Mesothelioma Asbestos Lawyer, DuBose Law Firm, PLLC

Main navigation

You are here: Home / Archives for Asbestos

Asbestos

Two Decades After Ban, Asbestos Still Kills 5,000 Britons Each Year

By

Not surprisingly, two decades after the ban, asbestos still kills 5,000 Britons each year. That’s because symptoms of disease often don’t show up until 20 to 40 years – or more – after exposure. This long exposure time is one of the reasons it is often not recognized as an imminent danger, yet the fibers inhaled many years in the past are poised to show up as lung cancer, asbestosis, or the deadly mesothelioma after the initial exposure is just a memory.

Asbestos still kills 5,000 Britons each year

The long exposure time is only one reason it is still killing after all these years. Though the mineral was outlawed 20 years ago in Britain, asbestos still exists in government, commercial, and residential buildings built before 1999. While not a threat when undisturbed, these buildings often are at an age when renovation, or even demolition, is required. If this work is not done by an authorized abatement company, the possibility of exposure from the dust created is high. To cut corners, renovators and do-it-yourself handymen often skip this critical step and the countdown to possible diseases in the distant future starts again.

The report from the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) verified that people today are still being exposed – often because of non-compliance with regulations. In the past year, over 130 British companies or individuals were ordered to stop work because of rule-breaking.

As Bev Bessinger, IOSH chief executive said, “It is unacceptable that 20 years on from asbestos being banned in Britain, organisations are still potentially putting at risk the lives of employees, their families, and other members of the public. Thousands die in Britain every year from cancers like mesothelioma, while many more are diagnosed with it. All this is preventable through good occupational safety and health. It is time for organisations to wake up and realise how dangerous asbestos is. There are no excuses.”

Dr. Nick Hopkinson, medical director at the British Lung Foundation, reinforced this message by confirming, “Currently the only treatments available are aimed at slowing the progression of the disease and improving quality of life. This devastating disease is preventable, and the dangers of asbestos are well known. It’s vital companies are vigilant and take the proper precautions to protect people from the life-threatening dangers of asbestos, and take urgent action if asbestos has been found.”

Asbestos still kills 15,000 Americans each year

This number of deaths is not acceptable. The United States has not taken the necessary steps to ban asbestos, even though it has been banned in 55 countries. Though some uses are no longer allowed in the US, others are – especially in commercial applications. We know homes and other buildings constructed before the 1980s have a high likelihood of asbestos in areas such as drywall, insulation, siding, roofing, tile mastic, and insulation around pipes. When will the US stop new uses of this deadly mineral?

Brakes on the Toxic Substances Control Act

This act showed promise to finally ban, or strictly control, asbestos as it was identified as one of the ten high risk chemicals set for EPA evaluation. Unfortunately, the ground rules for the EPA’s evaluation under the Trump administration has softened the likelihood of a ban and shockingly, may perhaps even allow new uses of the fiber.

A legacy of death for the future

Like those in the U.K. who work on demolition or renovation of pre-1980 era buildings, workers and their families can be exposed to asbestos if not careful to have suspicious areas checked by an abatement professional. Click here to see a comprehensive FAQ checklist of asbestos products, reporting information, and testing guidelines. Since there is no outright ban, new asbestos-containing materials can still be imported into the US. As seen in the British report, once a ban is in place, people contracting asbestos-related diseases continue for decades into the future. Until importation and new uses are stopped completely, there is no end in sight for the victims of asbestos.

Claire’s Finally Pulled Their Products Containing Asbestos

By

Claire’s finally pulled their products containing asbestos when the FDA affirmed the presence of asbestos after testing in 2017 and 2018. Though the removal was voluntary, it occurred only after the FDA issued a warning against the three contaminated products. Since the FDA does not have jurisdiction, they believed this was warranted since Claire’s initially “refused to comply with the FDA’s request, and the agency does not have authority to mandate a recall.” Claire’s steadfastly refuted the FDA’s findings, asserting “the products were “extensively tested by multiple independent accredited laboratories” and “all products were found to be compliant with all relevant cosmetic safety regulations.”

