Donald R. Bennett, transcript of Videotaped deposition, regarding breast implants. July 18, 1994.
Page 106
associate general counsel for Dow Corning during the years I was there. And he and Harry Dingman, who were general counsel, if they ran across something, would often bring it to our attention. But we did not specifically track that as a unit. We didn’t have the resources to do that, although I would receive various—And I see you’ve got them there.(Indicating) We would receive various communications that would come through that might pertain to silicon-containing materials.
Q: Do you remember a gentleman named Lewis, N.E. Lewis?
A: I don’t. In general counsel’s office, I assume. I—I don’t.
Q: They would handle the patents and occasionally come across patents that may be of relevance to you?
A: Might be of interest, and the would—And they often would send that on to those of us they thought might be interested in it. It was really a
Page 107
Courtesy.
Q: And you actually kept a copy—
A: I kept copies of them.
Q: Of these patents?
A: Right.
Q: In the patent file?
A: Yes, under the patent file.
Q: And you’ve been nice enough to produce that for us today, correct:
A: Yes. I was asked what documents I had. I had those because—
Q: Have you shown those documents to Mr. Donley or any other attorney representing Dow Corning?
A: You’re the first person that’s pulled those out of the file other than myself in 20 years.
Q: Okay. Let me show you this—Well, let me ask you a question. Did you have any contact in the ’65-’66 time concerning or with a—I’m sorry—with a gentleman named Dorsey Mussell, M-u-s-s-e-l-l, a Dow
Page 108
Chemical employee?
A: No.
Q: What about a John Leasure, L-e-a-s-u-r-e, from Illinois who worked for Dow Chemical?
A: No. It doesn’t ring a bell.
Q: Now, you set up in the Bioscience Research a Plant Science Division; correct?
A: Uh-huh (indicating affirmatively). That’s right.
Q: And they were going to look at the effects of organosilicons on plant growth; correct?
A: All sorts of—
Q: All sorts of things. Aspiration; correct?
A: Transpiration.
Q: Transpiration. Thank you. And even insecticides, the use of organosilicons for insecticides; correct:?
A: Right.
Q: And do you know if Dow Chemical was actually doing some work in
Page 109
The 1960s? Did you have any knowledge of this, of Dow Chemical doing work with organosilicon compounds in the 160s where they were looking at modifying the growth characteristics of plants?
A: I don’t specifically recall that. That was a unit which was not in the toxicology building. I don’t recall that we sent chemicals there, but then I—We didn’t make the chemicals. I don’t recall Bioscience ever having a contract of any kind like that at all.
Q: Were you aware of a group at Dow Chemical Corporation, either in Indiana or in Midland, Michigan or anywhere else, which was looking at the organosilicon compounds and its biological effects on plants in the 1960’s.
A: I don’t recall that, no. I’m sorry.
Q: Now, let me show you a patent which I pulled from your file, patent file. It’s and old patent—It appears to have been filed May 11th, 1966—“METHOD FOR MODIFYING THE GROWTH CHARACTERISTICS
Page 110
OF PLANTS,” John K. Leasure, Doris—Dorsey R. Mussell, assignors to the Dow Chemical Company, and its patent number, 3,421,881. And in showing you this, sir, does this refresh your memory of any work that was done by Dow Chemical scientists in the mid-1960s concerning organosilicons and the biological effects on plants?
A: (Witness examining document) You said “silicons,” because this—No. I was not—not aware of that.
Q: Okay.
A: I mean it’s—Obviously I was aware of it at one time. When we got them, we looked at them. But—That might give us a lead in our own unit, but we would not—publicly not contact these people at all.
MR. ELLIS:
Okay. Now, just for the record, I’m going back to this newsletter, which is LAK 1 through 11, and we’re going to introduce that as an
Page 111
exhibit. And we’ll make this United States patent that I just referred to, the Dow Chemical 1966 patent—We’ll make it Bennett Exhibit 1.
MR. KENNELLY:
And make sure you copy the back It’s got the date stamped on it.
MR. ELLIS:
And counsel for Dr. Bennett indicated that it was date-stamped “RECEIVED, MARCH 21ST, 1969, DOW CORNING CORPORATION.” And we’ll mark that Bennett Exhibit 1.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS”
Q: Now, sir, apart from Dow Chemical—
MR. DONLEY:
Go off the record on one moment, please.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER:
Off the record at 2:00 p.m.
(Whereupon a discussion was held off the record at this time._
THE VIDEOGRAPHER
Page
Back on the record at 2:01 p.m.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Apart from whatever work Dow Chemical was doing, sir, on organosilicons and their biological activity on plants, did you become aware in the 1966 time frame, approximately a year after you arrived at Dow Corning, of an interest by Dow Chemical at organosilicons I their biological activity?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection
THE WITNESS:
No, I wasn’t aware they were evaluating them as a— If you’re—Are you asking me as a separate project or program? I was aware of no program, no project that Dow Chemical had that was evaluating the broad class of organosilicon compounds like we were charged with.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: What about a narrow class?
A: No narrow class either,
Page 113
Specifically. I doubt that I would have known about it, because then that was a different corporation, and you can’t patent it.
Q: What about some joint work, sir, between Dow Corning and Dow Chemical that may have started in the 1966 time frame concerning biological properties of silicones?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: And I’m not trying to trap you or anything. I’m reading from a Dow Chemical Company Directors—board of directors’ meeting from September 6th, 1966, which is TDC 00011625 and 11626, which refers to, quote, “secrecy agreement dated July 13th, 1966 with Dow Corning Corporation on biological properties of silicones.” Do you have any knowledge of that?
A: No. I honestly don’t. If it
Page 114
was a—Was this if it was—Well, that would be speculation again.
Q: Well, could you—
A: That’s—
Q: Do you have any information that you can help us try to understand what these board of directors’ minutes from Dow Chemical Company in September of 1966, where they refer to a, quote, “secrecy agreement with Dow Corning Corporation on the biological properties of silicones”—Do you have any information that could help us understand that reference?
A: No. I’d have to know the specifics of it. I—You know, it could have been a screening contract where we didn’t have the—resources internally within Dow Corning, and the screening contract was set up to look at biological activity. I can speculate more, but I can’t imagine—I just don’t recall at the moment.
