 |
1/8/2009
Thursday morning
This topic is closed off and you will be taken directly to the website.
Topics taken from open source list. I hope you find this useful.
This site is for our clients only as an information resource.
| In order to provide estimates of the accuracy of death certification
of malignant pleural mesothelioma in Italy, the causes of
death of a series of ascertained cases were investigated. The study
included 523 cases of pleural mesothelioma diagnosed in
1984-1988 by 88 hospital departments and clinics. Vital status at 7
May 1990 was ascertained for 92.7% of subjects. The
overall concordance between pathological diagnosis and death
certification was about 75%.
___________________________________________________________
Med Lav 1994 Mar-Apr;85(2):157-60 |
| Latency periods (time intervals elapsing between first exposure to
asbestos and death) were examined in 421 cases of
malignant pleural mesothelioma, diagnosed in the Trieste-Monfalcone
area, Italy. Occupational data were collected from the
patients or from their relatives by personal or telephone interviews.
Routine lung sections were examined for asbestos bodies in
370 cases. Latency periods, calculated in 312 cases, ranged from 14
to 72 years (mean 48.7, median 51). Latency periods
differed significantly from one occupational group to another. Mean
latency periods were 29.6 among insulators, 35.4 among
dock workers, 43.7 in a heterogeneous group defined as various, 46.4
in non-shipbuilding industry workers, 49.4 in shipyard
workers, 51.7 among women with a history of domestic exposure to
asbestos, and 56.2 in people employed in maritime
trades. The ANOVA test indicated a correlation between latency
periods an. |
| Our 1990 article reported on recent papers in the peer-reviewed literature and
two international symposia, one at the International Agency for Research on
Cancer (2) and the other at Harvard University (3), all concluding that
chrysotile fibers are less active than amphibole types (crocidolite, amosite,
tremolite) of asbestos in the causation of mesothelioma in man. In his summary
of the IARC meeting, Sir Richard Doll, an eminent epidemiologist, concluded
there is the difference between the effects of chrysotile and amphiboles, which
is so great in relation to mesothelioma that it is possible to argue that
chrysotile does not cause mesothelioma at all (2). This observation has been
supported by numerous peer-reviewed papers and working groups subsequently
(4-6). |
| Mesothelioma, a fatal cancer usually found on the lining of the lung, is
specifically recognized in Ontario—as is asbestosis—as arising from
exposure to asbestos. Mesothelioma is written into the Compensation Act
as a Schedule 4 Disease. |
| Ralls statement that countervailing human data on the carcinogenic effects of
chrysotile asbestos (including large numbers of mesotheliomas among Canadians)
exist is reminiscent of a similar claim by Nicholson et al. (7) in which his
exaggerated numbers were correctly put into perspective by the epidemiologists
studying the Canadian workers (8). His unreferenced conclusion that
mesotheliomas are largely from chrysotile exposure in insulation workers and
family members who were exposed to low doses ignores the fact that these
individuals encountered mixed exposures to chrysotile and amphiboles at much
higher concentrations than levels of asbestos (predominantly chrysotile)
occurring in homes and public buildings today. Moreover, Rall does not
acknowledge the significant content of amphibole fibers in the lungs of these
workers (9) as well as recent studies showing a correlation between the lung
burden of tremolite, but not chrysotile, in the lungs of Canadian miners with
mesothelioma (. |
|
