Opinion ID: 203936
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Cancer from VC exposure

Text: The understanding that VC was carcinogenic first began to emerge among members of the PVC industry roughly a decade after the discovery of VC's toxicity to the liver. Sometime in late 1969 or early 1970, Dr. Viola discovered that rats exposed to high levels of VC over a twelve-month period developed cancers of the skin, lungs, and bones. Dr. Viola first presented his findings in May 1970, at the Tenth International Cancer Congress in Houston, Texas. The results were subsequently published in Cancer Research in May 1971. Members of the PVC industry took immediate notice of Dr. Viola's work. Dr. Viola was invited to meet with ACC's Occupational Health Committee in Washington D.C. on May 5-6, 1971, so members of the committee could gather more information on his studies. Monsanto's representative on the committee, Dr. Johnson, was absent, but the record establishes that Monsanto would have received the minutes from the meeting because it was a committee member. Those minutes describe Dr. Viola's methods, the results of his research, and his ongoing studies. The minutes also detail industry research proposals, including both an animal cancer study and an epidemiological study of workers in the PVC industry. On November 16, 1971, Dr. Viola's work and industry research proposals were again discussed by the ACC, at the Vinyl Chloride Industry Conference. This time, Monsanto's Dr. Johnson was present. ACC also formed special committees to address different aspects of the cancer issue. Dr. Johnson became a member of the Ad Hoc Planning Group for Vinyl Chloride Research, and Monsanto's Elmer Wheeler became a member of the Technical Task Group on Toxicology of Vinyl Chloride Monomer Carcinogenicity, as well as other groups. [11] As the understanding of the cancer risk grew in the early 1970's, ACC played a central role in communicating current research results and in coordinating industry response efforts. For example, in late 1971, ACC became aware that additional animal studies at lower exposure levels were being conducted in Europe by Professor Cesare Maltoni of the University of Bologna. In his affidavit, Bruce Eley stated that Monsanto and the other members of the ACC desire[d] ... to learn the results and the study designs of the European animal studies. Members of the ACC were able to secure release of the Maltoni study data by signing a secrecy agreement, which companies executed individually. Monsanto signed such an agreement on December 1, 1972, promising not to disclose study results outside the company. Subsequently, Monsanto received minutes from a January 17, 1973 meeting between Dr. Maltoni and ACC representatives, as well as minutes from a January 30, 1973 ACC meeting of the Vinyl Chloride Research Coordinators regarding the Maltoni cancer research. On January 16, 1974, Monsanto learned that Dr. Maltoni's team had discovered tumors in rats exposed to VC concentrations as low as 250 ppm, and that Dr. Johnson, now employed by Goodrich, had discovered liver cancer in two PVC workers. Read in the light most favorable to the appellants, the record shows that Monsanto became aware, at roughly the same time as appellees Dow, Goodrich and Union Carbide, of the carcinogenicity of VC. Principally, Monsanto's representation on the ACC committees that responded to the research of Dr. Viola and Professor Maltoni ensured that it received current information, sometimes before that information became public. Monsanto's occupational medicine department was fully equipped to understand and to act on that information. In the words of the district court, Monsanto... was fully as knowledgeable as... any of its subsidiary suppliers, of the risks of VC. Therefore, on this record, a reasonable jury could only conclude that Monsanto knew, or reasonably should have known, of the risk of cancer posed by exposure to VC. See Carrel, 852 N.E.2d at 108. For Dow, Goodrich, and Union Carbide to have provided Monsanto with warningswhen all four companies were discovering these risks concurrently would have been plainly superfluous. See id. at 112. Nor could it be reasonably concluded that such a warning would have reduced the likelihood of injury to Taylor, since Monsanto also knew that exposure to VC could cause cancer. See Bavuso, 563 N.E.2d at 202. [12] Appellees Dow, Goodrich and Union Carbide are therefore entitled to summary judgment on Counts I-IV and Count X of the Complaint. [13]