tv Documentary RT June 18, 2017 7:29am-8:01am EDT
i think it might have been my little bit that there might have been not that i don't like that i accept that i don't have money coming over i'd like the template but i'm not going to get any live. somebody to. see. if anybody. stanton glantz only learned of this case through the documents we showed him. the approaches that they used to attack the person doing the research on linking cured meats with cancer were the standard things they do one is to go through her work
with a fine tooth comb and find every little thing they could possibly complain about and because the issues tend to be fairly technical. you know if you're a politician or if you're a reporter or english or a highly specialized reporter all you hear is well this person said there was something bad and this other person said that they didn't know what they were talking about and settled these efforts to go after the scientists and to discredit the scientists is a key element of a much larger strategy to just gum up the entire policymaking process to the point where nothing happens that translates into hundreds of billions of dollars of sales and profits so the whole game is just slow down. in the documents on dr preston martin other even more machiavellian scenarios were studied. here it was suggested that talks be held with the scientist.
and hear a proposed seminar in order to lure her. to influence her and even shape the conclusions of her future studies. the common point of these documents they all come from the same lobbying firm multinational business services. already hired by philip morris to contest the effects of passive smoking on health and headed by a certain jim toth see a master of influence. amazingly in washington the heart of american power this lobbyist is still well established. as he never answered our requests for an interview we went to see him without an appointment with our documents in hand and a hidden camera it's. to
get into the u.s. he works here who are you where i'm going to french and journalist i'm looking for and i'm working on the knob the name. of the new point meant no new i was just looking for him because i called from france but you can sound these are. the good news american lobbyists can be welcoming. we even managed to have jim talk to you on his cell phone. here come in here please. jim can you hear me. i want to ask you some questions susan system not to. work. because you have the set up a strategy to discredit. us con man you are so i wanted to know more about this.
well. i don't know if you're just talking about. me and i know if you do your work in congress i'm going to ask you i can say no i'm going to have to as you believe. understand you if you like the welcoming lobbyist you love the angry why i'm asking you to have no point inductees leave now join me to leave you can lose your yes please please i am motoring you out can't just leave now that it's out. of here ok you understand that you have a tough life. here and you cannot go back. to you had to end like that. in the end mr trott's he did
a great job well at least for the industrialist. back then and he pressed the martin arguments were brought into the media spotlight. by this health journalist on a major national t.v. channel a few days after the publication of the famous study. let's get back to our hot dog study remember they asked the people did you eat a hot dog they didn't ask them did you put it in a bun did you put ketchup on it did you put mustard on. you might be saying who really cares one way or the other but that's important because it may be that it's not the hot dog at all that's causing this increased risk of cancer or maybe it's the maybe it's the ketchup maybe it's the mustard so you have to be careful when you read these studies not to say oh this causes this. the powers that be didn't go any farther than one nine hundred seventy s. nitrites file which could have resurfaced remains locked away. you're probably
wondering what susan president thinks the woman targeted by the lobby. we showed her the documents and what upset her the most was seeing that fellow scientists had played along with the industrialists. these professors will get paid a huge amount to do review by in this case probably the american media i mean thousands and thousands of dollars they probably get more from doing this kind of thing than they do from their regular jobs. seeing your name like this in all. my goodness a i gave a lot of people a lot of work. were you aware of this well i was aware that the processed meat community was concerned. but not aware of all the extent of this. twenty years on and she had turned the page.
