Asbestos. The mere mention of the word brings thoughts of “miners, millers & manufacturers or insulators and shipbuilders,” working during a time where there were limited protections. It brings to mind old homes and commercial structures built long ago. But, the worst thing it brings to mind is likely a horrible disease called mesothelioma. Wait! Wasn’t asbestos done away with? Aren’t there regulations in place banning this known carcinogen? Yes, and no. Sadly, mostly no.
Asbestos. The mere mention of the word brings thoughts of “miners, millers & manufacturers or insulators and shipbuilders,” working during a time where there were limited protections. It brings to mind old homes and commercial structures built long ago. But, the worst thing it brings to mind is likely a horrible disease called mesothelioma. Wait! Wasn’t asbestos done away with? Aren’t there regulations in place banning this known carcinogen? Yes, and no. Sadly, mostly no.
Asbestos in the News
More and more, we’re hearing of new cases of this naturally-occurring material in the news. In fact, while many thought that the mesothelioma crisis was over, just a few years ago, there was a story announcing the “third wave” of asbestos-related illnesses: those afflicted worked as cable pullers in enclosed, underground spaces. Cable pullers are those who, as the name suggests, pull cables through pipes for telecommunications companies. The pipes are made of asbestos cement and should be wet down prior to beginning work.
Never mind all the existing asbestos, like the aforementioned pipes, and, according to Rachel Lynch, writing for the Capitol Weekly, “insulation, ceiling tiles, flooring, wallpaper, boilers, and cement, among other products.” The dangerous material is also being found in children’s products, such as make-up and crayons.
Why is this happening? The risks and dangers of asbestos are well-known and documented. Where is the government action that’s supposed to be protecting the citizenry?
Asbestos and the EPA
The answer to the question lies with the Environmental Protection Agency (or what’s left of it), and the current administration.
The EPA, likely bending to the will of its corporate masters, enacted a new rule on June 1 of this year. As reported in Fast Company, “The EPA has even made it easier for companies to introduce new uses of asbestos-containing products in America—many of which could end up in common products in your home, as well as the materials used to build it.”
Come again? Easier? Yes, you read it correctly. Easier. This is what happens when agencies tasked with protecting the public are overrun by special interests and when those who run these agencies support the industries they govern more than they do their own agencies.
According to the EPA, the new rule requires “manufacturers and importers to receive EPA approval before starting or resuming manufacturing, and importing or processing of asbestos. This review process would provide EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended use of asbestos and, when necessary, take action to prohibit or limit the use.”
The new rule is not without its critics (big surprise). The new rule presents a “problem formulation,” a means by which the EPA can examine asbestos risks.
In an interview with PBS, Melanie Benesh, a legislative attorney for the Environmental Working Group, said, “The EPA has received criticism, including from us, with regards to the way it is proposing to conduct this risk assessment of asbestos.”
The “problem formulation” omits certain past findings related to asbestos risk, such as “legacy uses,” including the left-over asbestos found in buildings.
Benesh continued, “We think it’s really irresponsible of the agencies to not take those exposures into consideration when determining whether or not this is dangerous. The agency is also proposing to exclude certain non-cancer health risks from its assessment of asbestos, even though there are known cancer lung diseases associated with exposure to asbestos.”
One of those proposed exclusions is any risk of asbestos exposure for firefighters. These risks are potential exposure to flame-retardant materials, including clothing. A 2013 study by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) stated, “The population of firefighters in the study had a rate of mesothelioma two times greater than the rate in the U.S. population as a whole. This was the first study ever to identify an excess of mesothelioma in U.S. firefighters. The researchers said it was likely that the findings were associated with exposure to asbestos, a known cause of mesothelioma.”
So, kids and first responders don’t seem to be all that important to the EPA, based on this, do they? What does our Commander-in-Chief, he who appointed the EPA’s leader(s), have to say about all of this? Hint: don’t expect concern, at least not for your well-being.
Donald Trump is on record as having tweeted in 2012 that, had the Twin Towers had asbestos insulation, they would never have burned down in the 9/11 attack.
