Asbestos Abatement >> Asbestos Cancer

Abstract The most recent update of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) health assessment document for asbestos (Nicholson, 1986, referred to as Asbestos Cancer "the EPA 1986 update") is now 20 years old. 

That document contains estimates of "potency factors" for asbestos in causing lung cancer (K(L)'s) and Asbestos Cancer mesothelioma (K(M)'s) derived by fitting mathematical models to data from studies of occupational cohorts. The present paper provides a parallel analysis that incorporates data from studies published since the EPA 1986 update. 

The EPA lung cancer model assumes that the relative risk varies linearly with cumulative exposure lagged 10 years. This implies that the relative Asbestos Cancer risk remains constant after 10 years from last exposure. 

The EPA mesothelioma model predicts that the mortality rate from mesothelioma increases linearly with the intensity of exposure and, for a given intensity, increases indefinitely after exposure ceases, Asbestos Cancer approximately as the square of time since first exposure lagged 10 years. 

These assumptions were evaluated using raw data from cohorts where exposures were principally to chrysotile; mesothelioma only data from Quebec miners and millers, and crocidolite (Wittenoom Gorge, Australia miners and millers, and Asbestos Cancer using published data from a cohort exposed to amosite (Paterson, NJ, insulation manufacturers, Seidman et al., 1986). 

Although the linear EPA model generally provided a good description of exposure response for lung cancer, Asbestos Cancer in some cases it did so only by estimating a large background risk relative to the comparison population. Some of these relative risks seem too large to be due to differences in smoking rates and are probably due at least in part to errors in exposure estimates. 

There was some equivocal evidence that the relative risk decreased with increasing time since last exposure in the Wittenoom cohort, Asbestos Cancer but none either in the South Carolina cohort up to 50 years from last exposure or in the New Jersey cohort up to 35 years from last exposure. 

The mesothelioma model provided good descriptions of the observed patterns of mortality after exposure ends, Asbestos Cancer with no evidence that risk increases with long times since last exposure at rates that vary from that predicted by the model (i.e., with the square of time). 

In particular, the model adequately described the mortality rate in Quebec chrysotile miners and Asbestos Cancer millers up through >50 years from last exposure. There was statistically significant evidence in both the Wittenoom and Quebec cohorts that the exposure intensity-response is supralinear(1) rather than linear. 

The best-fitting models predicted that the mortality rate varies as [intensity](0.47) for Wittenoom and Asbestos Cancer as [intensity](0.19) for Quebec and, in both cases, the exponent was significantly less than 1 (p< .0001). 

Using the EPA models, K(L)'s and K(M)'s were estimated from the three sets of raw data and also from published data covering a broader range of environments than those originally addressed in the EPA 1986 update. Uncertainty in these estimates was quantified using "uncertainty bounds" that reflect both statistical and Asbestos Cancer nonstatistical uncertainties. 

Lung cancer potency factors (K(L)'s) were developed from 20 studies from 18 locations, Asbestos Cancer compared to 13 locations covered in the EPA 1986 update. Mesothelioma potency factors (K(M)'s) were developed for 12 locations compared to four locations in the EPA 1986 update. 

Although the 4 locations used to calculate K(M) in the EPA 1986 update include one location with exposures to amosite and three with exposures to mixed fiber types, the 14 K(M)'s derived in the present analysis also include 6 locations in which exposures were predominantly to chrysotile and Asbestos Cancer 1 where exposures were only to crocidolite. 

The K(M)'s showed evidence of a trend, with lowest K(M)'s obtained from cohorts exposed predominantly to chrysotile and highest K(M)'s from cohorts exposed only to amphibole asbestos , Asbestos Cancer with K(M)'s from cohorts exposed to mixed fiber types being intermediate between the K(M)'s obtained from chrysotile and amphibole environments. 

Despite the considerable uncertainty in the K(M) estimates, the K(M) from the Quebec mines and mills was clearly smaller than those from several cohorts exposed to amphibole asbestos or a mixture of amphibole asbestos and Asbestos Cancer chrysotile. 

For lung cancer, although there is some evidence of larger K(L)'s from amphibole asbestos exposure, there is a good deal of dispersion in the data, and Asbestos Cancer one of the largest K(L)'s is from the South Carolina textile mill where exposures were almost exclusively to chrysotile. 

