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.

Metal Roof Leak From Hail Damage

Design and Construction in Coastal A Zones Hurricane Katrina Recovery Advisory FEMA December 2005 Purpose: To recommend design and construction practices in coastal areas where wave and flood conditions during the base flood will be less severe than in V Zones, Structural Drying Metal Roof Leak From Hail Damage but still cause signifi  read more..

Get Rid Of Radon In Your House

Biennial Mitigation Exam The mitigation exam was updated in July 1994 to include the latest policy, protocol and technical information. The mitigation exam will be offered in lieu of completing the new biennial continuing education requirement until August 15, 1997, and participants whose renewal da  read more..

How To Remove Protein Smoke Odor From A Home

Fire Victims Help Sheet The Prairie du Chien Fire Department would like to express its sympathy for your property loss because of the fire at your residence.The emotional trauma of a fire is something you never forget. In the days, weeks, and months to come, you face the difficult task of recovering  read more..

The Effects Of Breathing Raw Sewage

Therefore, the monitoring and control of VSCs including H2S from the sewer could be the most important task to reduce public odor complaints about the sewer system.Recently, a few researchers have successfully applied on-line total reduced sulfur (TRS) analyzers for the monitoring of sulfur emission  read more..

Drying Equipment

FEMA Hurricane Katrina Recovery Advisories FEMA has prepared a series of Recovery Advisories that present guidance for design, construction, and restoration of buildings in areas subject to coastal flooding and high winds from Hurricane Katrina. To date, Structural Drying Drying Equipment eight advisories have been pre  read more..

Solutions For A Building In A Flood Zone

During a ceremony today at Anderson University, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a $60,000 award to Upstate Forever to help restore the Rocky River and its associated wetlands in Anderson, S.C., support community revitalization and Flood Damage Solutions For A Building In A Flood Zone protect public health.

  read more..

Program To Address Mold

Program To Address Mold In Neighborhoods Hardest Hit By Hurricane Sandy Unique Public-Private Partnership to Help Expand Mold Treatment Assistance in Affected Neighborhoods Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and the Mayor's Office of Housing Recovery Operations today announced a new initiative to address wa  read more..

When To Use A Dehumidifier In Your Home

The water evaporation and condensation occurred interior the separation unit, resulting in a direct reuse of latent heat released by water condensation. The energy of the system was calculated by Dehumidification When To Use A Dehumidifier In Your Home performing energy balance with the following equation: where is the water flow rate, kg/min. G  read more..

How To Test The Air After Asbestos Has Been Remove

Route of Entry Inhalation, ingestion. II. Toxicology Clinical evidence of the adverse effects associated with exposure to asbestos is present in the form of several well-conducted epidemiological Asbestos Abatement How To Test The Air After Asbestos Has Been Remove studies of occupationally exposed workers, family contacts of workers, and persons living  read more..

How To Vent A Crawl Space In An Old House

Bleach fumes can irritate the eyes, nose, and throat. working areas are well ventilated. Properly collect and dispose extra disinfectant and runoff. Never mix bleach with ammonia; toxic fumes may be produced. Crawl Space Drying How To Vent A Crawl Space In An Old House Can air ducts become contaminated with mold? 

  read more..