not of interest anymore that's how. the public awareness of science goes it's of interest in that it's not of interest seen in all that work today but it doesn't it doesn't matter i mean it's still in the literature and. it may influence people in future and it has influence people in the past and that's fine. but another scientist involved in the case has enjoyed a much more flourishing career. a scientist paid by the american meat institute to shoot down susan preston martin's work. david clear found. today david gergen is head of the u.s. government's nutrition program and he's invited all over the world for a scientific conferences where he gives his experts point of view. totally
independent. this week to. introduce reasons why the need is important to be healthy diet has been just. on that day he was in france speaking to scientists from around the world about meat and the link between processed meat and cancer in order to denounce backed up by a power point the climate of fear panic and even hysteria. and we know because we were there. it was right at the start of our investigation when we barely knew about nitrites and had the need of enlightened specialists to help us. so there are new reviews published this year that say nitrite is not harmful and others that say it is harmful. i don't think anybody really knows. definitively what but the answer is. a few months after this
handshake you can learn more about the industry and doubt bells started ringing. so we took advantage of our trip to america to ask him for another interview. only this time with a lot more cards up our sleeve. do you remember american meat institute no never no i was interested in the scientists was interesting martin do you know her i know who she is i do not know her personally i do remember reading a paper on her for the american meat institute found this and it was prepared for the american newton says fruit. ok there. this is something different yes. this was done twenty years ago roughly
so. i had forgotten about that do you remember how much you were paid for this evaluation though i do not as i said it was twenty or twenty five years ago you didn't know when you were working for the american it is you that philip morris was opening there. i'm not going to say yes or no at this point in time because it's more than twenty years ago did you know that the tobacco strategy motto was doubt is our product no i never heard that no no don't close your productive to. that was not mine and that was not my intent my intent was to do an evaluation. if i had read these papers and found that there were not shortcomings in the papers that they would not deficiencies in the papers i don't think i would have
criticized them but don't you think that your point of view would be stronger than your argument stronger if i hadn't found that you had been won by the american meat institute. no i don't i don't think that. would change it wouldn't change my point of view it might change your point of view that you tend to not believe what i'm saying because twenty five years ago i got some amount of money that i don't remember. for making progress he can't remember how much but he does remember getting paid. but you have to understand that the industry is a money making business so they're very risk averse they would not fund a study that. someone proposed to them that eating hot dogs increases the risk of childhood cancer why would they fund that you know they would only fund something that says. proposes that childhood cancer is prevented by eating more
hotdogs or if there's no relationship you know they're not going to fund a study that. is bad for their business. well at least he's honest much of the meat industry is lobbying depends on collaboration with paid scientists and that's still how things work. during a conference on processed meats and cancer. of french scientists confirmed that. there is no reference on the subject internationally renowned expert. he speaks and acts casually and doesn't call it telling us how things work at scientific events. it is just because he is a little supersede mr t. to me it is about the need to. get to points with you have to be it's a deep they call it just comes to me. me all the.
good. luck. little. does she don't consume don't jell you've been talking to her the whole joking there on the stand on the mobile soon enough that equal distance is my son and what he calls this tells me that. this would all be done to tell him to live the way that devotional moodiness is only as a zillion times out of us it all took the sitting on. the block to sell you on the idea that dropping bombs brings in the chicken hawks forcing you to fight the battle is going. to do socks for the tell you that every gossip published by itself or. off the bad guys and tell me you are not
to americans he came across at a conference on meat and cancer. and nathan bryant. as we checked out these scientists profiles we discovered a document which should certainly never have been on the web. internal report issued by the american meat institute. it lays out the strategy for influencing the decisions of high profile organizations. this organization is the i r c international agency for research on cancer. this institution based. is the worldwide reference on cancer. in two thousand and six i see scientists classified nitrites in the probably
carcinogenic category of products group too. and that was bad for business. so lobbyists are fighting to have this classification changed. page sixty four of the document. changing the r.c. nitrate nitrate classification from two to be. possibly carcinogenic. the strategy has been a. r.c. challenge. it notably involves the two scientists we were interested in andrew wilkow sweet and nice and bright. armed with our brand new file it was time to set off to meet the meat sector heavyweights. welcome to nashville tennessee the capital of country music and
notably the hometown of johnny cash. it's here that the american meat institute is holding its annual conference. in this huge building to be precise. the meat industry in the u.s. is very very big business. all of the world's biggest players are here. smithfield number one imports with a turnover of fourteen billion dollars a year cargo the giant with thirty three billion dollars a year in crude alone. and tyson people all divisions record holder this year will meet. with all of our divisions between or poultry and prepared between that thirty seven billion and forty billion dollars in revenue so it's a snowball maybe very small company. and. we checked it's over forty
one billion dollars. after half an hour we spot a face in the crowd that rings a bell. that will and they're testing nibbles at every stand. that's right page ninety two of the i.r.c. challenge document here with the short hair the american meat institute senior vice president of public affairs janet riley. is just she's thirty i don't know lieutenant trying to tell i'm something i'm looking so close to on to say tend to answer any question about seduction type found. it's is this document it didn't do it i'm sorry. i wanted to supposed to. poke it and i didn't see it registered no no actually it wasn't just so but i have some important question that you keep your business yes of course i have mine step journalist
caught just a question i want you to know what do you know about the eon challenge you know might be octet into your camera and silly know what i'm doing that it's a book not shot and dances think you know this is mine so me and i wanted to know who came so much for our interview not me why you disagree with you why you are. having been escorted outside. this is my press conference ok i've been ordered to show id we try one last time it's close do. what tobacco industry did for t.k. that's your opinion that's your opinion what we're doing is providing science based here if you doubt this that our products are safe and it's political scene right there but are you paying those scientists know you've got a camera will we know you. look away for such cases we always have a plan b. . on the list of i.r.c. challenge scientists there was one who agreed to see us the first on the list.
