Mesothelioma Asbestos: One-Time ‘Magic’ Mineral Now a Worldwide Health Menace as Human Toll from Exposure Reaches Epidemic Proportions
On Monday, major settlements of asbestos-related death and injury claims were announced in Japan and Australia. The United States has been the center of asbestos-related litigation for several years and at present, Congress is attempting to reach an accord with respect to a trust fund that would finance the resolution of asbestos claims over the next several decades by shielding the corporations responsible for the problem by implementing what many see as nothing more than a corporate bailout of the asbestos industry.
Simply stated, asbestos is as deadly a natural time-bomb as the world has ever known. Yet, it continues to be mined and exported from advanced countries like Canada and Russia to developing nations where more death and disease will eventually follow.
Asbestos producing countries have repeatedly blocked the addition of chrysotile (white) asbestos to the UN list of highly dangerous substances that cannot be exported to developing countries without their knowledge and agreement.
In September 2004, "prior informed consent" (PIC) listing of chrysotile was blocked at the Rotterdam convention meeting in Geneva primarily through the efforts of Canada and Russia.
Canada is the world's second-largest exporter of asbestos after Russia.
Numerous vocal critics of Canada's policy on asbestos call the country’s actions nothing more than exporting death to protect the profits of a handful of companies and the jobs of 1,600 miners.
"What's the difference between land mines and asbestos?" asks Dr. Barry Castleman, author of a respected book on the danger of asbestos. "A key difference, of course, is that Canada doesn't export land mines."
In countries like India where the exported asbestos winds up, unprotected workers slash open bags of asbestos fibers in order to mix it with cement. These workers have no choice but to work within swirling clouds of carcinogenic fibers.
In Britain, the Cancer Research Campaign has stated that its study into the European asbestos-linked cancer epidemic should sound alarm bells everywhere, "particularly in the developing world where uncontrolled asbestos is still very common," said CRC director Gordon McVie.
The asbestos industry, however, profits greatly from exporting to developing nations with seven of Canada's top 10 markets being so-called Third World countries.
To preserve that profitability, the Canadian government, the asbestos industry and lobby groups are doing there best to put a good face on the asbestos industry. Both diplomats and journalists are wined and dined and sent on first-class trips as part of this effort.
Philip Landrigan, of New York's Mount Sinai School of Medicine - the center that first linked cancer to asbestos in the 1960s - says the asbestos lobby's claim that the fiber is safe is "absolutely untrue."
"Asbestos remains an important cause of human illness," says Landrigan. "All forms of asbestos are carcinogenic, and that includes Canadian chrysotile."
Julian Peto, head of epidemiology at the University of London, who wrote the study on the Euro-epidemic, says there's no safe way to use asbestos in developed nations. In developing nations, where there is little money for protective clothing and ventilation systems, workers are being poisoned by the thousands.
"There is no way you can control it in Britain, let alone the third world," Peto says.
Ten European Union members have banned asbestos. France, which banned it in 1997 for health reasons, now faces a Canadian challenge at the WTO. Canada argues the ban violates Canada's rights under international trade rules.
In a speech before an audience of occupational health professionals from around the world who had gathered in Italy, Dr. Joseph LeDou of the University of California's Medical School attacked Canada's asbestos-promoting efforts.
LeDou said Canada was engaged in "the exploitation of ignorance and poverty" in Asia, Africa, and Latin America." He accused Canadian policy makers of "setting up the developing world "for an epidemic of asbestos-related disease, the costs of which will fall on countries that can ill afford it."
Thus, as the asbestos “problem” becomes more acute, public awareness of the looming epidemic and its origins takes on even greater urgency.
The naturally occurring mineral, asbestos, was once regarded as a natural insulation and used for fireproofing, automotive brake lining, and other useful materials.
In the past 25 years, however, scientists, consumer groups, and even manufacturers of asbestos-based products have come to understand the extreme long-term dangers posed by asbestos exposure.
New regulations regarding asbestos state that it should not be used in buildings or other products that previously relied on the substance for its many uses. Scientific and medical studies have also linked asbestos exposure to several illnesses ranging from asbestosis to a deadly form of cancer.