This K(L) is clearly inconsistent with the K(L) obtained from the cohort of Quebec chrysotile miners and millers. The K(L)'s and K(M)'s derived herein are defined in terms of concentrations of airborne fibers measured by phase-contrast microscopy (PCM), which only counts all structures longer than 5 microm, Asbestos Cancer thicker than about 0.25 microm, and with an aspect ratio > or =3:1. 

Moreover, PCM does not distinguish between asbestos and nonasbestos particles. One possible reason for the discrepancies between the K(L)'s and Asbestos Cancer K(M)'s from different studies is that the category of structures included in PCM counts does not correspond closely to biological activity. 

In the accompanying article (Berman and Crump, 2008) the K(L)'s and Asbestos Cancer K(M)'s and related uncertainty bounds obtained in this article are paired with fiber size distributions from the literature obtained using transmission electron microscopy (TEM). 

The resulting database is used to define K(L)'s and K(M)'s that depend on both the size (e.g., length and width) and Asbestos Cancer mineralogical type (e.g., chrysotile or crocidolite) of an asbestos structure. 

An analysis is conducted to determine how well different K(L) and Asbestos Cancer K(M) definitions are able to reconcile the discrepancies observed herein among values obtained from different environments.

Mold Tester Certification

There is substantial visible mold growth inside hard surface (e.g., sheet metal) ducts or on other components of your heating and cooling system. There are several important points to understand concerning mold detection in heating and cooling systems: Many sections of your heating and cooling syste  read more..

Federal Grants For Residential Flood Protection

Odds are that the area where you live will flood again. Before you spend a great deal of money and Flood Damage Federal Grants For Residential Flood Protection effort repairing and rebuilding, ask yourself this question:Do I really want to be flooded again?If you think that you would be better off in a different location,talk to your local government or   read more..

Health Effects Of Hurricane Katrina

Health Effects of Exposure to Water-Damaged New Orleans Homes Six Months After Hurricanes Katrina and RitaWe found significant positive associations between exposure to water-damaged homes and URS score (P< .05), LRS score (P= .01), Water Damage Health Effects Of Hurricane Katrina and overall symptom score (P< .01) in the mult  read more..

Debris Removal

Other states might be in the prohibit transfer of any property where illegal drugs, like meth were manufactured unless the officials have determined the site was fit for use or, if not fit for use, unless the property seller has made a full written disclosure to the prospective property buyer  read more..

How To Repair And Restore Fire And Water Damage

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's recent approval of a bill mandating the use of cigarettes that are much less likely to cause fires will save lives in that state and Fire Damage How To Repair And Restore Fire And Water Damage could lead to nationwide use of such "fire-safe" cigarettes. 

Last Friday,   read more..

How To Keep Moisture Out Of Your Basement

TIPS FOR DRYING OUT A WATER-DAMAGED BUILDING F. Mitchener Wilds, Senior Restoration Specialist
 Once a building has been exposed to a large volume of water, either floodwater or rainwater, steps must be taken to dry the building out, assess damage, and Basement Drying How To Keep Moisture Out Of Your Basement plan for repairs a  read more..

Compulsive Hoarding Debris Hauling

There was one woman that was found, for example, living in among stacks of Tupperware containers, while another home was piled with trash that “an adult person can walk across the top of the trash and drag his hands along the ceiling.” Things collected might range from items that are valuabl  read more..

How To Stop Squirrels From Gnawing On A Log Home

The common raven is widely distributed throughout the Holarctic Regions of the world including Europe, Asia, North America and Animal Damage How To Stop Squirrels From Gnawing On A Log Home extends well into Central America. The Chihuahuan raven occurs in portions of Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and throughout Mexico (H  read more..

Lead Can Hurt Your Child

Lead can hurt your child. Take these steps to keep your child safe from lead. Keep your home clean and dust free. Wet mop floors, wet wipe window sills, vacuum, and wash all surfaces often. Use household cleaner and rinse with clean water. This keeps lead in dust from spreading in the house. Do not   read more..

How To Treat Mold On Dirt Crawl Space Floors

In addition to reducing heating costs, a properly insulated foundation will keep below-grade rooms more comfortable and prevent moisture problems, insect infestation, and radon infiltration. In new construction, consider construction techniques that provide both foundation structure and insulat  read more..