Document o96V7ng2G6RowyD4pnD2vJDXE

-k- Whatsis the ashestos-related disease history? It follows a rather interesting sequence. About 1906 a distinguished British epidemiologist, Montague Murray, described at autopsy, a fibrotic condition of the lungs which he attributed to asbestos exposure of 33 years in a textile worker. Like most playthings of the literature that remain dormant until it was finally, you might say commissioned in 1938, as you say nr. Hubiak, with a first, a recognized environmental standard that was put forth. Then it became the property of we, the industrial hygienists and we began to match our environmental airborne densities with those of the medical. Another area which has been obscured by one elemental problem, we began with millions of particles per cubic foot, not with fibers. I think there is no one that would dispute that the etiology is somehow related to fibers and fibrils and not to the other detritus and artifacts that appear under the microscope. We have had, how many years, since 193d, of environmental data that hear no relationship except retrospectively under the microscope to the suppositions of what the Industrial hygienists thought was a fiber count at the time. Being a Bavy shipyard man, I know that we have gone through many types of materials in this insuing period. We've 'itmI flbrr glass sad burlap*. We bare had all kind* of mineral*, naa-sdaanftr, organic fibrils and so cm. Mazy of them turned vg> in the timg ad they were given the very fancy name of ferruginous bodies lately, or asbestos bodies. We have a great preponderant amount of literature baaed on a rather interesting subject under a microscope. Hot necessarily related to the epidemiology or to the industrial hygiene effects of asbestos. DUP 0902050