Asbestos is the name given to a group of minerals that occur naturally as bundles of fibers. These fibers can be separated into thin strands which tend to break easily and turn into a dust or powder.
This powder can then disperse into the air and attach itself to clothing, making it easy for people to inhale or swallow it. When asbestos is inhaled or swallowed it can cause a whole host of serious health problems.
One of the more severe health risks associated with asbestos is a chronic, non-cancerous respiratory disease called asbestosis. Asbestosis occurs when asbestos fibers are inhaled into the lungs causing lung tissues to become aggravated and scarred.
Some symptoms of asbestosis include shortness of breath and a dry, wheezing sound made by the lungs upon inhalation. Some of them more serious risks include cardiac failure which occurs primarily in advanced stages of asbestosis.
Unfortunately there is currently no effective treatment for asbestosis and it can therefore be completely disabling and even fatal. While other asbestos related illnesses can affect people who do not come in direct contact with asbestos but are merely victims of second-hand exposure, asbestosis rarely affects anyone other than individuals who work with asbestos.
Mesothelioma is another significant and widespread health risk associated with asbestos exposure and unlike asbestosis, it can affect individuals who are not directly exposed to asbestos but either live with someone who is an asbestos worker or live near asbestos mining areas or other places where the substance is widely used. Almost all cases of mesothelioma are directly attributable to asbestos exposure.
Mesothelioma is a rare and quite deadly form of cancer that occurs when tumors form on the membranes surrounding the lungs, chest, abdomen, and sometimes heart. Symptoms of mesothelioma may not appear until 30 to 50 years following exposure to asbestos
Thus, there is the expectation that there will be a significant increase in the number of mesothelioma cases in the coming decades both in the U.S. and in all of the developing nations that are currently importing asbestos fibers for industrial use.
There are two types of mesothelioma – pleural and peritoneal. Symptoms of pleural mesothelioma include shortness of breath and pain in the chest due to a build-up of fluid. Symptoms of peritoneal mesothelioma include weight loss and abdominal pain as well as swelling due to too much fluid in the abdomen.
Both types of mesothelioma can cause fever, anemia, blood clotting, and bowel problems. When mesothelioma spreads to other parts of the body it has been known to cause pain, difficulty swallowing, and swelling of the neck or face.
While asbestosis and mesothelioma are the most common health risks associated with asbestos exposure, lung cancer has also been linked to asbestos. In fact, lung cancer is responsible for the largest number of deaths related to asbestos exposure. Individuals who have been exposed to other carcinogens, such as cigarette smoke, are at an increased risk for developing lung cancer than people who have only been exposed to asbestos.
Recently, more information has surfaced regarding the immediate and long-term effects of asbestos exposure. Researchers are still trying to figure out which individuals are at the highest risk as well as how to prevent or diminish the risk using new tests and remedies.
A study from the University of Montana found that people exposed to high levels of asbestos may face a greater risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, and other autoimmune diseases. Residents of Libby, Montana were studied because of both occupational and environmental exposures resulting from their proximity to an asbestos-contaminated mine.
A comparison was made between 50 Libby residents and 50 residents of a nearby town with no known asbestos exposure. Researchers found that the Libby residents had levels of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) that were 29% higher than the residents of the neighboring town.
People with ANAs generally have immune systems that may be prone to attack their own body tissues causing inflammation, such as individuals with multiple sclerosis. More than 75% of the Libby residents also had lung problems, some more severe than others, that were directly attributable to asbestos exposure.
W.R. Grace & Co., the owners of the vermiculite mining plant in Libby, Montana, was charged with conspiring to endanger residents of the town as well as withholding information about health risks from asbestos-contaminated vermiculite. Grace apparently allowed the asbestos to spread through the community from commercial buildings to schools. If Grace is convicted, it could have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in fines.
Another study, published in the may issue of the American Journal of Industrial Medicine found a significant number of cases of mesothelioma in family members of asbestos workers.
According to the findings of Dr. Albert Miller of St. Vincent Catholic Medical Center in New York, the cancer, which is mainly caused by exposure to airborne particles of asbestos, most often affects the wives and daughters of asbestos workers and may take over 40 years to develop. A few cases involving sons and other relatives were also found, however.