A: Okay. What about—And now
Page 115
I’m reading from the board of directors’ minutes of Dow Chemical Corp—Company directors’ meeting, Tuesday, February 6th, it appears to be 1968—I’, sorry. Well, I’ll give you the Bates Number, TDC000011704 which refers to a, quote “agreement dated as of October 1st, 1966 with Dow Corning Corporation covering research and commercial development in the field of physiological effects of certain organosilicon compounds.”
A: It sounds like a screening contract to me, and I just don’t remember the screening contracts that we had. It’s been 20 years. I just don’t remember that.
Q: What—What is a screening contract that you—You do remember something about a screening contract that your group had—
A: I don’t—
Q: --with Dow Chemical Corporation?
A: No, I don’t remember any screening contract that we had. I’d have
Page116
to have—I’d have to have more than that to trigger it.
Q: Do you remember going to Dow Chemical plant, the Pitman Moore plant in Zionsville, Indiana or Indianapolis, Indiana in the late ‘60s and meeting—
A: I—
Q: --with Dow Chemical?
A: That’s right. I did go down there on a couple of occasions.
Q: Okay. And you went with Mr. LeVier?
A: Yes.
Q: And you also went down with Mr. Isquith; correct?
A: Right.
Q: Okay. And you went down there, and you met some scientist from Dow Chemical?
A: That’s right.
Q: Okay. And do you want to tell us why you did that, sir?
A: Then that would undoubtedly have been to—to set up screening contracts with them in order to see if we
Page 117
had biological activity in those compounds
Q: Did you understand that they had a screening technique to look at biological activity of various compounds?
A: All pharmaceutical companies have screening techniques usually.
Q: Okay. And that was a technique that you did not have available within Dow Corning’s biological—or—I’m sorry—
A: Yes.
Q: --Bioscience Research Department?
A: ‘66, 1968?
Q: Between that time period, yes.
A: We did not have it.
Q: And how did you come about that you went to Dow Chemical Corporation for that?
A: I don’t make those decisions.
Q: Did you somebody tell you: Go down to Dow Chemical. They’ll help you out?
A: It would not have been done
Page 118
in quite that way. But—I don’t recall how it came about. We—again, it would be pure speculation as to why. I can think of numerous reasons, but that’s
Q: I’m really interested in why—why you would go to Dow Chemical, a, quote, separate corporation, as you’ve testified to, versus any other pharmaceutical company, Upjohn, Parke-Davis, Abbot.
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Why—Why Dow Chemical, if there was a reason?
A: I’m not specifically aware of the reason.
Q: Are you generally aware of the reason, sir?
A: No. We—We had four people from the board of directors at Dow Chemical on our own board. We had four from Corning Glass Works. We had two from Dow Corning, which is the way that joint
Page 119
venture was set up.
Q: So there was some—
MR. GRAMS:
Excuse me.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: --relationship—
MR. GRAMS:
Excuse me. Objection. Move to strike.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: So you understood that there was some relationship between Dow Corning and Dow Chemical Corporation—
A: They created it.
Q: --in the late ‘60s?
A: I mean they—
MR. GRAMS:
Objection. Just as a matter of protocol, I think we should advise Dr. Bennett that counsel should be permitted to ask the question before the answer is given. Now, Dr. Bennett, Mr. Peters is not clear on my objection. I think that, as a matter or protocol, you should be
Page 120
advised that before you answer a question, counsel should be permitted to finish the question before you give an answer—
THE WITNESS:
Okay.
MR. GRAMS:
--So that I can—or any other counsel can give an objection before you answer.
THE WITNESS:
I apologize.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: It’s okay. Sometimes in depositions you know the end of my question. It’s obvious.
A: Okay.
Q: You understood in the late ‘60s that Dow Chemical was a 50-percent stockholder of Dow Corning; correct?
A: I don’t know what kind of a business arrangement that is, because when I describe the make-up of the board of directors, as I understood it, if that represents a 50-percent ownership. It was
Page 121
four, four, and two when I was there early on.
MR. GRAMS:
Objection. Move to strike.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: And you understood that the make-up of the Dow Corning board of directors consisted of four Dow Chemical persons; correct?
A: That’s what I understood.
Q: Four Corning persons; correct?
A: Right.
Q: And two employees of Dow Corning Corporation?
A: Right.
Q: For a total of ten, correct?
A: Right.
Q: You also made a reference earlier in your testimony to some arrangement there was between Dow Corning and Dow Chemical in the late ‘60s which allowed your department, your Bioscience Research Department, to actually use Dow Chemical laboratories, correct?
A: “To use—“ No. I didn’t.
Page 122
understand. “To use—“
Q: To use a Dow Chemical laboratory.
A: Like at Pitman Moore?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
We could use the laboratories at Pitman Moore.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: I was actually referring to Building 1803. But you actually were—Your Bioscience Research Department was actually physically located at Dow Chemical Corporation for the early years ’65 through ’69; correct?
A: That’s correct.
MR. GRAMS:
Q: And you’ve never seen a written lease agreement, have you, between Dow Chemical and Dow—Dow Corning for that space?
Page 123
A: If I did, I don’t remember it.
Q: Okay. And you don’t know what—the specific arrangements that were made between Dow Corning and Dow Chemical in that regard; do you?
A: Not any more. At the time I most likely would have known what we were going to send to them and what we would receive. No, I don’t remember that now.
Q: Were you aware of some type of secrecy agreement that was entered into between Dow Corning and Dow Chemical Corporation in the late 1960s concerning the biological properties of organosilicon?
A: I am, now that you mention it.
Q: Okay. And can you tell us about that secrecy agreement?
A: No. I—Not the secrecy agreement. I just knew that we—that we—I remember going out to Pitman Moore early on and having them evaluate compounds for us.
Page 124
Q: And that was with Dr. Norm Miner? Do you remember that?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. And he had a screen-
A: But I did not remember it before you said it.
Q: Okay. And he had a screen—
MR. GRAMS:
Objection
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: He had a screen in which he was looking for the induction—various—the ability of various compounds to induce interferon. Do you remember that?