Meanwhile, Frank Pallone, Jr, Energy and Commerce Chairman, stated, “Examples like Claire’s’ refusal to voluntarily recall their asbestos-tainted products demonstrates the need to modernize the current regulatory framework for cosmetic and personal care products to ensure that the FDA can act to protect consumers when industry fails to do so.”

Claire’s finally pulled their products

Claire’s sold the affected products between October 2016 and March 2019. While they are no longer in the stores, some households possibly continue to harbor the three products pinpointed. To check your home, the products are:

• Claire’s Eyeshadows, UPC #888711847165, SKU #84716, Lot No. 08/17
• Claire’s Compact Powder, UPC #888711839153, SKU #83915, Lot No. 07/15
• Claire’s Contour Palette, UPC #888711401947, SKU #40194, Lot No. 04/17

The identifying numbers are found on the price stickers on the product. Batch numbers are found beneath the ingredient lists on the back panels.

The original products pulled from stores in December of 2017 were Ultimate Mega Make Up Set, Metallic Hot Pink Glitter 48-Piece Makeup Set, Bedazzled Rainbow Heart Makeup Set, Rainbow Bedazzled Star Make Up Set, Rainbow Glitter Heart Shaped Makeup Set, Mint Glitter Make Up Set, Rainbow Bedazzled Rectangle Make Up Set, and Pink Glitter Palette with Eyeshadow & Lip Gloss. Again, if these still remain in your home, dispose of them or return the item to the Claire’s store.

For more information

If you want more information, contact Claire’s at 800-252-4737, option 2, from 9:30 AM – 7 PM EDT.

FDA Affirms Asbestos Found in Cosmetics Targeting Teens

By

Asbestos found in cosmetics targeting teens and preteens continues to be a problem in a statement from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) this week. This affirmation is the result of testing performed by U.S. PIRG, a consumer advocate group, in both 2017 and 2018. These three branded cosmetic products from Claire’s and one sold by Justice, were among those tested in 2017 and again in 2018. The Claire’s products tested positive for tremolite asbestos in 2018 as did the Justice product.

Why is asbestos found in cosmetics harmful?

After years and decades of testing, it is proven than there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos. Asbestos that is in solid form, such as shingles, left untouched is a potential danger, but asbestos that is loose, as found in powders and other cosmetics, is definitely dangerous. These products are easily inhaled or ingested which can lead to lung cancer and even mesothelioma – a deadly disease. In addition, these products targeted young girls, still growing and developing.

Claire’s rebuttal

In all testing, Claire’s contends there is no danger and that the U.S. PIRG report is faulty and misleading. In their independent testing, no asbestos fibers were found, however they have not disclosed their testing methodologies or results.

Claire’s spokeswoman, Melanie Berry said in a statement, “The FDA test reports have mis-characterized fibers in the products as asbestos, in direct contradiction to established EPA and USP criterion for classifying asbestos fibers.” “Despite our efforts to discuss these issues with the FDA, they insisted on moving forward with their release. We are disappointed that the FDA has taken this step, and we will continue to work with them to demonstrate the safety of our products.”

Claire’s filed for bankruptcy in the US in March 2018 and came out of it in October of 2018

FDA response

“Our lab is accredited by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology NVLAP program. The FDA used a lab on this accredited list for their cosmetics testing for asbestos (AMA Analytical Services) as well as another lab on the list, STAT Analysis Corporation.”

Why are cosmetic companies allowed to sell these products?