The study concluded that exposure to particles of asbestos carried home on workers’ clothing and bodies was directly linked to 32 cases of mesothelioma diagnosed in family members since 1990.
About 90% of mesotheliomas in men have been attributed to asbestos because of their direct exposure to the material at work. In cases involving women, however, linking the disease to asbestos has proven to be more difficult. Based upon the study results, Dr. Miller theorizes that many of these unexplained cases in women may be related to having lived with an asbestos-exposed worker at some point in their lives.
Another study published in the second issue of the October 2005 of the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine of the American Thoracic Society, stated that Californians who live near naturally occurring asbestos sources and who are exposed to low levels of the mineral are at increased risk for developing mesothelioma.
Dr. Marc B. Schenker, of the Division of Environmental and Occupational Health, at the University of California, Davis, and four associates, examined 2,908 malignant mesothelioma cases reported from 1988 to 1997. Over 50% of the men and 58% of the women, all of whom were listed in the California Cancer Registry, either had no or little exposure to occupational asbestos at the workplace.
According to the study authors, California has more naturally occurring asbestos source rocks than any other state in the U.S. Previous studies all point to occupational exposure to asbestos as the cause of mesothelioma. But population-based studies, Dr Schenker says, have almost all showed some examples of mesothelioma cases where there was no exposure at work. The new study reveals that the living environment could actually be the culprit in such cases.
In addition to some of these recent studies regarding asbestos exposure, there have been certain developments relating to diagnosis and treatment for mesothelioma.
A five-year study by researchers from several countries, however, has found that a vitamin E-related compound known as alpha-TOS may kill mesothelioma cells in mice. The compound also halted the growth of mesothelioma tumors and showed promise with respect to suppressing tumors associated with melanoma and breast, lung, and colon cancer.
Dr. Jiri Neuzil of Griffith University (Gold Coast), who headed the study, hopes to begin human trials within two years. Although Dr. Neuzil is encouraged by the results, he is cautiously optimistic since “in the past many experiments showing promise in mice have completely failed in humans.”
One very positive finding in this study was that alpha-TOS selectively pursued mesothelioma cells and destroyed them while causing little, if any damage to normal cells.
Although alpha-TOS is already taken orally by many people as a health supplement, it loses its cancer fighting quality when it is converted to vitamin E by the digestive system. Dr. Neuzil made a cynical observation, however, when he stated that the pharmaceutical industry might not take on alpha-TOS as a cancer cure because the compound cannot be patented.
A study published in theNew England Journal of Medicine (Oct. 13, 2005; vol 353: pp 1564-1573) found that a blood test could help screen for pleural mesothelioma by checking the blood for high levels of a protein called osteopontin.
In a news release, Dr. Harvey Pass, chief of the division of thoracic surgery and thoracic oncology in the cardiothoracic surgery department at NewYork University Medical School said that blood osteopontin levels "rise dramatically" in the early stages of pleural mesothelioma.
Prior to the new blood test, pleural mesothelioma was difficult to detect in its early, more treatable stages, which led to a high mortality rate and a life expectancy of only a few months.
Pass and colleagues conducted osteopontin blood tests on 190 people, 76 of whom had pleural mesothelioma. The study also considered sixty-nine patients who had asbestos-linked lung disease that wasn't cancerous and current or former smokers with no asbestos exposure.
The study found that higher osteopontin blood levels were linked to pleural mesothelioma but not to noncancerous asbestos-related lung diseases. There also was little difference in the osteopontin levels between the 69 noncancerous asbestos-related lung disease participants and the 45 people without asbestos exposure. Osteopontin levels were similar for men and women.
The findings need further study and it is still not known if high blood osteopontin levels can determine other kinds of asbestos-related cancer. However, osteopontin has been studied as a possible marker for other cancers such as ovarian cancer.
While all of this new information regarding asbestos related illnesses and exposure to asbestos continues to surface, the U.S. Senate is deciding whether to approve a bill to create an asbestos compensation fund.