A: Not specifically, I don’t. I’m sorry.
Q: Do you remember having any contact with another scientist at Pitman Moore, the Dow Chemical pharmaceutical facility in Indiana, names Dr. James Hayden?
A: At Pitman Moore? That’s a familiar name, but I can’t put a face with it.
Page 125
Q: Do you remember that Dr. Hayden, with his assistant, a Sue Barlow, were actually looking at various types of organosilicon compounds and at their biological activity? In fact, they published an article in a journal, I think, that you had some involvement with, Toxicological Applied—
A: Pharmacology.
Q: --Pharmacology in 1971.
MR. GRAMS:
In what year?
MR. ELLIS:
1971.
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
MR. ELLIS:
’72?
THE WITNESS:
What was the title?
MR. ELLIS:
This is an article entitled “Structure-Activity Relationship of Organosiloxanes and the Female
Page 126
Reproductive System,” James Hayden and Sue Barlow, from the Human Health Research and Development Laboratories, the Dow Chemical Company, Zionsville, Indiana. It’s published in Toxico—Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, Volume 21, pates 68 through 79 in 1972.
A: Yes.
Q: Let me ask you a question. Did you have some involvement with that journal?
A: Do you mean did I publish in that journal?
Q: I know you published in the journal. But did you—Were you editor, or did you have some other involvement with it?
A: Well, we’d often review papers on occasion.
A: Does that journal, the Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, have something—some connection with the
Page 127
Society of Toxicology”
A: That is the Society of Toxicology’s journal.
A: It’s the official journal of—
A: Official journal.
Q: --the society?
A: Yes.
Q: And you were active in the society in the—
A: Right.
Q: --late ‘60’s and early ‘70s?
A: Correct.
Q: And there was a gentleman from Dow Chemical that was active in that society named Dr. Gehring.
A: Yes.
Q: Do you remember him?
A: Yes. Perry Gehring, yes.
Q: And do you remember who the editor of that journal was in the late ‘60s, early ‘70s?
A: Coulston.
Q: Coulston?
A: Coulston.
Page 128
Q: Okay. And do you remember where he worked?
A: University of Albany Medical College. He was Professor and Chairman of Toxicology there, I believe.
Q: Now—
A: Now, there have been a lot of editors. I—But I think he was one of the founding editors, if it’s still during that. But this is on 2,6-cis, is it not?
Q: Well, it’s on 2,6-cis and other—
A: Oh, I—
Q: --organosiloxane compounds.
A: --thought you said “interferons.”
Q: That was Norm Miner.
A: Oh, I’m sorry.
Q: Okay? I guess here’s my—Let me see if we can get it back to question-and-answer format, sir. You remembered Dr. Miner at
Page 129
Dow Chemical, at Pitman Moore doing some work screening some types of compounds; correct?
A: I remember the name.
Q: Okay. And you actually—
MR. DONLEY:
Excuse me. Objection.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: You remember going down there and meeting with him at least on one occasion?
A: I remember going to Pitman Moore—
Q: Okay.
A: -- and meeting with people there.
Q: Now, I’m going to show you this article by Dr. Hayden and Sue Barlow which was published in the Society of Toxicology’s journal where he talks about different types of Organosiloxanes. And see if this refreshes your memory, sir, concerning work that Dow Chemical employees, either independently or jointly
Page 130
with Dow Corning employees were doing on the biological activity of silicones.
A: (Witness examining document.) Right. Now I recall.
Q: This does refresh your memory?
A: Uh-huh (indicating affirmatively).
Q: Now, do you see that actually you’re—You’re cited in the first line—
A: Correct.
Q: --of this article?
A: Right.
Q: It says, “Studies by Bennett, et al, 1972—“
A: Right.
Q:--have shown that a series of low molecular weight organosiloxane compounds—“
A: Correct.
A: “—alter male reproductive function in a number of mammalian species including the mouse, rat, and rabbit.” And that fairly characterizes some of the work that you had done in the
Page 131
early 1970s and published; correct?
A: That’s correct.
Q: And it wasn’t just 2,3-cis, but it was other low molecular weight organosiloxane compounds, too; correct?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. And do you remember having some discussions with this Dr. Hayden at Pitman Moore of Zionsville where he said that—he talked about his work looking at the—the series of low molecular weight organosiloxane compounds and their effects on the reproductive system?
A: Your question is you’re asking me if I remember talking to Hayden about—
Q: Yes. Do you remember having a meeting with Dr. Hayden—Let me just tell you—
A: I don’t—
Q: --I don’t mean to be unfair with you sir, and I know this is a while ago. One of the other witnesses,
Page 132
Dr. Isquith, has said that he went down to Zionsville at Pitman Moore with you—
A: Right.
Q: --and LeVier—
A: Right.
Q: --and that you and LeVier met with Hayden—
A: Right.
Q: --and he went and met with Dr. Miner. And I took it that that meeting had something to do with this publication, and that’s what I’m trying to ask you about, generally, whether you were aware of work that Dr. Hayden was doing that was similar to the work that Dow Corning scientists were doing at the Bioscience Research?
A: This was not an
area of—that Dr. Isquith was responsible for.
This was an area that Dr. LeVier was responsible for. If Dr. Isquith went on that trip, he most
likely went down to talk about micro-microbiological things.
Page 133
This relates more—
Q: And—
A: --to what LeVier was—
Q: --what he said.
A: Yes. This relates more to what—what LeVier was doing in the animal sciences.
Q: Uh-huh (indicating affirmatively).
A: Okay. I—but not out—I would assume those compounds likely. Well, I shouldn’t assume anything. I leave you to ask the questions.
Q: Well, let me ask you this. Do you remember—Does this refresh your memory of work that was done—
A: Yes.
Q: --by Dr. Hayden and other scientists at Dow Chemical Company concerning the biological effects of organosilicons?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. And do you know where
Page 134
these Dow Chemical scientists obtained the silicone compounds in order to conduct these studies?
A: It would be a guess.
Q: Well, what’s your guess—
MR. DONLEY:
Objection.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: I don’t want you to guess, but I’d like your best information.
