UCSF’s Industry Documents Library: Uncovering corporate drivers of disease

Health-harming products are contributing to a global rise in chronic, non-communicable disease. Studies estimate that fossil fuels, chemicals, alcohol, tobacco, and ultra-processed foods are now responsible for approximately one in three deaths worldwide. Scientists are pointing to an “industrial epidemic” of disease.

In a recent webinar, Center to End Corporate Harm Director Dr. Tracey Woodruff explained how the actions of some corporations are making people sick. Dr. Woodruff outlined the Center’s work in combating these harms, including with the Industry Documents Library (IDL). The IDL is an archive of internal documents from multiple health-harming industries. The library provides access for researchers to study industry practices which impact public health. IDL Director Kate Tasker provided an overview of the library and how to use it — the documents are fully searchable and accessible to the public. 

And Dr. Nicholas Chartres, lead scientific advisor to the Center, provided examples of the mechanisms and strategies these corporations use to maintain profits from their harmful products, long after the harms become clear.

Industrial drivers of disease

Dr. Woodruff began her presentation by highlighting the global increase in non-communicable diseases, such as cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.

“What we're experiencing right now is an industrial epidemic of public health problems, and that's because these public health crises are being driven by these corporate-produced products.”

From a public health perspective, these products are disease vectors, according to Woodruff. The companies making health-harming products have a vested interest in continuing to produce and market them, even when they know that their products are making people sick. The situation is “a manifestation of a global economic system that prioritizes wealth creation over health creation.”

Time after time, these industries have thwarted public health protections by adversely influencing science, regulatory policy, and communications. The classic example of this is how tobacco companies intentionally manufactured doubt or hid the harms of cigarettes for decades, in ways that delayed or prevented regulation. Many of the details of this cover-up only came to light after internal tobacco company documents were publicly disclosed in a 1998 court case.

Research has shown that corporations whose products harm public health often employ similar tactics to prevent regulation, including:

• Influencing research, deciding what does and does not get studied
• Funding and publishing favorable research
• Suppressing unfavorable research
• Distorting public discourse (both within and outside companies)
• Influencing occupational and public safety standards

The Industry Documents Library

The court cases in the 1990’s against the tobacco industry led to the disclosure of millions of documents. Those documents became part of the initial collection of UCSF's Industry Documents Library (IDL). From that initial collection, the library has grown to house over 24,000,000 documents across multiple industries, including the pharmaceutical, fossil fuel, and processed foods industries. 

The goal of the IDL is to provide access to documents which shed light on industry practices which impact public health.

These archives can show exactly how corporations carry out these campaigns. The documents have been cited in over 1,000 publications, including peer-reviewed papers, investigative reports, and documentary films. One example shared by Tasker was the Chicago Tribune series “Playing with Fire,” which explores how the tobacco industry worked with chemical companies to promote the use of flame retardants, even after the chemicals were shown to be toxic and often ineffective at preventing fires.

In the webinar, Tasker shared tips for navigating the trove of documents. A helpful tool for researchers getting started is the library’s bibliography, which links to all the published material that cites IDL documents. The IDL houses collections on the following industries:

• Tobacco
• Opioids
• Chemicals
• Drugs
• Foods
• Fossil Fuels

A PFAS case study

Dr. Nicholas Chartres shared case studies created from the documents, including one detailed in the paper “The Devil they Knew: Chemical Documents Analysis of Industry Influence on PFAS Science.” This study established a timeline of what the chemical industry knew about the toxicity of PFAS “forever chemicals” versus what information was made publicly available.

3M (makers of Scotchguard) and Dupont (makers of Teflon) began producing and selling PFAS-containing products in the 1940’s and ‘50s. Until around 2000, little was known publicly about the toxicity of those materials. As IDL documents show, for much of that time 3M and Dupont knew, through internal research, that they were selling harmful products. 

An internal report by Dupont’s chief toxicologist from 1961 states that Teflon materials had “the ability to increase the size of the liver of rats at low doses.” The report goes on to say that these materials should be handled “with extreme care” and that “contact with the skin should be strictly avoided.”

During this period, Dupont and 3M shared toxicologic studies. By 1970, both companies knew that C8 (now more commonly known as PFOA and PFOS) was “highly toxic” when inhaled and “moderately toxic” when ingested. In 1980, Dupont conducted a pregnancy questionnaire of employees. Out of eight pregnancies, two babies were born with facial birth defects, including eye defects. 

Dupont did not notify employees of the danger. Instead, they moved female employees out of areas where they would be exposed to C8, supposedly as a precautionary measure. In an employee memo, Dupont wrote “during the period that C8 has been used at Washington Works there is no known evidence that our employees have been exposed to C8 levels that pose adverse health effects.” In 1981, 3M conducted a study on C8 exposure in pregnant rats. The study concluded “observed fetus eye changes were due to C8.”

For decades, 3M and Dupont concealed this research. While they were suppressing unfavorable research, they were funding and publishing more favorable results. Negative research results were withheld from EPA. As late as 2006, Dupont was lobbying EPA to publicly state that “there are no human health effects known to be caused by PFOA.”

It has now been established that PFOA and PFOS (aka C8) are associated with cancer, immunological effects, cardiovascular effects, and developmental effects. As Dr. Chartres noted, the legacy of the cover-up is that “our environment, our children, and ourselves are now contaminated with these products.”

Explore the Library

Stopping disease vectors from spreading sickness requires understanding how those vectors function. In the case of corporations as disease drivers, the Industry Documents Library gives researchers tools to do that. 

Researchers at UCSF’s Center to End Corporate Harm are tapping these archives to develop strategies to counter the destructive influence of these polluting industries. Anyone interested in exploring the documents for themselves are encouraged to visit the Industry Documents Library.

For more, see our webinar Corporate Drivers of Disease: Exploring the UCSF Industry Documents Library.

This organizational blog was produced by CHE's Science Writer, Matt Lilley.