This fund would exist for the purpose of eliminating asbestos lawsuits by creating a 30-year fund financed by companies facing litigation and their insurers. Victims would lose their right to sue for compensation and would be required to go to the fund for relief.
The Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) has already mounted a vocal campaign against the passage of the asbestos bill. ADAO’s president, Alan Reinstein, argues that the bill does not adequately protect the rights of asbestos victims and hopes that Senate does not support what he calls “this corporate bailout bill.”
ADAO, however, has serious problems with the proposed fund including outdated and incorrect medical criteria with respect to the symptoms, diagnosis, and severity of asbestos related diseases, inordinate compensation delays, and improper eligibility standards, inadequate funding for research, education, prevention, and outreach, and possible insolvency long before all present and future victims can access it.
While the group is not opposed to the idea of a trust fund, it would much rather see one that is fundamentally fair, adequately funded, free of bureaucratic delays, and guaranteed to be around long enough to ensure all victims would be properly compensated. ADAO also advocates giving the victims the right to choose between compensation from the fund or a trial.
Meanwhile, Senate opponents of the bill see potential dilemmas with the fund’s solvency and with the allocation of expenses between the participating companies and insurers.
Lawsuits continue to surface regarding asbestos exposure and asbestos related illnesses. At the moment, studies continue to persist in an effort to learn more about how asbestos affects people who are directly exposed to the substance as well as individuals who experience second-hand exposure.
In the 1970’s government regulations stopped the widespread and common use of asbestos. Today, however, it is still used under heavy regulation. Asbestos is still used in more than 3,000 products such as brake linings, engine gaskets, and roof coatings. Older buildings still contain asbestos as it was originally thought of as an excellent insulating material.
In many of those older buildings (such as schools), however, years of deterioration, leaks, careless alterations, and improper asbestos abatement operations have all played a role in producing airborne asbestos fibers.
The number of asbestos-related deaths continues to climb. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that 77 people died from asbestos related illnesses in 1968 while 1,493 people died from asbestos in 2000.
Since mesothelioma can take up to 50 years to incubate and start becoming symptomatic, the number of people who have been affected by asbestos exposure remains to be seen. Additionally, asbestos has only recently been listed on death certificates as health officials are becoming more aware of the dangers associated with asbestos and asbestos related illnesses.
Clearly, the asbestos saga is far from over and only promises to get much worse before it gets better.
Simply stated, asbestos is as deadly a natural time-bomb as the world has ever known. Yet, it continues to be mined and exported from advanced countries like Canada and Russia to developing nations where more death and disease will eventually follow.
Asbestos producing countries have repeatedly blocked the addition of chrysotile (white) asbestos to the UN list of highly dangerous substances that cannot be exported to developing countries without their knowledge and agreement.
In September 2004, "prior informed consent" (PIC) listing of chrysotile was blocked at the Rotterdam convention meeting in Geneva primarily through the efforts of Canada and Russia.
Canada is the world's second-largest exporter of asbestos after Russia.
Numerous vocal critics of Canada's policy on asbestos call the country’s actions nothing more than exporting death to protect the profits of a handful of companies and the jobs of 1,600 miners.
"What's the difference between land mines and asbestos?" asks Dr. Barry Castleman, author of a respected book on the danger of asbestos. "A key difference, of course, is that Canada doesn't export land mines."
In countries like India where the exported asbestos winds up, unprotected workers slash open bags of asbestos fibers in order to mix it with cement. These workers have no choice but to work within swirling clouds of carcinogenic fibers.
In Britain, the Cancer Research Campaign has stated that its study into the European asbestos-linked cancer epidemic should sound alarm bells everywhere, "particularly in the developing world where uncontrolled asbestos is still very common," said CRC director Gordon McVie.
The asbestos industry, however, profits greatly from exporting to developing nations with seven of Canada's top 10 markets being so-called Third World countries.
To preserve that profitability, the Canadian government, the asbestos industry and lobby groups are doing there best to put a good face on the asbestos industry. Both diplomats and journalists are wined and dined and sent on first-class trips as part of this effort.
Philip Landrigan, of New York's Mount Sinai School of Medicine - the center that first linked cancer to asbestos in the 1960s - says the asbestos lobby's claim that the fiber is safe is "absolutely untrue."
