- Email: [email protected]
Asbestos production increases despite WHO opposition
News
Adam Hart-Davis/Science Photo Library
Special Report: International Asbestos production increases despite WHO opposition
For more on the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) policy on asbestos see News Lancet Oncol 2009; 10: 453
846
More than 40 countries—including all members of the European Union—have banned the use of white asbestos (also known as chrysotile): the only form of asbestos that is still being mined. Other countries have drastically reduced their consumption. Nonetheless, production levels are not declining; and have stabilised at roughly 2·2 million metric tonnes a year, around the same level they stood at in 1960. Enormous development projects in China and India are largely responsible; while Thailand has the highest per capita consumption of asbestos. Canada was formerly the world’s leading producer of chrysotile; and its continuing support for the industry has raised concern. Approximately 125 million people around the world work in environments in which they are exposed to asbestos, and at least 90 000 people die from asbestos-related lung cancer, mesothelioma, or asbestosis every year. Asbestos has also been implicated in laryngeal and ovarian cancer, and the WHO estimates that 5–10 million people will eventually die from asbestos-related illnesses: the latency period for such diseases is up to 40 years. The UN lists hazardous chemicals in a registry known as the Rotterdam Convention. These materials require prior informed consent before they can be exported. However, chrysotile has not been added to the registry. Kyrgyzstan and Iran are among those countries which have blocked its inclusion in the convention, but Canada is also opposed to any amendment. Canada’s active asbestos mines are situated in Quebec; a region with exceptionally high rates of mesothelioma. The federal and Quebecois Governments finance the Chrysotile Institute, a lobbying organisation that contends that chrysotile is not a significant factor in mesothelioma. Canadian embassies around the
world have hosted events promoting the country’s asbestos industry. “It’s politics”, explains Pat Martin, Canadian MP and former asbestos miner. Canadian politicians are wary of appearing hostile to Quebec’s interests lest they bolster the province’s powerful separatist movement. Canada produces 8% of the world’s asbestos. Much of its output goes to India; were Canada to cease production, India could easily source chrysotile from Russia, China, or Kazakhstan. This misses the point, says Kathleen Ruff (Senior Advisor on Human Rights to the Rideau Institute, Ottawa, Canada): “Canada plays a crucial role in legitimising the chrysotile industry”. The country’s respectable reputation provides the industry with moral credibility. The Chrysotile Institute distinguishes between chrysotile and amphibole forms of asbestos, maintaining that chrysotile is rapidly discharged from the lungs and can be “used safely with no risk”. It claims that if exposure to chrysotile does not exceed one fibre/cm3, “there is no evidence of increased cancer risk”. Experts disagree. “WHO’s position is unambiguous” Maria Neira (WHO) told The Lancet Oncology: “all forms of asbestos are carcinogenic”. WHO guidelines note that there is “no evidence for a threshold for the carcinogenic effects of asbestos, increased cancer risks have been observed in populations exposed to very low levels”. “We are committed to stopping exposure to asbestos”, Neira adds. In 1999, Canada challenged France’s ban on asbestos at the World Trade Organisation. Yet Canada itself operates a de-facto ban on chrysotile; exporting virtually its entire output and committing all new building programmes to be asbestos-free. “We’re spending millions of dollars cleaning [asbestos] out of the Parliament buildings, yet we continue to export
hundreds of thousands of tonnes into underdeveloped countries”, notes Martin. Supporters of the asbestos industry argue that chrysotile plays a vital role in development. Most chrysotile is mixed with cement and used in building materials. It is affordable, durable, able to withstand extreme temperatures, and does not rust. Alternatives such as ductile iron and PVC may not be available domestically—cement usually is. “The role of the Canadian Government isn’t to promote the use of asbestos”, Jacques Dunnigan—advisor to the Chrysotile Institute—told The Lancet Oncology, “it’s to promote the safe use of asbestos”. This is scarcely possible, answers Ruff: “if we can’t safely control the use of asbestos in the developed world, how can we pretend the developing world can do so?” A study in Pakistan found bags of asbestos opened in public by unprotected workers, and the material handled and mixed by whole families. “Indian workers are exposed to monstrous levels of asbestos”, says Martin; the country has already incorporated an estimated 7 million tonnes of asbestos into its buildings. Developing nations often have illadapted waste-disposal systems; and buildings containing asbestos may not be listed, storing up problems for future generations of maintenance workers. “It will take a long time before we see a reduction in asbestos-related diseases”, acknowledges Neira. Canada’s Parliament is debating a bill that would ban asbestos exports. Martin is not optimistic: “my party has had a motion on the books for the past 10 years that Canada stops the production, sale, and export of asbestos”, he told The Lancet Oncology. Little has come of it: 2008 saw a rise in Canadian production of chrysotile.