A: The same reason I went to Dow Corning from Dow Corning Corporation: Because they knew how to make them. That was their business. And I would assume these were not made in Pitman Moore, the Dow Chemical Company, but were likely made at Dow Corning.
Q: Now, you had a chemistry lab that was run by Dr.—
Q: Cecil Frye.
Q: --Cecil Frye that supplied you with different compounds for your testing in the Bioscience Research; correct?
Page 135
A: Not until 1973.
Q: Okay. How did you get your compounds in the ‘60s, in the late ‘60s?
A: You had to go through Dr. Hunter, who in turn, went through the chemical department and said: We would like to have these chemicals either made or provided.
Q: Okay. And do you have any knowledge of Dow Chemical personnel going through that process?
A: No. No, I don’t.
Q: Did Dr. Hayden or other Dow Chemical Scientists come to discuss your work with you?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: --in the late ‘60s, early ‘70s?
A: Discuss what work?
Q: Work or related work.
A: Come to Dow Corning?
Q: Yes.
A: I’m almost certain that this
Page 136
group from Pitman Moore did come up to Dow Corning.
MR. GRAMS:
Objection. Move to strike.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: And—
A: But it may have been to see LeVier, because this was his area of expertise.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Okay. LeVier was an—what’s called endocrinologist; correct?
A: He was trained as a zoologist and an endocrinologist.
Q: Okay. And an endocrinologist looks at effects on the reproductive system: correct?
A: All—All endocrine glands. The reproductive system is one of those.
Q: And he was looking at in the early—In the late ‘60s and early ‘70s Dr. LeVier was looking at a variety of compounds that affected the endocrine system; correct?
A: That’s right.
Page 137
Q: And you have some memory of Dow Chemical scientists coming down to Dow Corning and meeting with Dr. LeVier about that work__
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: --is that correct? Just your best memory.
A: (Witness nods head affirmatively.)
Q: Okay. One other rule for depositions. You have to answer out loud—
A: You have to answer—
Q: Yeah.
A: Yeah, The—This reminds me that that did take place.
Q: And did you have any understanding of why these Dow Chemical scientists were looking at low molecular weight organosilicons and their biologic—potential biological effects?
A: This is received in February of 1971. We did not move our new
Page 138
building. I think, until late’69 or ’70. They may have had the resources to do—I’d have to go back and take a look at this. They may have had the resources to do things that we still could not do at Dow Corning at that time, and, therefore, the agreement was to have them look at it.
Q: And do you remember who was involved in those discussions that Dow Chemical would do this?
A: Not at all, not now.
Q: Would that—Thinking back on your role in the late 60’s as head of this Bioscience, would that have been something that would have fallen to your or would have been higher up with a—Dr. Hunter, possibly. Dr. Bass or—
A: The contractual arrangements were really higher up. Usually the vice president signed off on these kinds of things.
Q: And that would have been who in the late ‘60s?
Page 139
A: Dr. Hunter.
Q: Dr. Hunter?
A: Right.
Q: I—I guess I’m curious, because before you testified that you were concerned about the competition, potential competition from Union Carbide Corporation, and that was a distinct corporation; correct?
A: (Witness nods head affirmatively.)
Q: And were you also concerned about the “quote, competition from Dow Chemical Corporation in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
Less so.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: And was that because there was some type of relationship between the companies?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
Page 140
THE WITNESS:
(No response)
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Let me see if I can refresh your memory, and maybe it will help you answer this question. Sir, do you remember that, in fact, Dow Corning and Dow Chemical had an arrangement in the late’60s that they would share profits, quote, that they would share—jointly share the, quote, “costs and shall share the profits and losses of any commercialization” of “physiologically active silicones”? I’m reading from a Dow corning Corporation executive committee meeting, February 1st, 1967, and it’s DCC101001440.
MR. DONLEY:
Do you have a copy of that that we might be able to look at, Counsel?
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
A: Is that the reason why you weren’t concerned about Dow Chemical’s work in the area of biological activity of
Page 141
organosilicons?
MR. DONLEY:
Objection to the leading.
THE WITNESS:
Can we talk for a minute or not? Is that—
MR. ELLIS:
Well, you are allowed to talk to your attorney. But I—There is just one rule about it. If it’s not an absolute privileged issue, which I don’t see—
MR. STREICKER:
Thomas, I don’t know what it is.
MR. ELLIS:
I know. You really should try to answer the question first, and then we can have a break. But if it’s a—I don’t understand exactly what your concern is.
THE WITNESS:
If you’re asking me do I remember that, no.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS.
Page 142
Q: Does this refresh your memory, me telling you that hey had a –Reading these minutes—
A: Sure.
Q: --to you, does—
A: Sure.
Q: --that refresh your memory?
A: Sure. The next question is, I might not have—It might not refresh my memory, because I was not aware of that the contractual agreements were.
Q: Okay.
A: Our job was to do the work, not to put the contracts together as such, although they were generally—The corporation was usually very good about being up-front and telling us exactly what we were doing. But specifically that meeting and so forth and those contractual arrangements, no, I don’t remember—
Q: okay.
A: --unless you’ve—
Q: Did you know in the late ‘60s—
Page 143
A: Yeah.
Q: --let’s say the ’66-67 time frame, that there was a joint development agreement relating to the physiological effects resulting from physiologically active silicones between Dow Corning and Dow Chemical? Did you know that this was in place, I guess, not the details, but did you know there was an agreement in place and some type of joint effort in place?
A: I—
MR. DONLEY:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
In any screening agreement, that you either pay for everything and retain all the rights, or you may have a venture, if you will. And I can’t remember what it was. If you’re telling me that’s what it is, then that is what it is.
MR. KENNELLY:
Off the record for just a second.
Page 144
THE VIDEOGRAPHER:
Off the record at 2:29 p.m. (Whereupon a discussion was held off the record at this time.)
