Document byLYv2dqK8DKkq7V1RMyZabBo

MiOSH Notes FINDINGS OF JOINT NIOSH/OSHA WORK GROUP CONCERNING HEALTH EFFECTS OF ASBESTOS H I A< a newsbriefing in Washingtonon April 17. 1980, the findings of a joini NIOSH/OSHA Work Group were an nounced concerning the Group's re view of recent scientific int. about the health effects of asbestos. Present for the briefing were Dr. Anthony Robbins. Director of HEW's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; Dr, Eula Gingham, the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health; Dr. Bailus Walker. Jr., Director of Health Standards for OSHA; and two NIOSH scientists. Mr. Richard Lemen and Mr. John Dement. Dr. Robbins said the Group had reconfirmed that: There is no safe exposure limit . for asbestos. All commercial and several non commercial dorms of asbestos cause disease. ' On the basis of the Work Group's findings and recommendations, which we endorse, we are today recom- ^nendino to the Department of Labor that it promulgate a safer standard for . workers exposed to asbestos and that it eliminate from the workplace all exposure from new non-essential uses of asbestos. We have asked that the new stan dard set a maximum workplace expo sure limit of 100 000 fibers per cubic meter of air, the lowest level which can be accurately measured. The present level, set in 1972. is two million libers per cubic meter of air. Asbestos poses a grave danger in the workplace. At least 1.4 million workers are exposed to asbestos in the United States. In conductings National Occupational Hazard Survey Irom 1972-74, NIOSH found that 45 per cent ot the occupations observed involve exposure to the substance. Nearly three quarters of a million tons are used annually in this country in 9 wide range of products including floor tiles, cements, acoustical products, brake linings, and roof coalings. Be tween 8 and 11 million workers have been exposed to asbestos since World War II. Asbestos is ubiquitous and its effects, measured in disease and death, are staggering. Asbestos causes a very serious form of lung fibrosis known as asbestosis. ft also causes lung cancer and mesothelioma, a cancer of the membrane that lines the chest and abdominal cavities. Exposure to asbestos has also been related to significant increases in lung, laryngeal, and gastrointestinal can cers. The AAOHN pin is available to all AAOHN members. The cost of the pin is S7.00 which includes mailing and handling charges. Orders may be placed tor individuals or groups. . .... . Send check or money order ro: Ate/icn Association of Occupational Health Nurses. Inc 575 Lexington Avenue New York. New York 10022 Name __________________________ Address ___________________________ C-ty Sure In 1972.OSHApromulgateda work place asbestos standard setting the maximum exposure level at 2.000,000 fibers per cubic meter of air. Since then both NIOSH and OSHA have monitored asbestos health effects re search and the development of asbes tos substitutes. In 1975. OSHA pro posed lowering the standard to 500.000 fibers per cubic meter of air. In 1976, NIOSH recommended lower ing the standard to 100.000 fibers. NIOSH and OSHA established an Asbestos Work Group in the fall of 1979. its charge was to review all health effects data since the 1976 NIOSH recommended standard was transmitted to OSHA and to deter mine whether any changes to that recom mendation were warranted. Was there health damage occurring at the level of the current standard? The Work Group consisted of four experts from NIOSH and three from OSHA. The Work Group has completed its / report and'NIOSH has formally recom- N mended that OSHA adopt the Work I Group's findings. The Group reconfirmed that there is no safe exposure level for asbestos. Although data suggest that lower exposures result in lower risks of developing cancer, there is no known level below which asbestos-related diseases do not occur. The Group reconfirmed that all commercial and several non-commer cial forms of asbestos cause disease. There has at times been debate over which types of asbestos fibers cause disease. The Group found strong evi dence that all forms are dangerous, inctuding chrysotile; crocidolite; and fibrous cummingtonite-grunerite in cluding amosile fibrous tremolite. fibrous actinolite, and fibrous anthophyllile. The Work Group found no basis for regulating one type of fiber and not another....................................... With these two premises in mind, let me enumerate some of the specific findings of the Work Group: Optical microscopy continues to be the most reliable and eco nomically feasible method for determining airborne levels ol asbestos. Its lowest reliable de tection limit is 100.000 fibers per cubic meter. Substitutes (or asbestos should be used whenever possible so that non-essential uses ol the 48 i DANA-0326.70 VPD-M3-0000242 carcinogenic fiber are elimi nated. The report contains recommen dations for medical testing pro cedures including chest X-rays, pulmonary function tests, ob servation of