Talha Burki
www.thelancet.com/oncology Vol 10 September 2009
Adam Hart-Davis/Science Photo Library
Special Report: International Asbestos production increases despite WHO opposition
For more on the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) policy on asbestos see News Lancet Oncol 2009; 10: 453
846
More than 40 countries—including all members of the European Union—have banned the use of white asbestos (also known as chrysotile): the only form of asbestos that is still being mined. Other countries have drastically reduced their consumption. Nonetheless, production levels are not declining; and have stabilised at roughly 2·2 million metric tonnes a year, around the same level they stood at in 1960. Enormous development projects in China and India are largely responsible; while Thailand has the highest per capita consumption of asbestos. Canada was formerly the world’s leading producer of chrysotile; and its continuing support for the industry has raised concern. Approximately 125 million people around the world work in environments in which they are exposed to asbestos, and at least 90 000 people die from asbestos-related lung cancer, mesothelioma, or asbestosis every year. Asbestos has also been implicated in laryngeal and ovarian cancer, and the WHO estimates that 5–10 million people will eventually die from asbestos-related illnesses: the latency period for such diseases is up to 40 years. The UN lists hazardous chemicals in a registry known as the Rotterdam Convention. These materials require prior informed consent before they can be exported. However, chrysotile has not been added to the registry. Kyrgyzstan and Iran are among those countries which have blocked its inclusion in the convention, but Canada is also opposed to any amendment. Canada’s active asbestos mines are situated in Quebec; a region with exceptionally high rates of mesothelioma. The federal and Quebecois Governments finance the Chrysotile Institute, a lobbying organisation that contends that chrysotile is not a significant factor in mesothelioma. Canadian embassies around the
world have hosted events promoting the country’s asbestos industry. “It’s politics”, explains Pat Martin, Canadian MP and former asbestos miner. Canadian politicians are wary of appearing hostile to Quebec’s interests lest they bolster the province’s powerful separatist movement. Canada produces 8% of the world’s asbestos. Much of its output goes to India; were Canada to cease production, India could easily source chrysotile from Russia, China, or Kazakhstan. This misses the point, says Kathleen Ruff (Senior Advisor on Human Rights to the Rideau Institute, Ottawa, Canada): “Canada plays a crucial role in legitimising the chrysotile industry”. The country’s respectable reputation provides the industry with moral credibility. The Chrysotile Institute distinguishes between chrysotile and amphibole forms of asbestos, maintaining that chrysotile is rapidly discharged from the lungs and can be “used safely with no risk”. It claims that if exposure to chrysotile does not exceed one fibre/cm3, “there is no evidence of increased cancer risk”. Experts disagree. “WHO’s position is unambiguous” Maria Neira (WHO) told The Lancet Oncology: “all forms of asbestos are carcinogenic”. WHO guidelines note that there is “no evidence for a threshold for the carcinogenic effects of asbestos, increased cancer risks have been observed in populations exposed to very low levels”. “We are committed to stopping exposure to asbestos”, Neira adds. In 1999, Canada challenged France’s ban on asbestos at the World Trade Organisation. Yet Canada itself operates a de-facto ban on chrysotile; exporting virtually its entire output and committing all new building programmes to be asbestos-free. “We’re spending millions of dollars cleaning [asbestos] out of the Parliament buildings, yet we continue to export
hundreds of thousands of tonnes into underdeveloped countries”, notes Martin. Supporters of the asbestos industry argue that chrysotile plays a vital role in development. Most chrysotile is mixed with cement and used in building materials. It is affordable, durable, able to withstand extreme temperatures, and does not rust. Alternatives such as ductile iron and PVC may not be available domestically—cement usually is. “The role of the Canadian Government isn’t to promote the use of asbestos”, Jacques Dunnigan—advisor to the Chrysotile Institute—told The Lancet Oncology, “it’s to promote the safe use of asbestos”. This is scarcely possible, answers Ruff: “if we can’t safely control the use of asbestos in the developed world, how can we pretend the developing world can do so?” A study in Pakistan found bags of asbestos opened in public by unprotected workers, and the material handled and mixed by whole families. “Indian workers are exposed to monstrous levels of asbestos”, says Martin; the country has already incorporated an estimated 7 million tonnes of asbestos into its buildings. Developing nations often have illadapted waste-disposal systems; and buildings containing asbestos may not be listed, storing up problems for future generations of maintenance workers. “It will take a long time before we see a reduction in asbestos-related diseases”, acknowledges Neira. Canada’s Parliament is debating a bill that would ban asbestos exports. Martin is not optimistic: “my party has had a motion on the books for the past 10 years that Canada stops the production, sale, and export of asbestos”, he told The Lancet Oncology. Little has come of it: 2008 saw a rise in Canadian production of chrysotile.
Talha Burki
www.thelancet.com/oncology Vol 10 September 2009