THE VIDEOGRAPHER:
Back on the record at 2:36 p.m.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Sir, let me show you this document. This is the Dow Corning Corporation executive committee meeting, Wednesday, February 1st, 1967, the minutes. And I want to ask you a couple of questions about it. The Bates stamp number on the first page appears to be whited out for some reason, but it appears to be DCC101001438 through 440. And if you follow along with me here, do you see that on the second page, which is—the last three Bates numbers are 439, at the bottom, although there’s a large portion redacted, it says, “Upon motion duly made,” et cetera, “a joint research agreement with the Dow
Page 145
Chemical Company pertaining to certain silicone products designated as DC555, DC555A, and compounds derived and related thereto; and, “and then going on to the next page, 440, it says, number two, “A joint development agreement relating to the physiological effects resulting from ingestion or injection into the systems of animals or men of particular physiologically active silicones, wherein in principle, the parties shall jointly share the costs and shall share the profits and losses of any commercialization.” Have I read that accurately?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. Now, let me ask you a question. Does this refresh your memory—Let’s take the first part, the DC555. Is that the same DC555 that you were talking about before—
A: yes.
Q: --that had the problem?
Page 146
A: Yes. I have to assume so. It’s DC 555.
Q: Okay.
MR. DONLEY:
Objection. Move to strike; speculation.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Page 146
A: Yes, I have to assume so. It’s DC 555.
Q: Okay
MR. DONLEY:
Objection. Move to strike: speculation.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: And that’s the compound you found contained this active ingredient called 2,6-cis; correct?
A: Right
Q: And you spent three years in trying to isolate that compound to find—
A: Right.
Q: --to find that that was the so-called culprit; correct?
A: Right.
Q: And did Dow Chemical assist you? Did Dr. Rowe’s group assist Dow Corning in attempting to isolate that component that was physiologically active in DC 555?
A: Dr. Rowe?
Q: Dr. Rowe’s toxicological group or any--
Page 147
A: Oh, you mean at Dow—
Q: Dow Chemical—
A: Chemical?
Q: --or any other group at Dow Chemical. Did they help in that effort?
A: I don’t remember Dr. Rowe doing any of this kind of work at all. And I don’t recall any work like this that was done in the confines of the 1803 building. But I don’t—Bur I agree that there was obviously an agreement—I’m not on the executive committee, so it’s hard for me to know; but-
Q: Let’s—Okay. Do you remember any work that was done with your group between ’65 and ’67—And I think you’ve testified before between ’65 and ’67 your group was working on the DC 555 issue; correct:
A: Right. WE—
Q: Okay.
A: We worked on it extensively, because each day that a new chemical might
Page 148
be defined in the original material, we would test that. “we being Dow Corning, in our laboratories in Midland, Michigan. This sort of structure here—I mean this paper was undoubtedly more to begin to define what the mechanism of action was than it was straight screening as such.
Q: Okay. When you’re talking about “this paper,” now you’re referring—
A: That—
Q: --back to the Hayden-Barlow—
A: Hayden-Barlow paper.
Q: Okay.
A: Because it would be my guess that we did not necessarily have the resources, so I go back full circle to what I said before. Although this looks like a list of screening compounds, there’s a fair amount of pathology evaluation in here. We did not have a pathologist as such, and we did—We tracked it.
Page 149
That is “we,” Dow Corning, tracked those chemicals along until we found 2,6-cis. But it’s obvious this group also was working on some of the fallout to that, because they’re working pure compounds here.
Q: Right. They look at a number of organosilicon compounds, not just—
A: Not just—
Q: --2,6-cis?
A: --or—
Q: Including D4 and other low molecular weight materials; correct?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection to the leading.
THE WITNESS:
D4 was not a component part of 2—of the 555—
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: But the Hayden work that expanded from that, if you turn to the Hayden article—
A: Okay.
Q: --and the chart’s on page—It would be the third page of the article,
Page 150
page 70. Do you see Table 1 “32 ORGANOSILOXANE COMPOUNDS”?
A: Right.
Q: And do you see under “Terrasiloxanes,” under “Cyclic”—
A: [(MeSi0)4}.
Q: And that’s—That’s D4; correct?
A: Uh-huh (indicating affirmatively).
Q: Okay. Now, let’s turn back a little bit back to this DC 555. While you were attempting between ’65 and ’67 to isolate the active component of DC 555—
A: Uh_huh (indicating affirmatively).
Q: --do you remember any Dow Chemical scientists working with you or working separately in that effort?
A: I don’t. I—
Q: Well, let me ask you this. You were at the Dow Chemical facilities at Building 1803—
A: Right.
Page 151
Q:--between ’65 and ’67?
A: Right.
Q: Okay. Dr. LeVier came to you in 1968?
A: Right
Q: He had worked previously at Dow Chemical Corporation?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. At his prior employment at Dow Chemical, do you have knowledge that he worked on certain organosilicon compounds?
A: I don’t. Specifically—No. I don’t I can’t—if you were to ask me: Well, what was he working on, I couldn’t answer you.
Q: Well, did he have some experience at Dow Chemical—Was that the reason that you hired him in 1968 to work on the 2,6-cis issue in Bioscience Research?
A: My recollection of why he was hired was that he had a reproductive endocrinologist. We needed that expertise, and we hired him away from Dow
Page 152
Chemical to get it.
Q: And was he also working at the—Building 1803 before—
A: Yes.
Q: --Dow Corning hired him?
A: Yes.
Q: In Rowe’s group?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay.
A: --under Perry Gehring’s group.
Q: Under Perry Gehring’s—
A: I think it was—No. I’d better not say that.
Q: You’re not sure whether—
A; I’m not sure.
Q: Okay.
A: But he certainly was in that building.
Q: Do you know why Dow Chemical in 1967 had an endocrinologist such as Dr. LeVier on staff?
A: Because—
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
Page 153
THE WITNESS:
--that was the age when terratogenicity and mutagenicity and all sorts of things were just beginning to take off in the scientific world. They needed that expertise for organic compounds, must les—If you’re implying that it was organosilicon compounds they needed him for, no. They didn’t hire him for his knowledge of organosilicon compounds.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Do you know why they hired him?
MR. GRAMS:
I withdraw my objection.
THE WITNESS:
I have no idea. I don’t know. I—I assume they had a need for—like we did.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: You hired him in 1958?
A: Yeah.
Q: You personally?
A: Yes.
Page 154
Q: And when you hired him did he have any experience, to your knowledge, in organosilicons?