"Asbestos remains an important cause of human illness," says Landrigan. "All forms of asbestos are carcinogenic, and that includes Canadian chrysotile."
Julian Peto, head of epidemiology at the University of London, who wrote the study on the Euro-epidemic, says there's no safe way to use asbestos in developed nations. In developing nations, where there is little money for protective clothing and ventilation systems, workers are being poisoned by the thousands.
"There is no way you can control it in Britain, let alone the third world," Peto says.
Ten European Union members have banned asbestos. France, which banned it in 1997 for health reasons, now faces a Canadian challenge at the WTO. Canada argues the ban violates Canada's rights under international trade rules.
In a speech before an audience of occupational health professionals from around the world who had gathered in Italy, Dr. Joseph LeDou of the University of California's Medical School attacked Canada's asbestos-promoting efforts.
LeDou said Canada was engaged in "the exploitation of ignorance and poverty" in Asia, Africa, and Latin America." He accused Canadian policy makers of "setting up the developing world "for an epidemic of asbestos-related disease, the costs of which will fall on countries that can ill afford it."
Thus, as the asbestos “problem” becomes more acute, public awareness of the looming epidemic and its origins takes on even greater urgency.
The naturally occurring mineral, asbestos, was once regarded as a natural insulation and used for fireproofing, automotive brake lining, and other useful materials.
In the past 25 years, however, scientists, consumer groups, and even manufacturers of asbestos-based products have come to understand the extreme long-term dangers posed by asbestos exposure.
New regulations regarding asbestos state that it should not be used in buildings or other products that previously relied on the substance for its many uses. Scientific and medical studies have also linked asbestos exposure to several illnesses ranging from asbestosis to a deadly form of cancer.
Asbestos is the name given to a group of minerals that occur naturally as bundles of fibers. These fibers can be separated into thin strands which tend to break easily and turn into a dust or powder.
This powder can then disperse into the air and attach itself to clothing, making it easy for people to inhale or swallow it. When asbestos is inhaled or swallowed it can cause a whole host of serious health problems.
One of the more severe health risks associated with asbestos is a chronic, non-cancerous respiratory disease called asbestosis. Asbestosis occurs when asbestos fibers are inhaled into the lungs causing lung tissues to become aggravated and scarred.
Some symptoms of asbestosis include shortness of breath and a dry, wheezing sound made by the lungs upon inhalation. Some of them more serious risks include cardiac failure which occurs primarily in advanced stages of asbestosis.
Unfortunately there is currently no effective treatment for asbestosis and it can therefore be completely disabling and even fatal. While other asbestos related illnesses can affect people who do not come in direct contact with asbestos but are merely victims of second-hand exposure, asbestosis rarely affects anyone other than individuals who work with asbestos.
Mesothelioma is another significant and widespread health risk associated with asbestos exposure and unlike asbestosis, it can affect individuals who are not directly exposed to asbestos but either live with someone who is an asbestos worker or live near asbestos mining areas or other places where the substance is widely used. Almost all cases of mesothelioma are directly attributable to asbestos exposure.
Mesothelioma is a rare and quite deadly form of cancer that occurs when tumors form on the membranes surrounding the lungs, chest, abdomen, and sometimes heart. Symptoms of mesothelioma may not appear until 30 to 50 years following exposure to asbestos
Thus, there is the expectation that there will be a significant increase in the number of mesothelioma cases in the coming decades both in the U.S. and in all of the developing nations that are currently importing asbestos fibers for industrial use.
There are two types of mesothelioma – pleural and peritoneal. Symptoms of pleural mesothelioma include shortness of breath and pain in the chest due to a build-up of fluid. Symptoms of peritoneal mesothelioma include weight loss and abdominal pain as well as swelling due to too much fluid in the abdomen.
Both types of mesothelioma can cause fever, anemia, blood clotting, and bowel problems. When mesothelioma spreads to other parts of the body it has been known to cause pain, difficulty swallowing, and swelling of the neck or face.
