Popcorn Lung, which is bronchiolitis obliterans, is a disease that destroys lung tissue, and with continued exposture a peroson will need a lung transplant. One of it's causes is when diacetyl, a food flavoring, is inhaled at high doses. In May 2000 it was first seen in a concentrated number of cases in Jasper, Missouri of workers at a Gilster-Mary Lee microwave popcorn-processing plant, by Dr. Allan Parmet. From here study after sudy was done to show the effect of this toxic chemical: rats, testing workers in flavoring plants, and the final punch . . . when a consumer of popcorn was diagnosed with popcorn lung.
From the time of the Gilster-Mary Lee workers diagnoses to the consumer (Mr. Wayne Watson) was a seven year span. Seven years of NIOSH suggesting regulation after regulation, and experiment after experiment showing that this chemical was dangerous and should be regulated. However, then did not have the athority to back thes regulations, OSHA did. Then the National Government ordered OSHA to do something. In response OSHA did nothing, stating there hands were tied, because there was no regulations in place to be enforced (and OSHA does not make regulations, they only enforce them). Finally, in May 2007 the FDA was forced to remove diacetyl form the market until adequate testing could be done. Only after most companies usning diacetyl in there flavoring had already stopped due to bad press.
So if NIOSH can not regulated recomendations, but OSHA can. Yet, OSHA can not regulate anything that does not have stipulations on a chemicals limit, then who puts into place the regulations on these items? And, where were they in this whole web of regulations and regulator? If NIOSH or OSHA could see something wrong, why did they not contact the appropriate athorities to set a regulation for OSHA to enforce?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interestingly, the agency that is supposed to be protecting worker safety seems to be more concerned with protecting industry. "OSHA has moved from a regulatory to a collaborative/consultative model." Like Dr. Jecklin said in class, do we want government controlling industry or industry controlling government? In this case it seems we have the latter. I am seriously concerned about not only the continued used of diacetyl, but about what other chemicals are being used in our factories and foods that have reported health affects that have been swept under the rug. Michaels states that new science has little to no impact on regulations concerning worker/consumer health and that OSHA has "virtually given up on developing new regulations or strengthening outdated ones." WHAT DOES THIS ORGANIZATION EXIST FOR?! Do we really have a system so incompetent that government workers poo poo themselves for having a difficult job?! A system so incompetent that the people who are charged with protecting our health have given up because industry has found a more effective way to champion their cause--money? I'm embarrassed as an American and furious as a 21st century citizen that we are still being put in harms way over somebody's profits! Why isn't our government ENFORCING by LAW the mandatory removal of all diacetyl from ALL products?? Oh yea... that's right, less government is better, we'll all be more "inventive" and "creative." Apparently being more inventive and creative to our government means DYING ON THE JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Ok, that's a little overboard--LOL) Con Agra removed diacetyl from their product. I eat Orville Redenbacher popcorn frequently and find it to taste exactly like I want it to: like popcorn but without death. Is it really more expensive or does it alter the elemental essence of the product so much it becomes a different product altogether?? I would bet not. Come on OSHA...MAN UP!
ReplyDeleteBoy popcorn is definitely starting to get a bad rep with this “POPCORN LUNG”. When reading this chapter I was more interested not in the chemicals, which were used in the popcorn making, but at the actions which were taken by various government agencies. One agency cannot regulate this and the other cannot regulate that. The government has many agencies, all whom are funded by the nations taxpayers. Yet when the time comes to go to work, the agencies fail. For example, all that happened following Hurricane Katrina.
