneys and public relations professionals, using scientists, science advisory boards; front groups, industry organizations, think tanks, and the media to influence scientific and popular opinion of the risks of their products or processes. The strategy, which depends on corrupt science, profits corporations at the expense of public health. Public health professionals can learn from this strategy how to effectively build scientific and public opinion that prioritizes both good science and the public health.

Advisory Committees↗