A: I can’t remember. I probably went to Bob before we hired him and—and talked to him, but I don’t remember exactly what I said. I just don’t remember.
Q: When he came on board did he seem to have familiarity with organosilicon compounds, or did he have to start from scratch?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
I don’t remember that specifically as to what his knowledge was at that time. He certainly picked it up quick.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Suggesting that he may have had some prior exposure to organosilicon compounds?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
Page 155
THE WITNESS:
I—I can’t answer that. I don’t know.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Apart from possibly Dr. LeVier, can you think of any other Dow Chemical employee that could have worked on DC 555, as referenced in this board of director’s minutes—I’m sorry—executive committee meeting of February 1st, 1967?
MR. DONLEY:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
I believe we hired Dr. LeBeau—
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Okay. And that’s—
A: --from Dow Chemical. I’m not certain of that. So I—
Q: Now, Dr. LeVeau, his first name is?
A: Joseph.
Q: Joseph LeBeau. And he was hired from Do
Page 156
Chemical too—
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: --just like Dr. LeVier was?
A: We either hired him when he came out of Michigan State University or he had gone to work for Dow Chemical and then we hired him. In any event, he went back to Dow Chemical. And I can’t remember exactly which one of those it was.
Q: Okay.
A: I’d have to get out the personnel record and take a look.
Q: Okay.
A: I just don’t remember.
Q: As we sit here today, can you think of any other Dow Chemical employee that may have worked on this, quote, joint research agreement with Dow Corning concerning DC 555 (sic) between the years of ’65 and ’67?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
Page 157
THE WITNESS:
No.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Okay. Now, let’s turn to the joint development agreement referenced on the third page of these minutes, the joint development agreement relating to the physiological effects—
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. –of particular physiologically active silicones. Now, as we sit here today, does this refresh your memory, sir, reading this portion of this reference to this joint development agreement, as to who at Dow Chemical may have been working with your group or others at Dow Corning?
A: No. I—This was ’67?
Q: Uh-huh (indicating affirmatively).
A: No.
Q: Let me turn you to the front page of this executive committee--
Page 158
A: Yeah.
Q: --of Dow Corning. It looks—it appears that the office—The meeting was actually held at the office of Corning Glass Works. Do you see that reference?
A: The only way I can—
Q: I know it’s hard to read, but the second line—
A: Oh, yes.
Q: Okay—in New York City.
A: Yeah. I recognize Amory—I can’t remember his last name. He was from Dow Corning—I mean he was from Corning Glass Works. So—
Q: Okay. What was this executive committee, and how did it differ, if any, from the board of directors?
A: I don’t have the faintest idea.
Q: Okay. Do you know why the executive committee of Dow Corning would hold its meetings at Dow Corning—at Corning Glass Works?
Page 159
A: No.
Q: The people present include Shailer Bass. He, you believe, was president of Dow Corning; correct?
A: That’s what I though.
Q: Okay. Carl Ger—
A: Gerstacker.
Q: And who was he?
A: With Dow Chemical.
Q: He was with Dow Chemical?
A: Uh-huh (indicating affirmatively)
Q: Do you know where he worked?
A: I would guess if I thought of his title. But he was relatively high in the corporation. I don’t know what his title was. He worked at Midland, Michigan.
Q: Do you know if he’s still alive?
A: I don’t know the Carl Gerstacker is alive.
Q: The next person here is Greening, it appears?
Page 160
A: Who?
A: Bill Greening.
A: That could be an old—I—
Q: Groening:
A: All I know is the name.
Q: Okay. Do you know who he was affiliated with?
A: I thought Dow Chemical, but I’m not certain. It that’s Bill Groening, that sounds familiar.
Q: Okay. W.A. Groening. The next reference here is a Charles LaFollette. Do you know him?
A: No.
Q: And the next reference is Amory Houghton, Houghton?
A: Houghton, I believe. I don’t think I—I may have met him once or twice at Corning Glass Works, but I don’t—I don’t know him.
Q: He was with Corning?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay.
Page 161
A: I believe that’s right.
Q: Now, it says, “Also present: R.W. Caldwell.”
A: Right.
Q: Okay. Did he work with—
A: Dow Corning.
Q:--Dow Corning? Dow Corning
A: No. Let’s see. You have to be careful, because some moved over, like Dr. Goggin, from Dow Chemical to Dow Corning.
Q: Dr. Goggin was president of Dow Corning at one point?
A: Yes.
Q: And he had come from Dow Chemical?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. And—
A: So had Melvin Hunter. Many of them had, because that’s where the corporation got started.
Q: Okay. R.W.Caldwell was a—
A: My recollection, I know he was a Dow Corning employee. I don’t know beyond that.
Page 162
Q: Do you remember later having other dealings with R.W. Caldwell apart from his employment at Dow Corning Corporation?
A: Yes.
Q: And he subsequently went to work for a corporation called Lepetit—
A; Right.
Q: --is that correct?
A: That’s right.
Q: Lepetit was a—a pharmaceutical company in Italy; correct?
A: Yes.
Q: And they were s subsidiary at the time of Dow Chemical Corporation?
A: That’s right.
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Do you know why—
MR. GRAMS:
Time Frame.
THE WITNESS:
Well, subsidiary, I shouldn’t have spoken to that so quickly.
Page 163
Subsidiary—
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Some affiliate with Dow Chemical?
A: Some affiliation. I don’t know what it was.
Q: Okay. And do you know when R.W. Caldwell left Dow Corning Corporation and went to Lepetit?
A: No. No. I don’t.
Q: Do you remember having dealings with Mr. Caldwell as general manager of Lepetit in 1970?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. So sometime between ’67 and ’70 he left Dow Corning—
A: Presumably:
Q: Okay—and went to work for Lepetit?
A: Right.
Q: Do you have any understanding whey he made that transition?
A: You know; I don’t know that he—he was general manager of Lepetit.
Page 164
I—
Q: We’ll get back to that.
A: Yes. I think—I think that’s correct. But, right. He left Dow Corning. Okay. So we got him at Lepetit.
Q: Do you know why he left Dow Corning and went to Lepetit?
A: No.
