By Jeff Simpson
Asbestos poisoning - mesothlioma - is a deadly disease!
Mesothelioma (or, more precisely, malignant mesothelioma) is a rare form of cancer that develops from cells of the mesothelium, the protective lining that covers many of the internal organs of the body. Mesothelioma is most commonly caused by exposure to asbestos. The most common anatomical site for mesothelioma is the pleura (the outer lining of the lungs and internal chest wall), but it can also arise in the peritoneum (the lining of the abdominal cavity), the pericardium (the sac that surrounds the heart), or the tunica vaginalis (a sac that surrounds the testis).
Most people who develop mesothelioma have worked in jobs where they inhaled or ingested asbestos fibers, or were exposed to airborne asbestos dust and fibers in other ways. Washing clothes of a family member who worked with asbestos also creates a risk for developing mesothelioma. Unlike lung cancer, there seems to be no association between mesothelioma and tobacco smoking, but smoking greatly increases the risk of other asbestos-induced cancers.
It is a major problem for people who work in the mines for a living! Has our friends to the north have found out, there are risks and serious implications for mining.
RiskThe risks associated with asbestos are significant, and workers have historically been subjected to concentrations 10–100 times the Canadian legal limit of 1 fibres/cm3 (3, 17, 13). These workers have suffered from a wide range of health effects. Asbestos has a significant risk even at lower concentrations. The families of workers have therefore had elevated rates of asbestos-related diseases from the asbestos inadvertently brought home on the clothing of miners. Radiographs of the spouses of workers exposed to asbestos indicated that 19% of them suffered from pleural changes, and that the only factor of significance in detailed questionnaires was the latent period since first exposure. The microscopic fibres of asbestos are therefore impossible to eliminate from the indoor air environment, and pose a significant risk for the workers, their families and those whose homes contain airborne asbestos.
ImplicationsThe laxness of the regulations concerning the sale, export and mining of asbestos has detrimental consequences for the health of Canadian communities. The Chrysotile Institute continues to receive federal subsidies to mine asbestos in Quebec, and sets safety regulations “in accordance with government” in Canada (1). The safety regulations developed were described in the previous section, and since these regulations protect corporate interests more than community health, there are serious implications for community health.Since asbestos-related diseases appear many years after first exposure to asbestos (Figure 3), it is often difficult to establish a link between disease and exposure, especially since smoking and genetics are confounding factors in the incidence of asbestos-related diseases. Lawyers and corporations have therefore depended on scientists to prove or disprove this link. Miller (2006) found in his analysis of radiographic readings for asbestosis using International Labour Office classification that evidence has been misused by the media and attorneys to give undue compensation to victims. However, evidence has also been found that victims of asbestos exposure are often misdiagnosed, and fail to receive adequate protection (4). The lack of firm government guidelines for the use and mining of asbestos is therefore of great detriment to miners and their communities.
Delay between the time of first exposure and employee diagnosis with asbestos-related diseases (Kamp and Weitzman, 1999)
RecommendationsSince epidemiological analyses and animal testing have clearly shown that asbestos has health effects through occupational and environmental exposure, it is the responsibility of the government to protect the health of its citizens instead of yielding to economic corporate interests. The government of Canada must stop exporting asbestos to EU countries in which asbestos has been banned, instead of continuing to challenge the rights of these countries to refuse imports using WTO guidelines (36). Although chrysotile is less potent than other forms of asbestos, serious questions must be asked about whether the benefits of economic development in Quebec outweigh the long-term health consequences of exposure to asbestos. One potential way in which these costs and benefits can be better balanced is by forcing companies such as the Chrysotile Institute to assume responsibility for the compensation of people affected by asbestos.Overall, better monitoring is required, both of the health of miners and their communities and of indoor air quality in buildings containing asbestos. Despite claims that indoor air quality testing of public buildings is unnecessary and unduly frightens the population, the overwhelming risks of exposure and subsequent health effects warrant testing these sites for indoor air quality. It is only through a thorough knowledge of the potential health effects of a specific site that informed policies can be created.
Mesothlioma is no joke, unless of course your right wing extremist Brian Sikma
See Sikma had a crony leak him a preliminary report, that says that there is asbestos on the site and its dangers to the workers and the local community. Sikma is having a field day making fun of this report because it was worked on by ...... (sit down for this) ----- Scientists and Academics!
The non-governmental author participating in the report’s creation is Tom Fitz, an associate professor of geoscience at Northland College and outspoken mine skeptic. Northland touts itself as an “environmental liberal arts” college that focuses on climate change, sustainability, and green practices.(Edit note to Sikma - Liberal arts colleges are not another word for Democratic Colleges)
Another non-DNR expert whose work was featured in the report is Marcia Bjornerud, a geology professor at Lawrence University. Although she didn’t participate in drafting the report, the DNR panel repeatedly referenced a study of hers from 2012. Tom Fitz helped produce that study.
Why would a geologist have any credibility on geology study? Especially when a guy who went to mailorder U.com disagrees with said study!
The reality is this mine is dangerous for the long term health effects of our friends and neighbors in Northern Wisconsin. However, to advance his extreme right wing, global warming is a hoax and the mine will be perfectly safe and create a gajillion jobs, Brian Sikma and the rest of the right wing cabal are putting your and your children's health and long term well being at serious risk!
Who cares if your children die of cancer as long as Scott Walker gets re-elected!
In Wisconsin we not only have to worry about mesothlioma, but also Sikmathelioma(the only thing that matters is electing republicans, no matter how many lives are destroyed in the process)!