respiratory and other clinical symptoms. The Group also recommends that sputum cytology be evaluatedas a surveillance technique. Results of medical eaminations should be reported directly to the employee, and aggregate medi cal information -- without indi- vidua I identifiers -- should be reported to an employer's entire workforce. ~" Asbestos workers showing res piratory problems should be~z` forded the opportunity to trans fer to jobs where there is no asbestos exposure. They should suffer no cut in oa vor benefits to ~aoso. The Group suooests that this program should be similar to the one now enforced by OS HA for lead workers. -Regulations should protect all workers' exposed to asbestos, including those in the construc tion, shipbuilding, and maritime industries, where high expo sures have historically occurred. Asbestos product manufac turers should perform air sam pling in all possible processes involving their products to deter mine probable airborne asbes tos levels. This information should be passed on to Ihe products* potential users. Dr. Bingham added the following remarks: For quite some time, a number of us in the public health community, both in and out of govern ment. have expressed concern about the health effects of exposure to asbestos, (n recent years, the sub stance has become the focus of public attention as well: asbestos js now perhaps the foremost symbol of this country's concern about toxic sub stances in the environment and in the workplace. Considerations of asbestos health effects and regulatory protec tion have always been complex and controversial. In this light, the current data and solid recommendations to come out of this NlOSH/OSHAproject are especially welcome and important. The report released today iscertainly a cause for concern -- concern for Ihe numbers of workers still exposed lo dangerous levels of asbestos. But this report, and OSHA's response to il, should also be a cause for hope among American workers everywhere. It should be a cause for hope because it confirms that occupational health research is not a static science. On the contrary, under Dr. Robbins' direction. NIOSHhas demonstrated an ongoing commitment lo the re-evalua tion of ail available data with only one thought in mind: the protection ol the worker. The current workplace stan dard governing asbestos exposure was OSHA's first comprehensive health standard. It is based on data that was assembled and analysed during the mid-sixties, if not the infancy certainly the childhood of occupational health. Much has been learned in the laboratory and in the workplace since then, as this report indicates. In view of what we know now. OSHA's current standard needs major improvements. . The report is cause for hope be cause. contrary to some of OSHA's critics, the agency's regulations are not carved in stone. They are instead a reflection of the best science available. As science continues to improve, so will OSHA's health standards, and worker protection. The report we are issuing today demands corrective ac tion. We will begin immediately. We have designated a team within OSHA to begin working on a proposed revision to the present OSHA asbestos standard. We will be developing that proposal pursuant to the OSHA cancer policy announced last January. I can't telt you yet what permissible level will be proposed or whether we will issue an emergency temporary slandard or pursue the proposed permanent stan dard route. But jhe_seyetity_aLihe .ihreai .posed and the, very high nynv bers of workers exposed to the asbes tos hazard dictate that we movs^yith all deliberate speed in amending the present standard nf ?~million fibers per Cubic.meler. average over a workday. I am confident that the procedures'set down by the cancer policy and the synthesizing effect of the rulemaking procedure will result in a much more protective standard so that we can finally move toward an end to fatal asbestos-related diseases such as lung cancer, asbestosis. and meso thelioma. an^jfecTatfdressIng . ejjpjprfrfs'extraSiOiTrfi 5tfid3TTorhanhcrciniil_ lon&fetiaicSE3trlp3lAs(gfO Occupational Health Nursing. July 1980 49 ri- riirifi"^~"-'Tilhi'riiVii<Wii'lriii1ie'- liliriltfiW DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE CENTER FOR OISEA5E CONTROL NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH----- ALOSH " 944 CHESTNUT RIDGE ROAD MORGANTOWN. WEST VIRGINIA 26505 July 30, 1980 Mr. John E. Zeitz Victor Products Division Dana Corporation P, 0. Box 462 1945 Ohio Street Lisle, Illinois 60532 Dear Mr. Zeitz: . . As per our phone conversation of 30 July, I am enclosing a few reprints of our work related to the action of certain chemical's and occupation-related dusts on the interferon system. I hope they will be informative for you. When our paper on wollastonite is published, I shall send you a copy. If I can be of further assistance, please let me know. With best regards, Sincerely yours, Enel. Nicholas Hahon Research Microbiologist Microbiology Section, LIB DRDS VPD-143-0000244