The FDA cannot force a company to remove asbestos-laden products because there are no laws requiring testing cosmetic products for safety. “The FDA is today announcing the results of these tests. Those tests confirmed the presence of asbestos in three of the product samples collected from Claire’s and one of the product samples collected from Justice. All suspect Justice products, including the one testing positive for asbestos, were previously recalled from the market in 2017. The FDA issued a Safety Alert today warning consumers to discontinue use of three Claire’s products: Claire’s Eye Shadows – Batch No/Lot No: 08/17; Claire’s Compact Powder – Batch No/Lot No: 07/15; and, Claire’s Contour Palette – Batch No/Lot No: 04/17 because they tested positive for asbestos.

In an FDA press release published on March 5, 2019, the following statement was made, “The FDA requested that Claire’s recall the products because they should not be used by consumers. Claire’s has refused to comply with the FDA’s request, and the agency does not have authority to mandate a recall. The FDA is therefore warning consumers not to use these products and will continue to communicate our safety concerns about them.“

Until laws requiring testing are enacted, the FDA requests cosmetic firms to take voluntary measures to register in the FDA’s Voluntary Cosmetic Registration Program (VCRP.) The FDA also asks manufacturers to voluntarily report any negative effects involving cosmetic products.

While the FDA was told there are no more asbestos-tainted products in the Claire’s stores, they caution anyone who has them in their homes should stop using them.

Petition Filed by 15 Attorney Generals for EPA to Enhance Asbestos Reporting Rules

By

Attorney Generals in 14 states, plus the District of Colombia, have petitioned the EPA to enhance asbestos reporting rules. This would “address deficiencies” observed in the current chemical data reporting (CDR) asbestos rule. The petition asserts that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a mandate to perform asbestos risk evaluations and create regulations that deal with all unreasonable human or environmental risks.

Specific ways for the EPA to enhance asbestos reporting rules

• Close exemptions that exist in the CDR for naturally occurring substances and impurities.
• Extend the reporting requirements to processors of asbestos.
• Require notification of the substance’s use in articles.

Basically, this petition and an earlier one presented to the EPA in September of 2018, request all importers of asbestos and asbestos-containing products to inform the EPA of how and where they will be used. A current example of the need for these rules is a loophole that allowed Occidental Chemical Corporation–the largest asbestos importer– to import asbestos into the United States without notifying the EPA.

Supporters of the 2018 petition included the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO), the American Public Health Association (APHA), Center for Environmental Health (CEH), Environmental Working Group (EWG), Environmental Health Strategies Center (EHSC), and Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families (SCHF). This petition was denied.

The dangers of asbestos

While asbestos is naturally occurring, that does not mean it is not a danger. It is a known carcinogen. Researchers believe approximately 40,000 Americans die annually from asbestos-related diseases. Diseases range from asbestosis, to lung cancer, and most deadly – mesothelioma. While many countries have banned its use, the US has not, though there are limitations.

2016 changes to the Toxic Substances Control Act

Loopholes were a concern when the EPA made changes to the Toxic Substances Control Act at the beginning of the Trump administration. In general, instead of all new uses coming before the EPA to assess risk, only 15 specific uses would bring about a federal assessment. These 15 uses are relatively common, so new uses could slip in without review.

Attorney General Maura Healey of Massachusetts asserted, “In recent years, tens of thousands have died from mesothelioma and other diseases caused by exposure to asbestos and other dangerous chemicals. If the Trump administration’s erosion of federal chemical safety rules continues, it will endanger our communities and the health of all Americans.”

EPA response

The EPA’s response, led by EPA’s acting administrator, Andrew Wheeler, said their plan would make it more difficult to use asbestos in products. The agency asserted that it “is aware of all ongoing uses of asbestos and already has the information that EPA would receive if EPA were to amend the CDR requirements.” Because the risk evaluations under the reformed TSCA must be completed by December, there was not time to change the rule and assemble the information in time – although there is a possible six-month extension.