While asbestosis and mesothelioma are the most common health risks associated with asbestos exposure, lung cancer has also been linked to asbestos. In fact, lung cancer is responsible for the largest number of deaths related to asbestos exposure. Individuals who have been exposed to other carcinogens, such as cigarette smoke, are at an increased risk for developing lung cancer than people who have only been exposed to asbestos.
Recently, more information has surfaced regarding the immediate and long-term effects of asbestos exposure. Researchers are still trying to figure out which individuals are at the highest risk as well as how to prevent or diminish the risk using new tests and remedies.
A study from the University of Montana found that people exposed to high levels of asbestos may face a greater risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, and other autoimmune diseases. Residents of Libby, Montana were studied because of both occupational and environmental exposures resulting from their proximity to an asbestos-contaminated mine.
A comparison was made between 50 Libby residents and 50 residents of a nearby town with no known asbestos exposure. Researchers found that the Libby residents had levels of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) that were 29% higher than the residents of the neighboring town.
People with ANAs generally have immune systems that may be prone to attack their own body tissues causing inflammation, such as individuals with multiple sclerosis. More than 75% of the Libby residents also had lung problems, some more severe than others, that were directly attributable to asbestos exposure.
W.R. Grace & Co., the owners of the vermiculite mining plant in Libby, Montana, was charged with conspiring to endanger residents of the town as well as withholding information about health risks from asbestos-contaminated vermiculite. Grace apparently allowed the asbestos to spread through the community from commercial buildings to schools. If Grace is convicted, it could have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in fines.
Another study, published in the may issue of the American Journal of Industrial Medicine found a significant number of cases of mesothelioma in family members of asbestos workers.
According to the findings of Dr. Albert Miller of St. Vincent Catholic Medical Center in New York, the cancer, which is mainly caused by exposure to airborne particles of asbestos, most often affects the wives and daughters of asbestos workers and may take over 40 years to develop. A few cases involving sons and other relatives were also found, however.
The study concluded that exposure to particles of asbestos carried home on workers’ clothing and bodies was directly linked to 32 cases of mesothelioma diagnosed in family members since 1990.
About 90% of mesotheliomas in men have been attributed to asbestos because of their direct exposure to the material at work. In cases involving women, however, linking the disease to asbestos has proven to be more difficult. Based upon the study results, Dr. Miller theorizes that many of these unexplained cases in women may be related to having lived with an asbestos-exposed worker at some point in their lives.
Another study published in the second issue of the October 2005 of the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine of the American Thoracic Society, stated that Californians who live near naturally occurring asbestos sources and who are exposed to low levels of the mineral are at increased risk for developing mesothelioma.
Dr. Marc B. Schenker, of the Division of Environmental and Occupational Health, at the University of California, Davis, and four associates, examined 2,908 malignant mesothelioma cases reported from 1988 to 1997. Over 50% of the men and 58% of the women, all of whom were listed in the California Cancer Registry, either had no or little exposure to occupational asbestos at the workplace.
According to the study authors, California has more naturally occurring asbestos source rocks than any other state in the U.S. Previous studies all point to occupational exposure to asbestos as the cause of mesothelioma. But population-based studies, Dr Schenker says, have almost all showed some examples of mesothelioma cases where there was no exposure at work. The new study reveals that the living environment could actually be the culprit in such cases.
In addition to some of these recent studies regarding asbestos exposure, there have been certain developments relating to diagnosis and treatment for mesothelioma.
A five-year study by researchers from several countries, however, has found that a vitamin E-related compound known as alpha-TOS may kill mesothelioma cells in mice. The compound also halted the growth of mesothelioma tumors and showed promise with respect to suppressing tumors associated with melanoma and breast, lung, and colon cancer.
Dr. Jiri Neuzil of Griffith University (Gold Coast), who headed the study, hopes to begin human trials within two years. Although Dr. Neuzil is encouraged by the results, he is cautiously optimistic since “in the past many experiments showing promise in mice have completely failed in humans.”
One very positive finding in this study was that alpha-TOS selectively pursued mesothelioma cells and destroyed them while causing little, if any damage to normal cells.
