Back Up NextTittabawassee River Watch
WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Dow Chemical

Can I trust Dow?

NO, NO, NO     Dow is concerned about 1 thing, their stockholders.  Read the document links below for examples of how Dow spends MILLIONS of dollars to work behind the scenes to disrupt, delay, and  misinform the public all levels of local, state, and federal government.  They also like to buy University support.  Would the University suggested for their version of a Health Study be one of them?  Below are a  few editorials and facts on Dow's & other polluters underhanded tactics:


WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Dow Articles of Interest

bulletDow whistle blower accuses Dow of intentionally submitting bad sample data to State
bulletDow deletes agent orange details from Wikipedia
bulletDow throws science out of the courtrooms
bulletA "Human Element" metamorphosis?
bulletDow fined $325,000 for bribing Indian Government officials
bulletDow fined $84.8 million for price fixing - who do you trust?
bulletWHO bars Dow from participating in setting global protection standards
bullet Dow's Paustenbach "scientist for hire" a fraud, T.River studies compromised
bulletSecret testing by Dow upsets EPA and MDEQ & is violation of their operating license
bullet EPA comments on Dow RI Work plans - finds them "critically deficient"
bulletDEQ analysis of dioxin half truths and distortions in Dow Community Update publication
bulletSEC asked to investigate Dow's misleading statements made to investors
bulletDow Knowledge Factories, Are Michigan Universities defending Dow with silence?
bulletDow forms alliance with US agencies to lobby against European Union's attempt to strengthen chemical regulations.
bulletFraudulent claims and faked studies used by chemical industry to support it's claims dioxin is not harmful
bulletChemical industries secret plan to attack California's Precautionary Principle trend
bulletChemical industry's efforts to keep the truth about Dioxin behind closed doors.
bullet Dow admits dioxin toxic
bullet Dow Chemical dioxin contamination fact sheet       
bulletCorporate Science
bulletCorporate Strategy - The polluters not so secret plan
bulletDow Myth: 1 ppb of Dioxin "Safe Level"
bulletDioxin: The real issue is profit, not science                                                            
bulletThe Dow Chemical Company  
bulletThe Dow Nightmare  
bulletDow Chemical Multiple Personalities 
bulletHow low can Dow go?  Dow sues Bhopal victims
bulletDows Federal and State political connections                       

WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)            

 <<  The YES MEN present Dow with "Gilda" the Golden Skeleton award,
 click here to view their site. It's all a spoof, but a good one.


WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

The Dow web of deceit

The next time you hear about a Health Study being proposed by ANYONE, read this editorial and then read the proposal again. There are many design criteria which can included that make the studies outcome inconclusive before it even starts.

Here is the general game played by Dow for years.  It's happening in our community right now.  Read the tactics below and then review the local newspaper articles to see their plan in action:



Dow influences local officials, including health departments. Guides them through the dioxin maize. Helps them with their public statements and responses. Downplays health effects. Scares them about jobs and stigma of dioxin in their community.   Local health officials (and physicians) are not well informed enough about health effects of dioxin to counter Dow propaganda.

Dow provides literature from their dioxin studies, ignoring tons of literature, from independent scientists, on dioxin health effects, that shows harm, even at low level exposure. (see Saginaw county health department blue folder given out at recent DEQ meetings, includes Dow factsheets and website).



Dow conducts special informational meetings for media so that they "understand" the issues.  No alternative views are offered to media at these meetings.  Media is fed pure Dow propaganda during the sessions, the same stuff fed to local township & city officials,  health departments, etc..   Meetings such as these usually precede public meetings so that the media is "prepared" for any public dissent.  Local newspapers are careful to downplay publics outrage.  They can refuse to print citizens letters on the subject and/or edit out crucial information in submitted editorials .  Dow places full page ads in local papers promoting it's concern for the areas citizens.  Wonder how much the papers made on those ads?



Note: on January 1, 2003, Jennifer Granholm replaced John Engler as governor of Michigan.  Many of the political appointees that drove the campaign to cover-up the dioxin contamination left with Engler.   It's to early to tell if the new administration will take the citizens side in these matters, however, recent news out of the  MDEQ indicate a change may be coming.   We will wait and see...

The content of this site referring to all of the deceit and collusion  between Dow and the MDEQ will remain for a  historical perspective. Future developments will hopefully be in stark contrast to the past.

Pre 1/1/03: Dow has an open door to the governor Englers office, DEQ and MDCH management. Similar pitch. Governor Engler dismantled all environmental oversight committees so it is now almost impossible to monitor these nefarious activities. Governor Engler is also buddies with G.W.Bush (some national clout).



