Document q302XxMj4p4K8M83YoXgz4yOE

FILE NAME: WR Grace (WRG) DATE: October 28, 1965 DOC#: WRG 150 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: 1965 Letter with article from Pennsylvania Department of Health titled Malignancies in Asbestos Workers. JOHN S ANOtftSON M O ic w T tv i o r n c c *o m c h p jiaie of (JHmtiarta j la ic J-lonrb of Eicalil] Helena, Montana October 28, 19^5 . . _ ~ " R. A. 31eich, Manager " The Zonolite Company Libby, Montana Dear Mr. Bleich: . * ' Enclosed is an article prepared b y the Pennsylvania Department of Health which we believe will be of interest to ..you. ' ' *" Sincerely yours, BFW/dl Enel. *. ' j v /y* >>< c > . ^ * 1/ Benjamin F. Wake Industrial Hygiene Engineer Division of Disease Control ' . \ I ' J \ . OCCUPATIONAL HfALTH News & Vieivs Division of Occupational Health Pall 196$_______ '_______ Malignancies in Asbestos Workers - A Preliminary Eeport - Within recent years and months there has beei a considerable amount of material in the literature vhich Indicates that ashestosis is directly related to the incidence of malignant tumors and rancor. - . - ' As early as eight years ago a Pennsylvania pathologist reported that he had seen at autopsies many cancer cases in persons vho also suffered from asbestosis. The pathologist is on the staff of a hospital vhich receives most of the patients ' from a nearby town where a large rsbestos plant is located. This plant makes asbestos textiles and Iso brake linings and_clutch facings. - The findings of . the pathologist have created concern in the asbestos industry and it was felt , appropriaie for cur health department to review the problem. ' - - To obtain as complete a story as possible the record rooms of six ' ' hospitals which draw their cases particularly from tie area of the asbestos.plant ' were searched for cases where asbestosis was considered during the period between 1956 and 1?6U. Seventy-five hospital records coded as asbestosis were located. . These were people who either were diagnosed on adbaission, on x-rays, or a t autopsy to have asbestosis or asbestosis was mentioned in the differential diagnosis. - " After obtaining the 75 records, an attempt w.j.s made to locate these former patient?. A large number were no Jonger alive and their survivors had to be contacted. - For these 75 an occupational end smoking history was obtained from their survivors and/or from plant manag-nent, Seven either had not worked at this particular asbestos pl:jit or the di; y.osis had been rejected. . . ' * * This left 63 asbestos work rs vho bed worked in one particular plant. . ` Further study of these records showed that 21;among them n o t only had evidence of asbestosis but elso were suffering from cancer. Twelve of these had lung' career and nine had various other growths suchr'as bladder cancer, leukemia, etc. Tc j snoking history of the 12 lung cancer cases revealed that five had never smoked vhich is more or less the same distribution of smokers vei'suo non-smokers as in the general population. Of the nine cases with other malignancies, two never smoked and thr e were cigar smokers only. ' Another interesting feature was that ai-.ong the other eancers, not the lung cancers, there was one case of a rolignan; mesothelioma. . . ' . Another interesting finding was that cf the 21 cases'with cancer 13 - " worked in the textile department of too plant and four worked in brake line man factors. The department wht e c: e man vsrkcd" remains unknown ar.d the rest worked at vario-. s other Jots. ' -2 Two of to-; 12 lung cancer cares and ore of toe lymphoblastoma cases hod verked in toe asbestos riant fc-r a'total cf only cix months vhich is a rather short exposure, and or.c venders how much this short exposure ray have contributed. Eighteen of th.-n ?\ r.vif-n had start. d work in ton plant prior to 19L0 and 12 had started vrk prior to ly?0. Cf too T.l C?.FI-!I c f ra-v-rr 13 were born b e fo r e 1?C0 and only cr.o van V - , -Ir r r lOJO. *