Document 4aa1qEZYy7DZ8DVyzV4Oerd8x

, <............................................................................................... '........................................................................................................................................................................... apldemlologlcal techniques .to their contont ond moit.ol the Author* .do not ....... mako eUlm to having done *o. Whit he* happened In that succeeding author* have drawn conclusion* and generalised boyond the ecope of the work* which they quota. Nowhere, for example, have we found rofaroncee to a population of asbestos worker*, although several author* who have quoted the observed Incidence of lung cancer In autopsies of persons who also had asbestosl* Imply that this Incidence applies to asbestos workers, generally. Wo have likewise been unable to find any study which actually calculated the Incidence of lung cancer among a population of persons who had asbestos Is, and not Just those who cam* to autopsy, With the exception of a paper by" Doll none of those reviewed gave any data on oxposure and dust concentrations, and even Doll's paper merely mentions "scheduled" areas, by which Is meant, "those oreae where pracosaoe are carried on which were scheduled under the Ashes* tea Industry Regulations of 1931 as being dusty," There Is, furthermore, a complota lack of definition of terms as uosd In the publlehed literature. For example, the term "aeboetoels", as used, may refer to change* observable only by microscopic examination of the lung tissue, or it mny mean a radlologl'cally detectable condition. kdoet of the published reports obviously Includad women among their caeee, but some of them do not glvo the number or proportion of women In volved In the^etudy. There Is also a lack of uniformity as to what type of exposure most studies havo dealt with. Of 99 case* enumorstod by Kuepor^^ In J955, only 0253