Dow has special meetings with ATSDR.  G.W. Bush recently appointed known "industry hacks" on CDC committees that determine human exposure. Dow's consultant, Dennis Paustenbach is one appointee.



Previous Dow influences on regional (region v) EPA administrators. Huge EPA/Dow scandal in march 1983, when Dow was caught "editing" an EPA report that named them as the major source of dioxin in the Tittabawassee river.Dow cut their name out as source, among other things. Congressional investigations into "sweetheart deals" followed.Acting EPA administrator John Hernandez resigns, others follow.   Dow has the ear of Engler, Engl.'s henchman Keith Harrison, Harding, Nash, and if history repeats itself Dow will try to influence the EPA (both region v and headquarters).

WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Dow Front Groups, don't be deceived

The following is an excerpt from, a watch group who monitors big corporation antics. The information is 4-5 years old, do you think they have changed their tactics?

Since 1977, Infact has been exposing life-threatening abuses by transnational corporations and organizing successful grassroots campaigns to hold corporations accountable to consumers and society at large. We are a non-profit, national membership organization building an active, aware public and a core of well-trained organizers to lead the grassroots challenge to unwarranted corporate influence.

Dow Chemical--Multiple Personalities: Front Groups


Dow Chemical’s recent purchase of Union Carbide--the corporation responsible for the worst industrial disaster ever--fuels concern about the chemical giant’s role in influencing public policy. Union Carbide’s 1984 gas leak in Bhopal, India, has killed an estimated 16,000 people and injured 500,000, according to local estimates. Infact joined with other organizations in commemorating the 15th anniversary of the Bhopal disaster in December 1999. The merger with Union Carbide increases Dow’s size and capacity to undermine environmental, consumer, health and safety policies. In 2000, Dow and Union Carbide had 45 federal lobbyists and reportedly spent $4.4 million on federal lobbying.

Why was Dow Chemical inducted into the Hall of Shame?  Read the historical excerpts from Infact's 1997 People's Annual Report:

Dow Chemical (Dow), the second-largest US-based chemical corporation with over $20 billion in revenues, will celebrate its 100th anniversary this year. The chemical giant's history is blemished with the production, marketing, or cover-up of information related to dangerous products such as Agent Orange and the pesticides DBCP and Dursban. Today Dow faces thousands of lawsuits related to silicone breast implants. The corporation is also under fire as the world's largest producer of chlorine (a byproduct of which is dioxin), and as a major source of chemicals that contribute to global climate change and other health and environmental problems.

On the surface, Dow is not among the biggest spenders in Washington. However, the chemical giant wields enormous influence in public policy, particularly on environmental and consumer issues. Much of this influence is well-hidden from the public because Dow operates through trade associations and corporate coalitions. Such deliberate concealment makes it nearly impossible to track Dow's influence and access over key public health issues and just how much the company has interfered with public policymaking.


The Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA, of which Dow is a leading member, is one of the key arms through which Dow exerts control over environmental and public health policy. The CMA has its own PAC, which contributes at least $25,000 per year. The CMA has a lobbying force of some 50 people, in addition to Dow's 51 lobbyists at the federal level alone. The CMA spent $4.68 million lobbying in Washington in just the first half of 1996. Dow spent an additional $1 million lobbying in the first half of 1996.

Dow and its front groups are also a force at the state level. Dow has 36 registered lobbyists in just 13 states. The CMA, Chemical Industry Council, and Chemical Specialty Manufacturing Association have at least 23 lobbyists in just eight states.

When the Republicans gained control of Congress in 1994, the chemical industry helped shape the legislative agenda, to create a more "business-friendly" regulatory environment. The objectives included Superfund reform, regulatory reform, product liability reform, OSHA reform, undermining the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, and defunding the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulatory agencies.


Corporate coalitions and trade associations, many with their own lobbyists, influence public policy at both the state and the federal level. With this convenient corporate veil, Dow can maintain its environmentally-friendly image while working to undermine environmental and public health protections. The following are a few of the trade associations and corporate front groups of which Dow is a member:


Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations


American Tort Reform Association


Business Roundtable


Chemical Manufacturers Association


Chlorine Chemistry Council


Global Climate Coalition


The Coalition for Improved Environmental Audits

Each of the above groups is working to undo public health or environmental legislation, through US or international bodies like the World Trade Organization. Dow is also one of the leading contributors to conservative think tanks behind a campaign to roll back the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) authority to protect public health. DowElanco, a subsidiary, gave $52,500 between 1992 and 1995 to think tanks orchestrating the anti-FDA campaign.

