Document K6g2xvDXLxGw20Oxd8rRNRy9o

r/x;. ProtntW tt ca**UnwiUtip%u4 Ku*r#l , HttuUInf fn* TaitKii^OfltiU ltfVln.*.<Vftvi4iV/, tli. Xm^rlitn cUt( (or 4b# A4v*MmM f.fcuiwi CommUiw on feltne* ir tHt.iPr** mottai ( Kiimt* l!op.fDHu.(Ttw. Otiimfctr If IMf. .. ;;ij >n;; . j-! ,;.: ,, J }i jr. I: / By I. J. Selikoii -I 00 not xnow if it is entirely, appropriatrito con However, comfort was provided; this time'in .the? sider,>our:"cui;fnt:j;i>rc blems .with asbestos an "u an/iripafedenvironmental hazard.'' As I look back, ment in 1 l930i;:,W$|W|[puim<m it would :aeem that iwe should have, had some,prerno-; 'asbestos workers'.-iingthe1pM]t;i,wMf it - nition.; ' was .For example, 70 yenrsiago.HisMontaguei Murray* igood.j ."In waa I effect 'Of i <9ii^Ji^i^]iAp]plicfaUoni'^piry<prj0y`fiintiY4Ri'!asica tal in London, examined a man of 33 suffering with 'sure* ^houldl^Tappjsft^ pii<l^t^y-:ff^sisi|.tKe had been working in the incidence of fibrosis." ca^n^r^^f4l#^'!bt8t08:itextileiffactoTy. Of the Such optimism persisted for the next 30 years; ten-men workihgih chat room thirteen .years be- asbestosis was acknowledged as a .rather rare dis lorc;'^it^w^^t^eiiB^e;iJiu^'iyoi^;He,j;tOo.;:;^ed *at!year ease; occasionally pccurring amongia smail group of` .later;'.4t;,"ppstfiriortbmtit 'j-^'';fb;UridS'|hat he had > workmen;: eniployetl;iin;;*h:isolate'dy -esoteric; industry. severely scarred lungs containing, numerous asbes- , There were a few rumblings during this time ; tos nbers. pr. Murrsy dewribed thii case to the whose echoes should perhaps embarrass Us; now. Departmental :>5C<^^^itteef;J';;on!:^r^jol|*!K^*itIon fori. Thus. kenheth Lynch reporteda death from lung .Industrial Disease which, -''after. '.thankingSDr. MurT, 1 cancer in association' with asbestosis in 1935. and' .. its now several-similaf -i^|^a^jiQF^gjiSss^asitbiH^f^n'\bet7r^en, {in 19071;, taken tp,fp^r^^'th(i,:;3iiiaiaCiph of the two - then ;uncbmmbn;'"diseases; fpliowed^TIbr: themosfc i .du|^:`^ttit;.'|hif,di|^e;iU-notiso.-iikelyi..to>:occur;-aa part, however, these reports were categorized as heretojfqr-^' n- ' ^ biblibgraphicalcun'oslUM.Kventhecarefulatudies < $$*!; w^nred to then had no j, of Richard.iDbll'rrtpbried!.: Jn|4^|fail'id|t|/dU|prb name; nor did it when Auribautt described numer- our calm;- perhaps because bf the reticence with ! which the statistician summarized his findings. textile factory in 19C*6, nor did it! when Pancoast found abnormal X-rays of the chest in 1919 in a eon^|U^a-i^'t\iiiiortn: examinations .-at'bne _asbes-' group of American asbestos workers. Surely, tax tos wprksj;in,i;En'glahd;vhe cbhc)uded;';that';!V,':.!';;ilung > onomy has a particular virtue in science; individ cancer was a specific industrial hazard of certain uals dying of: this ncn-disease became much more asbestos j Workers r..V.;;'.:"i:;Eyeh';i those';,who, [accepted- in 1924 Doirs conclusions--and therewere some who' did 'and''1927-ohd^ gave^thei.ijlhess' ;Jl^-curreii|t name-- not--Could point to a problem with a rather narrow ,asbestp'sis.`;`We,:.can:::now, accurately^ord.-for-ex-;. spectrum. A single neoplasm (liing cancer) was ample, (past tensel a speciflc industrial hazard (nb hlnt that it could be more than;thls)ofcertaiha*bestos years wore due to asbestosis. 1 . :,j workers (the heavily exposed individuals in this The new ` category was soon replete with.'; cases. factory). " ' '' ' v,':.^r/ ' Muck, 1939 ' :>';: [[ };!;' ' ; 'i *