|
|
Medical Experts and Federal Agencies Agree: Each and
Every Exposure to All Asbestos Fiber Types, Including Chrysotile, Cause
Mesothelioma
Does chrysotile asbestos cause mesothelioma?
Yes. Even the asbestos company defendants today largely agree with that
simple, irrefutable truth. Their strategy, instead, has been to persuade
the Judge to prevent the plaintiff from bringing to trial medical
experts to testify about causation without first producing job-specific
epidemiology studies that shows an elevated risk of disease among
workers exposed to chrysotile fibers only. Neither medical science nor
the law requires such a showing.
The
following is a review of the opinions, based on reliable science, of
four experts who have testified on the issue of whether chrysotile
fibers from friction and clutch products cause mesothelioma among
automobile brake workers. They also address the contrived defense
“issue” whether epidemiology showing general causation (i.e., does the
group of, say, auto mechanics have an increased risk of disease?) is a
prerequisite to allowing in evidence of specific causation (i.e., did
this plaintiff’s exposure to defendant’s chrysotile containing brake
product help cause his meso?).
The
Experts:
Dr. Richard Lemen, Ph.D
Dr. Arthur Frank, MD
Dr. Sam Hammar, MD
Dr. Ron Dodson, Ph.D
OSHA/CDC
Dr. Richard Lemen,
PhD
Dr. Richard
Lemon, Ph.D. is an epidemiologist and former Deputy Director of NIOSH
and Assistant Surgeon General.
Dr. Lemen has testified as follows in cases in which the plaintiff with
mesothelioma was exposed to brake and friction products:
-
Epidemiological
studies are not needed for every occupation and every type of
exposure because asbestos is the known cause of disease. The
amount of exposure determines whether disease occurs.
-
Those who work with
asbestos containing friction products are at risk of developing
asbestos diseases.
-
Many factors make
it difficult to do epidemiological studies to show risk, including,
but not limited to the difficulty of bringing together a
heterogeneous group of brake workers because they suffer from
different confounders.
-
The more the
accumulation of the asbestos exposure, the greater the risk of
asbestos disease. All fiber types cause asbestos disease.
Brief exposure to asbestos can cause disease. Friction
products release chrysotile fibers in an amount and size that are
capable of producing asbestos disease.
-
Exposures vary from
individual to individual, and one must look at it on an individual
basis to determine risk for a particular person.
Dr. Arthur Frank, M.D
Dr. Arthur Frank is a toxicologist, who attended medical school at Mt.
Sinai School of Medicine while Dr. Irving Selikoff was conducting his
landmark studies concerning the hazards of asbestos and assisted with
that work. Dr. Frank has testified as follows in brake cases:
-
There are a number
of factors that clearly point to the relationship between exposure
to asbestos from brakes and the development of asbestos disease.
-
There is scientific
literature that the type of asbestos found in brakes, chrysotile,
has the ability to produce all asbestos diseases including
mesothelioma, lung cancer and asbestosis.
-
As is true for all
carcinogens, each and every exposure to asbestos carries risks. As
the exposure levels increase the risk of developing disease
increases.
-
Dr. Frank helped
examine the individuals seen in the Lorimer study. With the
detailed occupational histories obtained and the X-ray findings, the
only tenable diagnosis was asbestosis. For many of the cases the
only reasonable explanation for the asbestosis was brake and clutch
work.
-
The report by
Nicholson et al (1982) documents the hazards of asbestos to brake
mechanics. There were reports of fiber counts up to 72 f/ml
reported by Rohl, et al., and the measurements by Nicholson show
concentrations above background.
-
There is a greater
prevalence of X-ray abnormalities in mechanics who repair brakes
than among controls or mechanics who do not engage in brake work.
-
Epidemiological
studies are not necessary for each and every group exposed to
asbestos in order to opine that asbestos causes disease. One basic
principle in all of occupational and environmental medicine is that
the hazardous material is the issue, not the job category. The
human body has the same response to inhalation of asbestos,
regardless of one’s occupation.
-
The position that a
twofold excess in a specific group is required is unsubstantiated.
There has been scientific documentation that there is a greater than
twofold excess for mesothelioma, lung cancers, and asbestosis
following exposure to asbestos.
-
Much of the
epidemiological literature on brake mechanics has serious
inaccuracies, including the use of gross terms like “motor
mechanics,” which do not always describe those doing brake repair.