ReplyDeleteAs I always say, it would not be bad to work for one of these agencies such as OSHA, but somewhere down the line one will have to deal with politicians. Who knows maybe someone on capital hill had affiliation with various popcorn makers and had affiliations with regulatory government agencies. I am glad to hear that diacetyl was removed from the production of popcorn, but still how long did it take, almost 7 years. Just because one agency couldn’t do this and the other couldn’t do that. The questions where does society start to combat industries, which use “agents” which are harmful to our health? Do we stop buying those products? Do we take it all the way to capital hill and fight it there? I just feel that with government agencies and politics, its just the like six degrees of Kevin Bacon. No matter how you look at it, they are connected in one form or another, and not necessarily all for good. In closing I would say that yes we need to look at the products, which are used in and around food processing companies, but also look at the agencies who regulate standards.
I totally agree with the discussion questions at the end of Paula's blog...why is it that there wasn't anything set into place, as far as a regulation, fo OSHA to stand by...very very, intersting and furthermore, after a situation like this, why are there not any efforts being made to possibly change the role that OSHA plays in the whole regulation stipulations? Why can't OSHA put regulations into place instead of being the one who enforces them? Also, after reading this, I do not recall this issue one bit...so is this one of those coverups or an issue that purposely did not receive much attention to lessent he worry and keep everyone mum? Are there more instances like this that we do not know about? Or do we as a soceity do not become aware of issues until after action has been taken?? Interesting...........
ReplyDeleteA successful company always has support and back up from contact of inner government. They know how to avoid the surveillance and detection from government and agencies. Those agencies did not work together. Where is the code ethic of these agencies and mission. IF these agencies can not regulate indutries. who can do it? The basic responsibility to keep the stable health standard for workers and taxpayers is inexistent. No one want to pick up this bad result and recover it. The middle class,who lost their family numbers in workforce, can not become the pedestal of social pyramid any more. Be honestly, it is not the first one and the last one round us. How can government or alliance/ agencies fix it up generally?
ReplyDeleteHere is a link from committee on education and labor annotated the Popcorn Workers Lung Disease Prevention Act (Diacetyl): http://edlabor.house.gov/popcorn-workers-lung-disease-prevention-act-diacetyl/index.shtml
I agree with a lot of what everyone has said, I found myself nodding to what Alyson was saying about why don't we do something about OSHA and their ability to not only enforce the laws, but be a big part of creation or recommendations for new or revised laws. Afterall they are the ones who are rolling up their sleeves and in the middle of it all, they would know what should be enacted or things that probably should be enforced, or would they? It concerns me that again even if they don't have that power, say something! Whoever does have the power may not know about it, and by not bringing such giant concerns to fruition you are essentially lieing by omission.
ReplyDeleteI often struggle with a lot of these issues and peoples' general level of morality and personal values. Does money seriously drive such dismissal of all knowledge of general "right and wrong". I just don't see how people can just turn away from these things, and act as if it wasn't their responsibility or they were unaware. I guess we can only control our own actions, and trust they will be dealt with by a higher power eventually.
It is unfortunate, that it took five years with numerous studies and many lives lost, to have convinced OSHA the linkage diacetyl and lung disease.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Hui, successful companies always have the support to back from contract of the inner government. Our government is controlled by the power of money. When a large organization has the money it gives them the authority to protect themselves no matter what. Since we now have understanding of the role agency play on this working world, it’s our responsibility as health educators to be aware of government actions, and those who are run in the government. As well, it is our responsibility to emphasize awareness on control of political power to the media and to inform them on the right resources that they can trust.
What is your price? Often times in films about corporate wrong doing, the villain often says to the protagonist that, "that everyone has a price." Is this true? While doubt is an easy thing to apply to the anonymous characterization of popular thought, what examples illustrate how an individual is influenced by doubt? Is there anything that influences individuals in these situations besides being bought for a price or being immobilized by doubt?
ReplyDeleteLoved this since I have never heard of Poopcorn lung before and I am totally and utterly disgusted with the companies that did not follow through on the regulations that they were to instill in their companies...lives are on the line and hindered due to their bad judgement! Terrible!