andrew wilkow scheme. we had to madison wisconsin. this city in the north of the united states is home to andrew housekeeper and the company of hot dog king oscar meyer who we came across in the preston martin case america is. the scientist work for this company for thirty years. you know to. he's at the university. but he doesn't hide his proximity to the american meat body. presented with our i.r.c. challenge documents he acknowledges everything. almost. so
did the meat industry paid you for this i received some compensation for my time as well as the others how much. i'm not going to say i don't know thousands tens of thousands of dollars. small amounts. can we have an idea. and defending not tried since to be a very big thing for industry looking for a substitute. has been attempted. and was a tall sally. something as chemically simple as nitrite. and as unique as nitrate having a substitute has not been possible to anyone's ability but if there is more risk of getting cancer don't you think it's important to try to find a solution. now as we're going to see really because they do not believe that that
risk is is true you think there is no risk at all. i think the risk is. if it is indeed. on hearing that we pulled this expression. so for andrew wilkow ski the colorectal cancer or the hundreds of studies on the dangers of nitrites none of it exists if you go nothing to do with it. in the united states it's thanks to scientists like neil county that the meat industry has been able to cut another notch in its belt. surprisingly in the health conscious state of california. this imposing building is home to the state cabinet level california environmental
protection agency. we have an appointment with sam dell sent deputy director for external and legislative affairs. to show us a document that doesn't exist in any other american state when the show or. something. so this is the lists. it's a list of substances judged dangerous to man by the state of california. to do business here manufacturers are banned from using these substances or they are obliged to warn consumers and it's very restrictive because there are over eight hundred products on the list so good example that would be tobacco smoke. totally there's other things like benzene that would be something you know we have come in things like exhaust and then here we have an ounce of britain and then as aspirin
you know it's a special note especially for pregnant women oh here's kind of an odd one but you know the breath of bird you know if you want to eat this go for it but be aware that you maybe don't want to eat it every single day so i'm doing fine i tried it i tried is not on the list. it's been here since nitrites has been targeted but procedures have never been seen through when we believe the chemical meets the criteria for listing we post what's known as a notice of intent to list and that triggers a period in which people can submit public comments on whether it does or does not meet the criteria we review the comments before making a final decision to complete. the nitrites here are the comments that swung the scale of the seven contributions six come from food industry lobbyists. and with thirty one pages the winner is. andrew milk house.
before the interview we show. our documents on the. challenge and the attempts at influence. based as an avalanche of proof gathered during months of investigation he ends up taking out his cell phone to take photos. however in answering our questions he seems less inspired. we. it's their business if they think that they can. influence the decision be on the science but we want the science to the talking do you think it might happen that some times you are many created by the industry we. we do our best. to make decisions based soley on the science regardless of whatever.
pressure or attempts at persuasion may be made by any outside group. ok. before you will read sam and the dangers of nitrites but not before next year. for the lobby it's a mini victory time gained and profits not lost. in europe a new study on nitrite was expected in december two thousand and fifteen almost a year later it still has not been.
well first and foremost a president who said you just did you see he doesn't see marshmallows as the ground solution the president said again and again that he does the law and he does that he's not been here for the long haul. is that in december so well so there's no read need for it but to imply that you would like to extend martial law for that for personal reasons or for small for. such an environment. with. chemical discoveries over the last century made
every day life easier but at what cost this is cereal is exempt. no wonder it's confidential. says the years old industrial giants reaps the benefit. by chemical production. you know as if these people aren't people just experimental animals. the toxic environment continues to poison lives and we found these astronomically high levels of dioxin levels that my staff think maybe some of the highest levels ever found in the united states for almost thirty years this very serious problem had not actually been addressed what will that investigation into the chemical industry secrets revealed. to specific.
enough that it could have now how does it. keep the point i. wanted to leave you would have been obvious even. to. me. plus. the city people. didn't. vote but i thought it might have been my little bit of a what if i'm not proud of it i accept that i don't have much good to know about much of the woodwork to mop up to go to but and. this is. why. some forces of. some scientists. to see. even to look over.
IN COLLECTIONSRussia Today Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on