Recently, Dow has turned to radio and TV advertising to promote its "corporate citizenship." The ads include a TV spot promoting the benefits of silicone products, which is airing in New Orleans, where a breast implant trial is being held. This ad, sponsored by Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, was produced by the American Tort Reform Association (see above list of front groups). University of Houston law professor Joseph Sanders said, "It may be that [corporate defendants] are able to buy themselves something that should not be for sale."


Dow has developed software that can rapidly identify employees in key Congressional districts in order to generate "grassroots" political pressure by its plant workers.


In 1995 Dow "loaned" one of its scientists, Dale Humbert, as staff for the House Commerce Committee–the same committee that oversees the EPA and the FDA.

Dow has a representative, Dave Buzzelli, on the unelected President's Council on Sustainable Development. Jonathan Lash, president of the World Resources Institute and member of Dow's Corporate Environmental Advisory Council, also serves on the President's Council. The Council on Sustainable Development was set up to develop policies on manufacturing, managing natural resources, and sustainable communities.

WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Conceptual shifts in scientific thinking - Dow scientists stuck in the old world ?

An essay which first appeared on the San Francisco Medical Societies web site in November 2002 provides an excellent review of current scientific thinking in the area of environmental toxicology.  Rachel's Environment & Health News ( ) article #757 provides a review of the essay.  Dow Chemical's behavior concerning toxic chemicals seems to be consistant, i.e.  promote  "Corporate Science" and ignore (at least publicly) this NEW shift in thinking by the rest of the worlds scientist.  The following is an excerpt from the essay,  just substitute the word DOW for OLD in the 9 points listed below.

"We're in the Midst of a Scientific Revolution...The revolution arises from scientific discoveries which establish that many chemicals -- both from the natural world and synthesized in laboratories -- interfere with the biochemical messaging systems that direct the biological development of plants and animals, including humans."   These discoveries "are forcing a series of conceptual shifts upon toxicology as it integrates these new findings with long-standing assumptions".

Conceptual Shifts in Scientific Thinking:

  1. 1. OLD: High level contamination overwhelms detoxification and other defense mechanisms. NEW: Low level contamination hijacks control of development.
  2. 2. OLD: The dose makes the poison. NEW: Non-monotonic dose response curves are common, in which low level exposures cause effects that disappear at higher levels. [See text for the meaning of non-monotonic.]
  3. 3. OLD: Only high levels of exposure matter. NEW: Impacts caused at what had been assumed to be background levels.
  4. 4. OLD: Focus on adults. NEW: Periods of rapid growth and development (prenatal through puberty) are most sensitive to exposure.
  5. 5. OLD: A small number of bad actors. NEW: Many chemicals thought safe are biological active and capable of interfering with signaling systems.
  6. 6. OLD: Immediate cause and effect. NEW: Long latencies are common; fetal programming can lead to disease and disabilities decades later.
  7. 7. OLD: Examine chemicals one compound at a time. NEW: In real life, mixtures are the rule. They can lead to effects at much lower levels than indicated by simple experiments with single chemicals.
  8. 8. OLD: Focus on traditional toxicological endpoints like mutagenesis carcinogenesis, cell death. NEW: Wide range of health endpoints, including immune system dysfunction (both hyper and hypo-active); neurological, cognitive and behavioral effects; reproductive dysfunctions; chronic diseases.
  9. 9. OLD: One-to-one mapping of contaminant to disease or disability. NEW: Same contaminant can cause many different effects, depending upon when exposure occurs during development and what signals it disrupts. Multiple contaminants can cause same endpoint [effect], if they disrupt the same developmental process.

WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)
01/29/06 WHO bars Dow from participating in setting global protection standards

According to a recent API story, The International Life Sciences Institute , funded by hundreds of corporations including Dow Chemical, was barred by the World Health Organization (WHO) from helping set global standards for protecting food and water supplies because of its funding sources.

bullet"The WHO and other public health agencies risk their scientific credibility and may be compromising public health by partnering with ILSI,"
bullet"the institute 'has a demonstrated history of putting the interests of its exclusively corporate membership ahead of science and health concerns, and that ILSI's special status with the WHO provides a back door to influence WHO activities.'

WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Are your ready to visit the other side?

Just remember, the MDEQ, EPA, WHO, and many others seem to think dioxin is MUCH more of a health hazard.  Consider the closing quote from the MDCH/DEQ  Dioxin Fact Sheet:   "... recent studies suggest that dioxins may be far more harmful to human health than was previously believed and these standards as well as others set for soil, sediment, and food may change in the future."  

All right, if you really want to see's Dow's Dioxin Information   web site, click here. :-(


Locations of visitors to this page

WB01727_.gif (697 bytes)

Back Up Next  Back to the top   Site Map