Although alpha-TOS is already taken orally by many people as a health supplement, it loses its cancer fighting quality when it is converted to vitamin E by the digestive system. Dr. Neuzil made a cynical observation, however, when he stated that the pharmaceutical industry might not take on alpha-TOS as a cancer cure because the compound cannot be patented.
A study published in theNew England Journal of Medicine (Oct. 13, 2005; vol 353: pp 1564-1573) found that a blood test could help screen for pleural mesothelioma by checking the blood for high levels of a protein called osteopontin.
In a news release, Dr. Harvey Pass, chief of the division of thoracic surgery and thoracic oncology in the cardiothoracic surgery department at NewYork University Medical School said that blood osteopontin levels "rise dramatically" in the early stages of pleural mesothelioma.
Prior to the new blood test, pleural mesothelioma was difficult to detect in its early, more treatable stages, which led to a high mortality rate and a life expectancy of only a few months.
Pass and colleagues conducted osteopontin blood tests on 190 people, 76 of whom had pleural mesothelioma. The study also considered sixty-nine patients who had asbestos-linked lung disease that wasn't cancerous and current or former smokers with no asbestos exposure.
The study found that higher osteopontin blood levels were linked to pleural mesothelioma but not to noncancerous asbestos-related lung diseases. There also was little difference in the osteopontin levels between the 69 noncancerous asbestos-related lung disease participants and the 45 people without asbestos exposure. Osteopontin levels were similar for men and women.
The findings need further study and it is still not known if high blood osteopontin levels can determine other kinds of asbestos-related cancer. However, osteopontin has been studied as a possible marker for other cancers such as ovarian cancer.
While all of this new information regarding asbestos related illnesses and exposure to asbestos continues to surface, the U.S. Senate is deciding whether to approve a bill to create an asbestos compensation fund.
This fund would exist for the purpose of eliminating asbestos lawsuits by creating a 30-year fund financed by companies facing litigation and their insurers. Victims would lose their right to sue for compensation and would be required to go to the fund for relief.
The Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) has already mounted a vocal campaign against the passage of the asbestos bill. ADAO’s president, Alan Reinstein, argues that the bill does not adequately protect the rights of asbestos victims and hopes that Senate does not support what he calls “this corporate bailout bill.”
ADAO, however, has serious problems with the proposed fund including outdated and incorrect medical criteria with respect to the symptoms, diagnosis, and severity of asbestos related diseases, inordinate compensation delays, and improper eligibility standards, inadequate funding for research, education, prevention, and outreach, and possible insolvency long before all present and future victims can access it.
While the group is not opposed to the idea of a trust fund, it would much rather see one that is fundamentally fair, adequately funded, free of bureaucratic delays, and guaranteed to be around long enough to ensure all victims would be properly compensated. ADAO also advocates giving the victims the right to choose between compensation from the fund or a trial.
Meanwhile, Senate opponents of the bill see potential dilemmas with the fund’s solvency and with the allocation of expenses between the participating companies and insurers.
Lawsuits continue to surface regarding asbestos exposure and asbestos related illnesses. At the moment, studies continue to persist in an effort to learn more about how asbestos affects people who are directly exposed to the substance as well as individuals who experience second-hand exposure.
In the 1970’s government regulations stopped the widespread and common use of asbestos. Today, however, it is still used under heavy regulation. Asbestos is still used in more than 3,000 products such as brake linings, engine gaskets, and roof coatings. Older buildings still contain asbestos as it was originally thought of as an excellent insulating material.
In many of those older buildings (such as schools), however, years of deterioration, leaks, careless alterations, and improper asbestos abatement operations have all played a role in producing airborne asbestos fibers.
The number of asbestos-related deaths continues to climb. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that 77 people died from asbestos related illnesses in 1968 while 1,493 people died from asbestos in 2000.
Since mesothelioma can take up to 50 years to incubate and start becoming symptomatic, the number of people who have been affected by asbestos exposure remains to be seen. Additionally, asbestos has only recently been listed on death certificates as health officials are becoming more aware of the dangers associated with asbestos and asbestos related illnesses.
Clearly, the asbestos saga is far from over and only promises to get much worse before it gets better.
posted by Chris Placitella | 10:09 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home