According to several sources, including Heather Von St. James, a prominent mesothelioma awareness advocate and survivor (also featured in a Legal Reader interview last year), writing for The Progressive, Uralsbest, a company that is the largest importer of asbestos into the U.S., put a picture of President Trump on bales of its asbestos.
The photos hit social media with the caption, “Approved by Donald Trump, 45th President of the United States. Donald is on our side. He supported the (now former) head of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, who stated that his agency would no longer deal with negative effects potentially derived from products containing asbestos. Donald Trump supported a specialist and called asbestos ‘100% safe after application.’”
By the way, Uralsbest is a Russian company. Since businesses are people now, it can’t be said that Trump doesn’t care about people. However, this certainly makes it appear that those about whom he cares are the ones whose blood runs green.
What about the actual people? The ones who have a real pulse and red blood?
Mesothelioma Statistics and Geographic Concentrations
As you may have guessed, it’s not looking good. Roughly 3,000 people each year are diagnosed with mesothelioma. On top of that, the average number of annual deaths caused by the disease is 2,500. Pretty grim statistics. On average, the age at mesothelioma diagnosis is 72 for women and 75 for men. With survival rates holding steady, only about 7-9% of those with mesothelioma live five years or longer.
Mesothelioma causes two to four times more deaths in the so-called “Rust Belt” states, as well as in port cities (typically places with high asbestos concentrations). For a closer look at state-specific information, please see the infographic below.
Why an Asbestos Ban in the U.S. is Overdue
There is a long list of reasons. Over 31,000 of them (the number of mesothelioma-caused deaths between 1999 and 2010). Then, add the roughly 3,000 new reasons every year. Oh, don’t forget those new waves of reasons, some of which may not appear for the next 20, 30, or 40 years. And, who knows how many reasons we can add to the list, especially since what we all thought was a banned material is still perfectly legal in many common, everyday items.
Do you work on your own vehicle? Guess what? “Brake pads, clutches, gaskets and pipes” may all contain asbestos!
We’ve already discussed fire safety products and the risks to firefighters, but that risk extends to civilians, too. We may have flame-retardant items in our homes. Lab workers, who may routinely use fireproof or heatproof safety equipment (gloves, jackets, etc.) are also at risk. They face the added risk that many other lab items, such as hoods and tabletops, may also contain asbestos.
Then there’s all the construction materials in which asbestos-use is perfectly legal or where the asbestos is found in existing structures.
What about “accidental asbestos”?
Since asbestos is a naturally-occurring material (one which must be mined), talcum powder and products containing talc, may be contaminated with asbestos as talc is also mined. It so happens that talc and asbestos deposits are often found together. Then there’s plant fertilizer. Many of these often use vermiculite (a naturally-occurring mineral) that is often contaminated with asbestos.
The list could go on, but this should be sufficient to show that asbestos, in any form, is simply not something that is safe to use or be around.
But, what about the asbestos ban?
Well, there’s a history lesson. The EPA (in previous, non-corporate run incarnations), made a good stand against this dangerous material. In the 1970s, the agency banned a number of asbestos-containing items:
- Spray-on fireproofing/insulation and all other spray-on uses
- Pipes and blocks used on things like boilers and hot water tanks
- Fake fireplace embers, as well as wall-patching material (this one was the Consumer Product Safety Commission – CPSC – another gutted agency)
In 1989, the EPA took its largest positive action against asbestos: a ruling under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which banned most asbestos-containing products. Sadly, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned this ruling in 1991.
In almost every case, industry has found a loophole, whether in the form of weak governmental protections, or profit-before-people presidents, and deadly asbestos is back in business.
The time has come to put a stop to this once and for all. We, the people, are more important than corporate profits or presidential greed. We are living, breathing members of society – the government “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” It’s time, on this Mesothelioma Awareness day (and as mid-term elections approach), to let our elected representatives know that enough is enough. Too many people have died. Too many are still getting sick. Too many more will die. It’s time to finish asbestos for good.
Special thanks to the Mesothelioma Cancer Alliance (MCA) for their help with and input into this article.
Join the conversation!