-
While it is true
that some brake materials is altered into fosterite during wear,
there is still a significant amount of asbestos. For those doing
brake repair, who regularly handle, grind and drill brand new
brakes, extremely high levels of exposure can occur.
-
Even under the
strictest rules that have ever existed, the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) has concluded that additional cases of
mesothelioma and lung cancer will occur.
-
Fibers from brakes
have the same biological activity as fibers from other sources and
can be additive in causing disease. Exposure to asbestos from
brakes can cause asbestos related disease.
-
Brakes should not
in any way be considered an inconsequential source of asbestos, or
in any way, not capable of producing significant disease.
Dr. Samuel Hammar, MD
Dr. Samuel Hammar, M.D. is a pathologist,
who is member of the elite U.S./Canadian Mesothelioma Panel and a member
of a World Health Organization panel on lung tumors. Dr. Hammar has
testified as follows:
-
An exposure level
of .1 fiber cc years or less can cause mesothelioma.
-
Elliott McCaughey
and Arthur Langer published a paper describing a 56-year-old man who
was a career-long brake worker who died from mesothelioma. The only
type of asbestos found in his lung tissue was chrysotile asbestos.
-
Based on the data
that has been published on the amount of fibers that are released
during brake work, one can conclude that this work is a contributing
cause of mesothelioma and other asbestos diseases.
-
Even though there
may not be any published epidemiological evidence that exposure to
asbestos from working as a brake mechanic causes an increased
incidence of mesothelioma, there have been 174 cases recorded.
-
If one has
mesothelioma, one has been exposed to asbestos. Calcified pleural
plaques are independent evidence of exposure because if the plaques
are grinded and viewed through an electron microscope, they contain
asbestos.
-
Tissue burden
analysis involves counting asbestos fibers in the tissue and
comparing it to a control population of people that do not have
mesothelioma. If the fibers found are in excess of background
levels, it demonstrates that mesothelioma was caused by asbestos.
If both amocite and chrysotile are found at levels above background
in the lung tissue, then both are causal.
-
Dr. Hammar
co-authored a paper with Dr. Dodson entitled Asbestos in
Extrapulmonary Sites. They discovered that when one finds asbestos
in the peritoneal lining, it tends to correlate with having asbestos
fibers of the same types in the lungs. Dr. Hammar has found
chrysotile, amocite and crocidolite in the peritoneum and found the
same fibers in the lungs.
-
If one has
chrysotile in the peritoneum, he will likewise have a substantial
amount of in his lungs.
-
Chrysotile goes to
the pleura where the mesothelioma develops.
Dr. Ronald Dodson, PhD
Dr. Ronald Dodson is a cellular biologist at the University of Texas
Health Center in Tyler, Texas. Dr. Dodson has testified as follows:
-
Tissue burden
analysis provides information with regard to the number and type of
asbestos fibers that are in the tissue.
-
The asbestos fibers
typically used in friction products are not usually as long as eight
microns. Thus, in looking at the fiber burden created by friction
products, the light microscope is not a sensitive. The most
sensitive tool for analyzing asbestos fibers is the transmissions
electron microscope. It is possible to look at lung tissue with a
light microscope and not see any asbestos bodies, but then look at
that same tissue with a transmission electron microscope and see
chrysotile fibers in levels above background.
-
Short fibers are
removed more easily than long ones, and chrysotile fibers from brake
products are more characteristically short. In being cleared from
the lungs, chrysotile fibers can be dispersed into other areas of
the body, including, but not limited to the linings of the lung and
lymph nodes.
-
Mesothelioma is a
cancer of the serosal membranes, the pleural lining of the chest
cavity, the lining of the abdominal cavity or the lining around the
heart. Generally, short fiber is most readily transported from the
lung to the pleura where mesothelioma occurs.
-
Chrysotile can
fragment and create shorter more respirable fibers.
-
In attempting to
count the number of asbestos fibers that are actually present in the
tissue of a person, and only counting fibers that are 5 microns in
length, one can miss up to 95 percent of the fiber burden. One
could essentially overlook all of the chrysotile. Because shorter
fibers carry with them a risk of producing disease and pathogenicity,
it is important to include them in the count.
Federal Agencies Agree: Chrysotile Causes Meso
OSHA has determined that chrysotile asbestos
is a Human Carcinogen.