Q: Do you know what his position was in 1967 at Dow Corning at the time of these minutes?
A: No, I—
Q: Did you know him at Dow Corning—
A: Yes.
Q: --before he left—
A: Oh, yeah.
Q: —and went to Lepetit?
A: Well, I knew him in Lepetit because I went to Italy.
Q: I know you went to Italy.
A: So yes. Sure.
Q: We’re hoping to go to Italy, too--
Page 165
A: Okay.
Q: —but we haven’t had the opportunity yet. I know you had an enjoyable trip, though.
A: Oh, yeah.
Q: We’ll get to that. We’ll get it straight.
A: Yeah.
Q: Did you have dealings with Mr. Caldwell while he was at Dow Corning before he went to Lepetit in the late ‘60s?
A: I can’t remember them.
Q: Now, the next person listed on these minutes is a—It looks like somebody Huber, H-u-b-e-r. Do you know who he
was?
A: You never know the treasurer. No, I did not.
Q: And what about Mr. Griffin, the acting controller?
A: Yes, Gerry Griffin I knew.
Q: Okay. Was he Dow Corning or was he Dow Chemical?
A: Dow Corning.
Page 166
Q: Okay. Were you aware that Dow Corning—I’m sorry—that Corning and Dow Chemical had made loans to the Dow Corning Corporation in the aggregate amount of $20,000,000 during 1967 and 1968.
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
No.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Did you understand in the late ‘60s that any products that may have come out of the Bioscience Research Division, any profits made from those projects would be split with Dow Chemical?
A: No.
Q: Did you have any discussions concerning that subject matter with either Dr. Hunter or with anyone else at Dow Corning?
A: Now, wait. Are we talking about the Pitman Moore agreement again, or are we back to Pitman Lepetit or—I wasn’t sure.
Page 167
Q: Well, I’m still—I guess I don’t know, because I still don’t really understand who was involved in this joint development agreement as referenced on the third page of this—these minutes.
A: It just doesn’t computer upstairs. I—I don’t recall.
Q: Okay. Because I will tell you, there’s another document that does refer to a, quote, screening program with Dow Chemical Company. And that’s a separate agreement dated September 8th, 1969, two years after this, with the Dow Chemical Company setting up a screen—screening program in the human health field. And that is DCC101001638, the board of directors’ meeting from Dow Corning Corporation, December 4th, 1969. Putting that in context, assuming that there was a later agreement with Dow Chemical on the screening issue—
A: Right.
Page 168
Q: —does that refresh your memory back to ’67 on a separate development agreement with Dow Chemical Corporation?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
No. It doesn’t. I—It doesn’t. I don’t remember the agreements that specifically, whether it’s just my memory after that many years or whether it’s—I was not involved. Obviously, my name is not here. But, whether I just wasn’t simply involved with him—I would know perhaps about agreements, but I would not know usually the kinds of details. But that—The one you’re talking about there, that was the one I was talking about initially that we had screening agreements to look for biological activity.
Q: The screening program; right?
A: Yes.
Q: Okay. And that was Dr. Miner’s effort?
Page 169
A: Well, it that’s—Yeah.
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
Right.
EXAMINATION BY MR ELLIS:
Q: Let me see if I can further jog your memory here a little bit. I’m going to show you a directors’ meeting at Dow Corning Corporation, Thursday, Mar 7th, 1968, which appears also to have been held at the office of Corning Glass Works in 1968. And there is a reference here, for the record, DCC101001529, and it appears to go all the way to 541. And looking at the reference on Bates number 540, it says, quote, “The following documents were filed with the secretary. Agreement dated December 5th, 1967 with the Dow Chemical Company—“
MR GRAMS:
Excuse me, Rick. If you’re going to read a lengthy portion, to you have a copy--Can
Page 171
we have a copy of that, please?
MR. ELLIS:
Sure.
MR DONLEY:
Which one? Which page are you on?
MR ELLIS:
I’m on DCC101001540
MR GRAMS:
All right. Thanks.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Okay. And it states on that page, sir, “The following documents were filed with the secretary. Agreement dated December 5th, 1967 with the Dow Chemical Company providing for joint research, development, evaluation, and commercialization programs on the physiological effects upon the systems of animals or man or physiological active organosilicon compounds.” Okay. Do you remember any—and such agreement in 1967?
A: No; except that we had screening agreements, and that’s--I
Page 171
don’t remember that.
Q: Okay. But you don’t remember a, “quote, joint research development evaluation and commercialization program, a joint program covering those areas with Dow Chemical?
A: Not on the—
MR. DONLEY:
Objection to the argument.
THE COURT REPORTER:
Sir, you said that—
MR. ELLIS:
Dow Corning.
THE WITNESS:
I don’t.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: You never went to these board of directors’ meetings; is that correct?
A: No.
Q: And you never went to the executive committee meetings?
A: No.
Q: So, it’s
extremely possible that there were agreements in place between Dow Chemical
Corporation and Dow
Page 172
Corning Corporation where they would agree to have a joint research program, where they would agree to share the profits of any drugs that were found from your group, and you would just not be aware of the? Is
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: —that possible?
MR DONLEY:
Objection
THE WITNESS:
I was aware of the screening program. You’re asking for details that I don’t remember.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: I really want to put the screening program to one point; that—
A: Okay.
Q: --there is no dispute there was a screening—joint screening program with Dow Chemical. It appears from the documents it was entered into in 1969.
Page 173
I’m merely going back two years, ’67, ’68, into these other references to a joint research and commercialization project with Dow Chemical. And I think I’ve exhausted your memory; that you don’t seem to remember that, and—
A: No. I really—
Q: Correct me if I’m—Correct me if I’m wrong.
MR. DONLEY:
I have to object. This is just counsel testifying now, and it’s argumentative. It’s been asked and answered.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Okay. Is it possible that such an agreement was in place, sir, and that you would not have known about it?
A: Is it possible?
Q: Yeah.
A: Yes.
MR GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
Page 174
Yes.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Okay. Did you have any knowledge as to where the funding for your bioscience research group came from?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
For me it came from Dow Corning from my perspective. But to—
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Okay. Have you ever seen anything to indicate how much, if any, Dow Chemical contributed to the funding of your group?