ReplyDeleteTobacco, diacetyl, lead, etc. Just threse three represent enduring battles with tragic consequences resulting disabilities, disease, and premature death. The longer the battles, the larger the number of lives that are changed forever. Law and order is too slow and ineffective for many victims. I believe the judiciary should be expanded to include a science court. Just as we use drug courts in La Crosse County to improve our effectiveness with drug offenders, we need a science court to improve our ability to apply science to environmental, worker, and consumer protection. The lack of specialized knowledge in our regular courts and legislative bodies makes them ineffective in resolving regulatory disputes. The essential role of doubt in science should not be used to deny us reasoned and reasonable protection from risk. Risk is never certain, it is always emergent, and daily living requires that we not only manage certain threats but also risks. Societal decisions about risks should not be determined by the greater power to litigate, but instead should be determined by courts that are prepared,skilled, and knowledgeable in quickly understanding the nature of risk based scientific argument--not just legal argument.
ReplyDeleteThe first three we have covered in this class are intense chapters with jaw dropping subjects. The video of the employee which was shown in class was crazy. Just hearing the mans voice, you knew he has plenty of pain. Then we heard his regiment of getting ready in the morning, which is hard enough, but how long will the man be able to live like that. How long are lungs like that able to last for. Its a very sore subject, but I am pretty sure that the man would have traded the money he won from the settlement just to have his original lungs back. PJ very good choice on the video, you should try to track that guy down, and see how he is doing, overall good choice with the video.
ReplyDeleteI haven't heard of this either, before we read and talked about it in class. As I mentioned in class, the obvious question would be what can be done to help the victims: medicine, lung transplants, etc? But once again, this doesn't solve the issue, rather take the "guilt" off of the company beause the injured party was healed, or taken care of. But realistically there is so much more than just patching up the outside, just think of the pain and worry the victim's families and themselves go through before being healed, if that is even possible. Very well, they could live like this for the rest of their lives. Oh- "but they are "taken care of" I forgot about the heap of money they are sitting on". Please.
ReplyDeleteI haven't heard a lot of popcorn lung case in China. Maybe it is because popcorn is not that popular in China compare to the U.S. However, it recalled me the case report of sillicosis in China. It is still considered a very serious occupational lung disease in China, and happen a lot in labors who exposure to silica dust work place. Although it is preventable occupation disease, it has a very high incidence in miners in China now. Although there is worksite environment policy has came into being already, it doesn't carry out effectively in China. It brought me a thinking that public health policies always tend to promote and advocate the public health issues. However, if it is going to protect thoes people under a harmful situation, I think the policies and execution organs should stand in a stronger position and provide somewhat mandatory method.
ReplyDeletePaula, I thought the video of Eric Peoples was a great tool to allow us to truly get at the center of the issue--the people and how poor workplace saftey policy affects their lives. Those are the stories we need to hear. Those are the words that will create the force needed to make change.
ReplyDeleteI found the back and forth descriptions of OSHA and NIOSH interventions in this chapter interesting and unnerving: interesting because it helped be understand the roles and limitations of each a little more and unnerving, because even with 'big brother' NIOSH on the job as well OSHA still did subpar work. Typically with a little accountability even a less than reputable individual, organization or company can produce quality results. What does this say about OSHA? Also, noting the double standards of OSHA mentioned on page 113, where they sometimes 'invest a great deal of time an resources' and other times, 'simply take a pass' I wonder who or what is behind this dichotomy?
ReplyDelete--------------------------
Because I was gone the week of the in class presentation, i will post my comments here after reading everyone's posting above. I am very concerned about the efficacy of OSHA to protect employees safety after reading this chapter- as are the rest of us it seems- and I think it is imperative to having a regulating body that consistently commits time and resources to risk assessments versus taking a pass as mentioned in the chapter. I too, however, noted the powerful force of the consumer and media again. Noted on page 119 in the final paragraph stating that Pop Weaver, a major popcorn manufacturers rejected the use of diacetyl in flavoring when the media got wind of the research of Dr. Rose. Despite all the years of trying to change things, it came down to a few days and avoiding protest from consumers.