Attorney generals’ response

The attorneys assert that the public has a right to know of dangers to their health and how to avoid and eliminate exposures. “Neither of these goals can be accomplished,” the attorneys said,” if EPA does not possess the necessary comprehensive data with respect to the manufacture (including import) and use of asbestos in the US on which to act – data that currently EPA is not collecting under the CDR, as EPA concedes” in its response and denial to the previous petitioners.

Going forward

The ADAO President and CEO, Linda Reinstein, expressed the thoughts of many when she said, “We are grateful and pleased that the states are showing leadership in holding the Trump EPA accountable for its reckless disregard of public health. When they denied ADAO’s petition, EPA irresponsibly refused to collect information that its own scientists need to do their jobs properly and that workers and the public need so they know whether they are being exposed to asbestos and can protect themselves from harm.”

The EPA response to this latest petition, filed on January 31, is required within 90 days.

Good News For Many As U.S. Cancer Deaths Declined

By

U.S. cancer deaths declined 27% overall in a period of 25 years – from 1991 to 2016. Good news for many, but this statistic reverses in some counties where there is a great deal of social and economic difference.

Why does the cancer death rate vary between counties?

The positive: In those 25 years, almost 2.6 million fewer people died due to cancer. This is primarily due to:

– Smoking reduction
– Earlier detection
– Improved treatments
– Environmental factors

Common cancers, such as breast, colon, lung, and prostate benefitted the most with a percentage decrease of 40%-breast, 53%-colon, 48%-lung, and 51%-prostate. So, why have some counties actually shown an increase in these cancers over the same length of time?

The negative: Rebecca Siegel, lead researcher and scientific director of surveillance research at the American Cancer Society (ACS), suggests, “The largest gaps are for the most preventable cancers. For example, in the early 1970s colon cancer death rates were 20 percent lower in poor counties, and today they are 35 percent higher, when compared with people living in richer counties.”

Siegel also said, “Differences in wealth lead to differences in risk factors and less access to high-quality care for prevention, early detection and treatment.” Predictably, people in lower economic areas are less likely to go to a doctor as frequently for screening, which leads to cancer diagnoses at a more advanced stage.

“Health literacy is an issue”, stated Siegel. Where people of lower economic levels have access to screening, the cancer percentages per county even out with those of more wealth, but only if residents also are educated on how they can lower their cancer risks.

Environmental factors are important as well. Beginning in the early 1970s, many of the first environmental regulations were passed – aiming to curb public exposure to a myriad of industrial toxins. Additionally, geographic areas with heavy industry often tend to have a higher incidence of cancer rates.

Not all cancer deaths declined

Though the report is good news overall, other cancer deaths rose, such as liver cancer, pancreatic cancer, brain cancer, soft-tissue cancers, and oral cancers related to the human papillomavirus (HPV).

Siegel reminded that, even though lung cancer deaths decreased, “lung cancer still kills more Americans than breast, prostate and colon cancer combined.” Included in these lung cancers is malignant mesothelioma, a fatal disease across all economic groups that currently has no cure. Mesothelioma is actually a cancer of the lining of the lung caused by asbestos exposure. There are also several variants of lung cancer which can also be asbestos-related.

Great strides are being made, but cancer remains the second leading cause of death after heart disease. For some areas, as well with Hispanic, Asian American, and people under 80, cancer is still the primary cause of death. While the gap in cancer deaths has reduced between black and white populations, there is a growing gap based on wealthy versus poor counties.

What is next?

Obviously additional research and studies on more that the common cancers is necessary. There must be increased education initiatives in poor communities and communities in general.

Cancer deaths currently drop at 2% a year, but with increased availability of screening, health education within all communities, and ongoing research, this 2% could increase a great deal and cancer deaths become fewer with each year.

Dr. Harold Burstein, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and physician with the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, stated this report shows “tremendous improvements” in therapeutic treatments for cancer.

Though there is still work to do, Burstein professes the medical researchers have made tremendous progress treating the disease. “For a long time, there was a nihilism that we are not winning the war of cancer,” he said. “We are winning the war.”