A coalition of environmental and safety groups and unions says the government and the cancer establishment must introduce a new and comprehensive ‘Cancer Action Plan’ if they are to address needless deaths from occupational and environmental cancers. The Alliance for Cancer Prevention’s report says existing strategies are “grossly outdated.”
Alliance for Cancer Prevention news release and background document. Risks 627.
Emerging scandals concerning academics in the UK and Canada have exposed the lengths to which the asbestos industry will go to manipulate science and boost its deadly product. An October 2013 conference at McGill University in Canada revealed that one of its most high profile academics, Professor J Corbett McDonald, had received over Can$1 million from the asbestos industry, but had routinely hidden this association when publishing industry-friendly papers; and Edinburgh University’s Professor Ken Donaldson either failed to mention or flatly denied links to firms defending asbestos compensation cases, while receiving payments and writing papers the New York Supreme court found were “intended to cast doubt on the capability of chrysotile [white] asbestos to cause cancer.”
RightOnCanada blog. David Egilman’s full presentation: The Past is Prologue, Universities in Service to Corporations: The McGill-QAMA Asbestos Example. Montreal Gazette. A very particular crime, Hazards magazine special report, September 2013. Nature. The Scotsman. Risks 626.
Seventeen scientists who launched a high profile attack on plans in Europe to regulate endocrine-disrupting chemicals have past or current ties to regulated industries. An investigation by Environmental Health News (EHN) revealed that of 18 toxicology journal editors who signed a controversial editorial, 17 have collaborated with the chemical, pharmaceutical, cosmetic, tobacco, pesticide or biotechnology industries.
Environmental Health News. Nature. ChemSec news. Policy decisions on Endocrine Disruptors should be based on science across disciplines: A Response to Dietrich et al and Editorial: An international Riposte to naysayers of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals. Both in Endocrinology, published online ahead of print, 18 September 2013.
DR Dietrich and others. Scientifically unfounded precaution drives European Commission’s recommendations on EDC regulation, while defying common sense, well-established science and risk assessment principles, Food and Chemical Toxicology, published online 5 July 2013.
P Grandjean and D Ozonoff. Transparency and translation of science in a modern world, Environmental Health, volume 12, number 70, 27 August 2013. Risks 624.
A Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (FIOH) occupational cancer memorandum, agreed in cooperation with government, insurers, unions and employers, notes the document “consists of a review of carcinogenic substances according to exposure, complete with a literary overview.” The report, which was submitted to the Committee for Occupational Health of the Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, made detailed recommendations. It notes: “In addition to the recommendations regarding the compensation of occupational cancers, the working group also takes a stand on the screening of lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos, the forming of a special group of experts for occupational cancer diagnostics, the combining of gathered exposure information on asbestos, and the use of X-ray radiograph to determine the occurrence date for asbestosis.”
Memorandum from the Occupational Cancer Working Group 2013, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, 2013.
Thirty-eight known or possible carcinogens, drawn from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) or from Quebec regulations, were assessed using the Canadian CAREX exposure databases. More than 6 per cent of workers were exposed to solar radiation, 6 per cent to night shift work of some sort, more than 4 per cent to diesel, and approximately 3 per cent to wood dust and 2 per cent to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. The authors conclude: “Although crude, estimates obtained with different data sources allow identification of research and intervention priorities for cancer in Quebec.” Note: Quebec was until the recent closure of its last asbestos mine, the home of Canada’s asbestos industry and the seat of the global asbestos campaign.
France Labreche, Patrick Duguay, Claude Ostiguy and others. Estimating occupational exposure to carcinogens in Quebec, American Journal of Industrial Medicine, volume 56.9, pages 1040-1050, September 2013. Carex Canada.
Union statements in 2013 noted it 16 years had passed since the US federal workplace safety officials began developing a rule to control and limit workers’ exposure to silica dust, in a country where more than 7,000 workers develop silicosis and 200 die each year and others develop silica-related lung cancer and other conditions. Workers are still waiting for a safer exposure standard.
AFL-CIO Now blog. USW news release and statement from silicosis sufferer Alan White. OSHA statement and information on the proposed standard. American Thoracic Society statement. National COSH network statement. The Pump Handle. Working in These Times. Risks 620.
Workers involved in ‘fracking’ are being exposed to levels of carcinogenic silica up to 10 times the US recommended limit, a study has found. Researchers from the US government occupational health research institute NIOSH looked at worker exposures during hydraulic fracturing (fracking) operations and also found the most commonly used type of respirator, the half-mask air-purifying respirator, might not provide enough protection for workers.
Esswein EJ, Breitenstein M, Snawder J, Kiefer M, Sieber WK. Occupational exposures to respirable crystalline silica during hydraulic fracturing, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene (JOEH), volume 10, number 7, pages 347-56, 2013 [abstract]. EHS Today. Risks 617.
A paper whose lead authors work for the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) was attacked by prominent scientists after it used discredited referenced to indicate chyrsotile asbestos is a much lower cancer risk than is really the case. The claims were refuted in detail in a response from US and Canadian academics published in the British Journal of Cancer on 27 June 2013. This said the authors of the paper “fail to impose quality control standards to their study” and concluded: “The McCormack et al (2012) study minimises the health risks posed by chrysotile asbestos and suggests that ‘strict regulation’ in lieu of eliminating all asbestos use is acceptable. The suggestion that continuing ‘controlled use’ of asbestos is realistic is the asbestos industry’s position and is contradictory to the World Health Organisation’s recommendation that all use of asbestos should stop (WHO, 2006).”
V McCormack, J Peto, G Byrnes, K Straif, P Boffetta. Estimating the asbestos-related lung cancer burden from mesothelioma mortality, British Journal of Cancer, volume 106, number 3, pages 575-584, published online 10 January 2012. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.563.
RA Lemen, AL Frank, CL Soskolne, S H Weiss and B Castleman. Comment on ‘Estimating the asbestos-related lung cancer burden from mesothelioma mortality’ – IARC and Chrysotile Risks, British Journal of Cancer, volume 109, pages 823–825, published online 27 June 2013. doi:10.1038/bjc.2013.301
V McCormack, J Peto, G Byrnes, K Straif and P Boffetta. Reply: Comment on ‘Estimating the asbestos-related lung cancer burden from mesothelioma mortality’, British Journal of Cancer, volume 109, pages 825–826, published online 27 June 2013. doi:10.1038/bjc.2013.302
A September 2013 UK conference of dust exposure experts attracted unwanted attention, reported Hazards editor Rory O’Neill. Professor Ken Donaldson, the scientific chair of Inhaled Particles XI, had been identified in a potential asbestos cancer ‘crime-fraud’ controversy and accused of having undeclared links to the industry.
Hazards 123, July-September 2013.
French researchers investigated problems linking disease diagnosis, neglected recognition, recording of, and compensation for, lung cancer. They used questionnaires to obtain information about past jobs and possible exposures to carcinogens. Of 51 lung cancer patients seen in consultation, 34 responded to the questionnaire, 31 could be linked to workplace exposures (primarily asbestos), and 17 compensation cases resulted. The authors called for revision of the system. “The complexity of the administrative process seems to be an obstacle for patients and perpetuates inequality. The implementation of our approach increased the identification and the compensation of occupational lung cancer. Our approach responds to the objectives of the National Cancer Plan and helps to improve the overall care of patients with cancer.”
Camille Cellier, Barbara Charbotel, Julien Carretier and others. Identification of occupational exposures among patients with lung cancer, Bulletin du Cancer, volume 100.7-8, pages 661–670, 1 August 2013.