SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the never-met-a-problem-we-couldn't-solve-by-outsourcing dept.
Results in epidemiology often are equivocal, and money can cloud science (see: tobacco companies vs. cancer researchers). Clear-cut cases are rare. Yet just such a case showed up one day in 1984 in the office of Harris Pastides, a recently appointed associate professor of epidemiology at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
A graduate student named James Stewart, who was working his way through school as a health and safety officer at Digital Equipment Corp., told Pastides there had been a number of miscarriages at the company's semiconductor plant in nearby Hudson, Mass. Women, especially of childbearing age, filled an estimated 68 percent of the U.S. tech industry's production jobs, and Stewart knew something few outsiders did: Making computer chips involved hundreds of chemicals. The women on the production line worked in so-called cleanrooms and wore protective suits, but that was for the chips' protection, not theirs. The women were exposed to, and in some cases directly touched, chemicals that included reproductive toxins, mutagens, and carcinogens. Reproductive dangers are among the most serious concerns in occupational health, because workers' unborn children can suffer birth defects or childhood diseases, and also because reproductive issues can be sentinels for disorders, especially cancer, that don't show up in the workers themselves until long after exposure.
Digital Equipment agreed to pay for a study, and Pastides, an expert in disease clusters, designed and conducted it. Data collection was finished in late 1986, and the results were shocking: Women at the plant had miscarriages at twice the expected rate. In November, the company disclosed the findings to employees and the Semiconductor Industry Association, a trade group, and then went public. Pastides and his colleagues were heralded as heroes by some and vilified by others, especially in the industry.
As the effects of the chemicals used in chip manufacturing became known, production was shifted to South Korea where the problems continued.
(Score: 2) by KGIII on Sunday June 18 2017, @03:22AM (1 child)
When I was younger, and moss not even evolved, we heard this as being presented as valid science and policy:
"The solution to pollution is dilution."
Which, I suppose, is valid science but probably not very good policy. When I read a thread about this same link, there were a few comments that seemed to be still based on this. Their reasoning was that those developing nations weren't actually polluted enough.
I could see a reasoned, if probably unethical, argument to support that claim. When I finished the thread, none of them had. Their reasoning was pretty much, "Fuck those dirty foreigners. I want cheap stuff." I do award them bonus points for their honesty. I'm also pretty sure society should have a serious discussion about maybe, just maybe, actually holding people accountable.
Also, chip manufacturing requires some pretty nasty stuff. There is no known way around using said nasty stuff. Some increased automation might actually help. It isn't as if robots don't exist. Somewhere between full automation and full manual labor, there is probably a point where it's reasonably safe. I imagine that would take empathy and investment, which makes it rather unlikely.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 18 2017, @05:30AM
I think dilution is still used to make sure some of the less harmful compounds are within limits of the city's sewer system.