News Digest
During the Summer various news items and papers caught our attention. Below is a brief resume of recent items which may be of interest.
July 6, 2006: The Asbestos Story, a documentary produced in partnership with Zimbabwe's Chrysotile stakeholders, was premiered in Harare; the film suggests that the asbestos ban proposed by the South African Government is economically motivated and that the use of chrysotile asbestos is supported by international guidelines.
Journalist Munyaradzi Hunt buys the pro-industry propaganda hook, line and sinker writing:
“As it turns out, the true asbestos story is that moves to ban the product have nothing to do with health as it is claimed by the anti-asbestos activists. The real asbestos story is that it is more of an economic than a health issue.”
July 21, 2006: The World Health Organization (WHO) confirmed a huge shift in the organization's position on asbestos when it issued the Draft WHO Policy Paper on the elimination of asbestos-related diseases. Whereas formerly the WHO's focus on asbestos was directed “towards assessment of the health risks of different types of asbestos and substitutes,” the WHO has now concluded that:
all types of asbestos cause asbestosis, mesothelioma and lung cancer;
there is no safe threshold level of exposure;
safer substitutes exist;
exposure of workers and other users of asbestos-containing products is extremely difficult to control;
asbestos abatement is very costly and difficult to carry out in a completely safe way.
August 31, 2006: the Japanese Government announced unprecedented plans to raise 7.38 billion yen over four years from fiscal 2007 to pay for asbestos-related health problems by imposing a new charge on all 2.6 million registered businesses in Japan. The money will be collected by increasing the rate of workers' accident compensation insurance.1
September 1, 2006: The European Union Commission and the Senior Labor Inspectors Committee launched an initiative to further minimize hazardous asbestos exposures of EU workers and the public
"The campaign will be uniformly conducted in all Member States and focus on the removal work of weakly-bonded asbestos, the maintenance and removal work of asbestos cement and other tightly-bound asbestos products, and on the disposal of waste. The main target groups of the campaign are employers, employees and labour inspectors."2
Papers:
Additional Features of the Worldwide Double Standards in the Prevention of Asbestos-related Diseases. Benedetto Terracini. Ann 1st Super Sanita 2006;42,2:174-177.
“Worldwide, very little epidemiological knowledge on the consequences of occupational and environmental exposure to asbestos has been gathered in countries known to be the major producers and/or consumers of asbestos.”
Asbestos-related Disease in South Africa: The Social Production of an Invisible Epidemic. Lundy Braun and Sophia Kisting. Public Health Then and Now. Am J Public Health. August 2006;96,8.
“South Africa was the third largest exporter of asbestos in the world for more than a century. As a consequence of particularly exploitative social conditions, former workers and residents of mining regions suffered – and continue to suffer – from a serious yet still largely undocumented burden of asbestos-related disease. This epidemic has been invisible both internationally and inside South Africa.”
Saving the Asbestos Industry, 1960 to 2005. Jock McCulloch. Public Health Reports. September/October 2006;121,5.
“the asbestos industry fought hard to keep its products in the marketplace… its most potent weapon has been the corruption of science from within…”
Documents discovered during the course of U.S. litigation reveal that Dr. Christopher Wagner “probably received in excess of $US300,000” from Owens-Illinois (O-I), a leading asbestos defendant; according to a deposition by New York attorney Paul Hanley “O-I had been paying Dr. Wagner $6,000 per month for some period of time irrespective of whether Dr. Wagner did any work for O-I.”
Don't Ask, Don't Tell? Preventing Information Exchange Increases the Risks of Chemical Exposures. Carl Smith. Int J Occup Environ Health. July/September 2006;12,3. http://www.maneyonline.com/toc/oeh/12/3
On two occasions, opposition by asbestos stakeholders, led by Canada, has succeeded in blocking the inclusion of chrysotile asbestos on the list of hazardous chemicals subject to regulation by the Rotterdam Convention. This hard-won multilateral environmental agreement is designed to protect vulnerable populations by facilitating information exchange on designated chemicals. In Autumn 2006, there will be another chance to support the aims of the Convention; continuing opposition by pro-asbestos governments could transform the convention into an “evader's charter.”
September 1, 2006
_______
1http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200608310117.html
2 Press Release:
http://www.ttl.fi/Internet/English/Information/Press+releases/Asbestos+is+deadly+serious+
prevent+exposure+warns+the+new+European+Asbestos+Campaign.htm
European Asbestos Campaign 2006 website:
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/health_safety/slic_en.htm
