Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Asbestos exposure causes mesothelioma, but not this asbestos exposure: an amicus brief to the Michigan Supreme Court.

Asbestos exposure No Comments

Center to Protect Workers Rights, 8484 Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA.

Manufacturers of asbestos brakes, supported by many manufacturing and insurance industry amicus curie, requested the Michigan Supreme Court to dismiss testimony of an expert regarding the ability of asbestos dust from brakes to cause mesothelioma as “junk science”. Scientists are concerned with the sweeping and unequivocal claims that any conclusion that asbestos from brakes caused a signature asbestos-related disease in a particular person must be “junk science”. The manufacturers’ sweeping pronouncements are what veer from accepted, reliable mainstream scientific methods and conclusions. This article outlines the evidence supporting the conclusion that asbestos from brakes can and does cause mesothelioma, and describes the defendants’ attempts to fabricate doubt about this conclusion.

Asbestos exposure, legislation and diseases in the Czech Republic.

Asbestos exposure No Comments

Department of Occupational Medicine, Charles University, Prague. daniela.pelclova@lf1.cuni.cz

Asbestos manufacturing has been banned in the Czech Republic; however, about 280 workers in the 2nd-4th work category have been exposed during the remediation of asbestos, and the health consequences of the former use of asbestos will be apparent for many years. The incidence of mesothelioma in the Czech Republic is about 0.5/100,000 inhabitants, which places it among the lowest incidences of mesothelioma in Europe, and ranks the Czech Republic among the countries with the lowest rates in the world. The proportion of occupational mesotheliomas is only about one-tenth of these malignancies. These data show an underreporting of occupational cancers, most probably due to low awareness of the association of exposures more than 40 years ago with this disease. Physicians should focus more on the occupational history of these patients and refer them to the Departments of occupational diseases. Benefits are available for all patients with mesothelioma, in whom industrial hygienists confirm former exposure to asbestos, corresponding to the latency period.