A: No.
MR GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
No.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Now, where you were working in Building 1803, the Dow Chemical facilities, between 1965 and 1970, was that the same building that the Dow
Page 175
Chemical toxicological group was in?
A: Yes.
Q: What other scientists from Dow Chemical were present in that building?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
EXMAINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: If any.
MR GRAMS:
Same objection.
THE WITNESS:
I remember V.K. Rowe.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Could I interrupt just one second on him?
A: Yes.
Q: Was he with the biochemical research lab?
A: Well, he may have been in charge of that, too. I—My presumption was he was head of the toxicology laboratory.
Q: Okay.
MR GRAMS:
Objection. Move to strike.
Page 176
Q: Okay.
A: He may have headed up both buildings, both activities, and I’ve just forgotten it.
Q: Okay.
A: Because I see him every day working—You come to work in the morning; he’s in his office in that building.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Okay. And he was in Building 1803?
A: 1803.
Q: Okay. And was Dr. LeVier in Building 1803 before you hired him?
A: I believe he was.
Q: Okay. Dr. LeBeau, was he in 1803 before you hired him?
A: That’s what I’m having trouble—
Q: Okay.
A: --with. I can’t remember if we hired Joe out of Dow—I thought we hired him out of Dow Chemical. I think he
Page 177
was in—in that building although I can’t be certain. He was a veterinarian, and both of the facilities had animal facilities. So it wouldn’t surprise me if he was in 1701, and I just remembered that number. Is that right? 1701?
Q: 1701 was the Biochemical Research Lab?
A: Yes. God, it’s in there.
Q: You’re doing very well. You’re doing very, very well. Now did you go to Dr. Rowe and ask for his advice on the needs of Dow Corning Corporation in the area of silicone toxicology?
A: I did.
Q: And did you ask for Dow Chemical’s input into Dow Corning’s needs in the area of toxicology?
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
THE WITNESS:
I did not ask Dow Chemical’s input. I—asked for his
Page 178
input.
Q: And him as an employee of Dow Chemical, correct:
A: As a respected toxicologist.
Q: Okay. And he give you that input; correct?
A: Yes.
Q: And in fact, he wrote a letter—
A: Right.
Q: --to the president of Dow Corning Corporation—
A: Correct.
Q: --Dr. Goggin—
A: Right.
Q: --in 1968 making recommendations on the needs of Dow Corning Corporation in the area of toxicology; correct:
A: That’s right.
Q: And you had solicited that input; correct?
A: I had solicited that input.
Q: Now, you also had some involvement with the toxicological needs
Page 179
of Dow Corning in a broader sense beyond that of just bioscience research, correct:
MR GRAMS:
Objection to the leading.
THE WITNESS:
No. If you’re talking about industrial toxicology and, you know, environmental toxicology, no.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Well, let me ask you this. Did—in the mid 1960s—
A: Yes.
Q: Let’s take ’65 to ’68.—you knew Dow Corning was producing a variety of products, medical products, such as silicone gel breast implants; correct?
A: (Witness nods head affirmatively.)
Q: You knew they were being implanted into women; correct?
A: Yes.
Q: And was there certain toxicology work being done on those silicone material that were--
Page 180
A: Yes.
Q: --being used in breast implants?
A: Yes.
Q: Did you have any involvement?
A: My involvement was to help assuring that the work that we contracted to the outside or occasionally when the medical products business or whoever—the toxicology group, really, not so much the medical business. But if—if compounds were being evaluated, we might be sent to those laboratories to assure that the samples were taken adequately, they were implanted adequately, that the pathology was done, and in general, just to evaluate the value of the work, if you will.
Q: And one of those outside labs was Food and Drug Laboratories—
A: That’s right.
Q: --Steve Carson’s laboratory?
A: Right, right.
Q: And were you aware at the time, sir, that they had falsified data
Page 181
back in the 1960s?
A: I—
THE WITNESS:
--was not.
MR. GRAMS:
Objection.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Did you later—Did you later become aware of that?
MR. GRAMS:
Same objection.
THE WITNESS:
I later became aware of it, but that was after, I think, I had left them.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Okay. Do you remember how you became aware of that?
MR GRAMS:
Same foundation; objection.
THE WITNESS:
We-we-We get a fair amount of information into the AMA with regard to a lot of laboratories that are doing work on drugs, devices, et cetera.
Page 182
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: You later also did work with another lab called IBT, Industrial Bio-Test. Do you remember that?
A: I didn’t work for them.
Q: I know you didn’t work for them. But you—You knew that Dow Corning had contracted certain studies—
A: Right.
Q: --with that lab?
A: That’s right.
Q: Apart from Steve Carson’s lab, they also did some work with IBT; correct?
A: Right.
Q: And were you aware at the time that they had falsified data?
A: I was aware—
MR. DONLEY:
Objection—Excuse me, Dr. Bennett—multiple objections to that question.
MR ELLIS:
That’s fine. Go ahead.
Page 183
MR DONLEY:
I would like to request of counsel that he lay a little foundation.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Were you aware that they falsified data, sir:
MR. DONLEY:
May I request that you even ask for the year?
THE WITNESS:
I was aware that they allegedly falsified it.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ELLIS:
Q: Okay. When did you become aware of that?
A: Do you recall—It would help me if you could—I can’t remember whether that was before I left or after I left. It seemed to me like it took a long time to get that resolved, so I remember it as much as a part of AMA as I sort of do for Dow Corning.
Q: Are there files at AMA concerning investigation of IBT and
their falsification of data?
A: No; only what we would receive in the trade press and the scientific literature and the legal—Now, I can’t speak for all units, like the general counsel, but I can’t imagine—
Q: You wouldn’t—to your knowledge, the AMA would not—
A: We would not do a separate—
Q: --do a separate investigation?
A: No. No. What we might do is if we’re alerted to a problem, we might put it out on the federation network to let people know that there’s a problem.
Q: Okay. So at least at some point you became aware that both the Food and Drug Research Lab, FDRI and IBT—
A: Yes.
Q: --had been accused of falsifying data, but you’re not sure exactly when you found that ou