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.

Water Structural Drying

What is needed to thoroughly extract the adulteration and repair the damage? Shall the entire edifice or a portion of the edifice be evacuated and, if so, for how long? Could semi porous materials be sanitized, or shall they be replaced? What are the costs of using inadequate measures to extr  read more..

New Health Dangers From Lead

New Health Dangers from Lead, Levels of lead once thought harmless now shown to be toxic. If you work with lead you need to: Find out how much lead is in your blood. Talk to your doctor about lead and your health. Take steps to protect yourself at work. What health damage can low Lead Paint Removal New Health Dangers From Lead levels of  read more..

Drug Laboratory Cleanup

Methamphetamine labs are more than just hazardous and unlawful. They leave a huge mess, and ecological hazard that, according to the law, must be cleaned up. And it takes a special procedure, authorization and inspectors who search the Meth Lab Cleanup Drug Laboratory Cleanup property in full-gear Hazmat suits and bre  read more..

Flooded Kitchen From A Plumbing Leak

Disinfecting Food and Utensils after a Flood Cans of Food - Cans that do not have dents or rust can be saved if they are handled properly before they are opened: Remove labels. Re-label with a permanent marker. Wash the cans in a strong detergent solution Water Damage Flooded Kitchen From A Plumbing Leak with a scrub brush to remove   read more..

How To Test For Hoarding

Over the past year, my office has received an unusually high volume of calls from constituents who find themselves in difficult situations because of their out-of-control, overly cluttered apartments. Dismayed by the number of residents that are not only in danger of losing their homes, Hoarding How To Test For Hoarding&nb  read more..

I Got Water On The Carpet In My Basement

Recent instances of whole house deep energy retrofits for private clients could eventually yield case studies that will help researchers identify consumer preferences and cost-effective methods for exterior basement insulation. So far, however, Basement Drying I Got Water On The Carpet In My Basement the anecdotal  evidence gleaned from iso  read more..

How To Restore Fire Damaged Photos

When reviewing completed work, keep in mind that it is difficult to evaluate technical aspects of a treatment. A good rule of thumb is that all repairs should be discernable to a trained eye, Document restoration How To Restore Fire Damaged Photos  o that those consulting the materials in the future will not be misled about an item's   read more..

Mold Remediation

A second group of cells, notably wooden rays, consist of short, brick-like rudiments directed at ninety degree angles to the tree axis and extending through the inner bark towards the trunk. It is opportune at this Structural Drying Mold Remediation time to bring up the influence of wooden rays upon structural drying. Woo  read more..

Asbestos Pipe Insulation Removal

In February 2001 the. Environmental Protection Agency, as part of a national evaluation of facilities that received ore from the mine in Libby, Montana, collected surface soil, air, and Asbestos Abatement Asbestos Pipe Insulation Removal surface dust samples from this. W.R. Grace Phoenix facility in Phoenix. 

  read more..

How To Get Rid Of Standing Water In A Crawl Space

Chemical preservative treatment against decay is especially likely to repay its cost for porches, outside steps, and railings made of wood of low natural durability. Crawl Space Drying How To Get Rid Of Standing Water In A Crawl Space There are commercial impregnation treatments available for wood to be painted. 

When a  read more..