See e.g. Report on Carcinogens,
Public Health Service, National Toxicology Program (2004), 11th
Ed., Exhibit 2; Dept. of Labor, OSHA, Fed. Reg., Vol. 51,
No. 119, June 20, 1986, Rules and Regulations, pg. 22615,
Federal agencies have issued recommendations
and regulations restricting the use of asbestos based upon
determinations that such products emit concentrations of asbestos
capable of causing disease. The U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services unequivocally states, “[a]sbestos and all commercial forms of
asbestos are known to be human carcinogens based on sufficient evidence
of carcinogenicity in humans.” Rpt. on Carcin. 11th
Ed., Ex. 2.
OSHA states that it “is aware of no
instance in which exposure to a toxic substance has more clearly
demonstrated detrimental health effects on humans than has asbestos
exposure.” Fed. Reg., Vol. 51, No. 119, p. 22615, Ex. 3.
Government
Agencies: Asbestos Brake Dust Causes Meso
In 1975, the Center for Disease Control
issued a bulletin alerting recipients “to recently gathered information
indicating a potential health hazard for persons exposed to asbestos
during the servicing of motor vehicle brakes and clutch assemblies.”
Exhibit 4 (“a review of the scientific literature on the association
between asbestos exposure and mesothelial tumors…has revealed at least
four cases of these rare tumors in persons who were employed in jobs
involving automobile brake servicing”). This bulletin concludes, “[t]he
environmental studies of brake lining servicing operations outlined
above together with the observation of mesothelial tumors in persons so
employed affirms the necessity of instituting and maintaining
recommended control measures.” Id.
In 1986,
the United States Environmental Protection Agency published a bulletin,
“Guidance for Preventing Asbestos Disease Among Mechanics,” Exhibit 6,
that states:
Friction materials, such as brake linings and clutch facings,
often contain asbestos. Millions of asbestos
fibers can be
released during brake and clutch servicing.
Grinding and
beveling friction products can cause even higher
exposures.
While lowering exposure lowers risk, there is
no known level
of exposure to asbestos below which health
effects do not occur.
Mesothelioma is a type of fatal cancer of the
lining of the
chest or abdominal cavity. It can be caused by
very low
exposures to asbestos. This cancer has occurred
among
brake mechanics, their wives, and their
children.
Ex. 6 (emph.
added).
Dr. Lemen
has published a peer-reviewed article on the subject. In this article,
he, concludes: that “encapsulated asbestos containing brakes do release
asbestos fibers…at concentrations capable of causing disease,” Lemen,
2004, Ex. 1 at p. 234; “short asbestos fibers…pose a risk of
disease,” Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at p. 235; and, that “OSHA
has stated that their current standard for asbestos [0.1 f/cc] will not
eliminate the risk of asbestos-induced cancers.” Lemen, 2004,
Ex. 1 at p. 235. He notes that “[a] review of the published peer
reviewed literature reveals at least 165 cases of mesothelioma in
end-product users of friction products[, and that a]dditional government
studies have reported other cases.” Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at
p. 234 (“[t]hese numbers cannot be attributed to ambient air exposure or
to chance alone”).
In a 1976
study, Rohl reported 2-15% chrysotile fiber and/or fibril forms in dust
samples from car brake drums. Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at p.
231. He found concentration of 16 fibers/ml of air from blow out
operations, and measurable concentrations 75 feet away 15 minutes later.
Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at p. 231. Other studies have found
intact chrysotile fibers released during brake repair in the range of
3.8 fibers/ml. See Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at p. 231-32.
“[W]hile average concentrations can average much lower, excursion levels
can reach much higher concentrations during certain operations of the
brake maintenance and repair process exceeding the OSHA excursion limits
and the 8 hour TWA for asbestos.” Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at p.
232. Researchers have concluded that “excessive exposure to asbestos
fibers occurs during brake servicing.” Id.
“Fiber
release studies of actual brake repair and replacement and the
laboratory simulation studies both demonstrate the ability of
encapsulated asbestos-containing brake products, to release respirable
asbestos fibers at concentrations capable of causing asbestos related
disease.” Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at p. 232.
The EPA has reported that millions of
asbestos fibers are released during brake and clutch servicing, and that
this asbestos lingers in the garage. Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at
p. 232. Studies found releases of asbestos fibers around and above the
OSHA PEL (as of 2004). Lemen, 2004, Ex.1 at p. 232. One
study found that when the worst control techniques were used, those
engaged in brake and clutch repair operations for 7.25 hours per day
would experience exposures in excess of the OSHA standard of 0.1 f/cc.
Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at p. 232. As early as 1948, in a
report by a GM employee, “[t]he National Safety Council reported that
asbestos used in brakes was potentially harmful.” Lemen, 2004,
Ex. 1) at p. 233. Several studies report mesothelioma among auto
mechanics, their wives and children. Id.
“Epidemiological studies have been equivocal.” Lemen, 2004,
Ex. 1 at p. 233. The plant where Teta et al. found three cases of
mesothelioma, was the Raybestos brake manufacturing facility. Id.
Another study found 17 mesothelioma deaths at a friction production
plant (4.3% of the total). Id. “[Spairtas] reports 33 cases of
mesothelioma in persons having stated as part of their occupational
history brake repair work. One of the confounding factors preventing [Spairtas]
from calculating a relative risk was that an overwhelming majority of
those workers had also been exposed as insulators or shipbuilders.”
Lemen, 2004, Ex. 1 at p. 233. Teschke et al. found 6 cases
of mesothelioma in vehicle mechanics among 51 cases, but did not
conclude that mechanics showed an excess risk. Still, they acknowledge
that most of these cases were caused by asbestos exposure and that
“their findings were based on small numbers of cases and any judgments
about causal associations would be speculative.” Lemen, 2004,
Ex. 1 at p. 234. Even a conservative interpretation of the
Australian tumor registry study puts the rate of mesothelioma among
automobile mechanics at 22.6 /million/year—“a rate substantially above
the upper limit of the estimated background rate of 1-2 mesotheliomas
per million person-years or around a 10-fold increase.” Lemen, 2004,
Ex. 1 at p. 234.
As early as
the 1930’s, there were published reports of asbestosis among workers in
plants manufacturing brake linings. See Lanza, McConnell, Fehnel,
(1935), “Effects of Inhalation of Asbestos Dust on the Lungs of Asbestos
Workers,” Publ. Health Rept. 50: 1-12, Exhibit 7 (high
prevalence of asbestosis among workers, including plant manufacturing
friction materials); Goerge, A.W. & Leonard, R.D., (1939), “An X-ray
Study of the Lungs of Workman in the Asbestos Industry Covering a period
of Ten Years,” Radiology, 33: 196-209, Exhibit 8
(documents asbestosis in friction manufacturing workers since 1928);
Stone, M.J., (1940), “Clinical Studies in Asbestosis,” Amer. Rev.
Tuberc., 41: 12-21, Exhibit 9 (asbestosis in 148 friction
manufacturing workers); Stone, M.J., (1940), “Studies in Asbestosis,”
Dis. Chest, 6: 170-171, Exhibit 10 (asbestosis in 148
friction manufacturing workers). An industrial hygienist from General
Motors published a report in the National Safety News, in 1948,
concerning protective practices to be used when grinding friction
materials. Exhibit 11. In 1963, a former General Motors
industrial hygienist said of “[t]he sawing, filing, drilling and
grinding of brake linings” that “[i]t is desirable in asbestos exposure
to keep the dust count down to 5 million particles or less, per cubic
foot of air.” Patty, F.A., (1963), Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology (2nd
ed.), NY: Interscience, pp. 2243-44, Exhibit 12.
One study
found unaltered chrysotile in garage air samples and concluded,
“exposure of garage mechanics during brake lining maintenance and repair
show that fiber concentrations frequently in excess of regulated limits
are common.” Rohl, A.N., Langer, M.S., Wolff, M.S. & Weisman, J. (1976),
“Asbestos Exposure During Brake Lining Maintenance and Repair,”
Environ. Research, 72: 110-128, Exhibit 16. There are
numerous published reports of mesothelioma in persons working with
friction products.[1]
CONCLUSION
Chrysotile asbestos causes mesothelioma. It
causes lung cancer, asbestosis and pleural disease. Scientists may
dispute certain issues, such as the dustiness of a product, but these
disputes are for a jury to decide.
The issue for the jury, not the judge, is
whether asbestos exposure was a proximate cause of the illness and death
of a plaintiff. Chrysotile asbestos fibers do not respect job
classifications. Asbestos exposure increases the risk of mesothelioma,
regardless of the person’s job title. The issue is whether the injured
person was exposed and how much and whether that exposure contributed to
the disease or cancer.
As one court wrote: “ As a matter of public
policy, courts should not be hampered in the search for the truth by the
rigid proposition that no expert, however qualified, can reliably opine
on the causal link between a toxic substance and injury without
epidemiological studies conducted according to strict guidelines.”
*** POSTED
APRIL 16, 2007 ***
|
|