J. P. Leineweber and Malcolm Ross of the U.S. Geological Survey on Chrysotile, Crocidolite and the Washington Report (1980)

Two letters. On May 13, 1980, Dr. J. P. Leineweber, vice president and technical director of Johns-Manville Sales Corporation's Health, Safety and Environment Department, wrote to Dr. Malcolm Ross, a research mineralogist at the U.S. Geological Survey, about a Washington Report article based on an interview with Ross. Leineweber questioned its statement that studies of a Canadian asbestos-mining town showed "no measurable health effects among either miners or residents," citing J. C. McDonald's finding that highly exposed chrysotile miners had a higher risk of asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma, and asked for support for the view that blue asbestos (crocidolite) needed special handling. Ross replied on June 3 in a five-page letter, copied to J-M president John A. McKinney, that he had been misquoted about the miners, and that "it appears that there is a J-M policy of assuming that blue asbestos (crocidolite) is no more dangerous than white asbestos (chrysotile)."

What it shows

Leineweber argued that the biological activity of any fiber depends on "the dose, the dimensions of the fiber, and finally the durability," so a sufficient dose of fibers of the right size was all that was needed to cause disease, and that "it is a great disservice to leave the impression that chrysotile asbestos fiber is safe under all conditions." Ross, who defended chrysotile, answered with the mesothelioma deaths among crocidolite miners at Wittenoom, Australia, and the British government's 1979 Simpson report, and warned that J-M's view would treat all fibrous minerals as hazardous. He ended: "I think the greater disservice to the public is the failure of a segment of industry to tell the whole story even if it means accepting responsibility for consequences of past action." Here the company's scientist argued that chrysotile was not safe, while the government mineralogist argued that it was; J-M's position that crocidolite was no worse appears in Reitze's memo on Ontario's limits the same year.

In Johns-Manville's chronology

Johns-Manville's own chronology of what the company knew describes this document as follows:

J.P. Leineweber writes to Malcolm Ross (U.S. Dept. of Interior Mineralogist). 5/13/80, asking for verification of certain of Ross' statements regarding asbestos and health which were recently printed in the Washington Report. Leineweber believes some of Ross' statements are not supported by the medical/scientific literature. Ross is quoted as saying: (1) Studies show that Canadian asbestos miners and town residents show no measurable health effects from asbestos. (2) Blue asbestos is the most dangerous type of asbestos and should be handled in a very special manner.

Ross writes a lengthy and heated response to Leineweber on 6/3/80. With respect to point G1, Ross states that he was misquoted. The statement should have read that the asbestos town residents who were not employed in the chrysotile asbestos industry have not shown any asbestos-related disease, and those employed in the chrysotile asbestos industry and who were exposed to low to moderate levels of dust for over 20 years show no significant excess of disease.

With respect to point G2, Ross is astounded that J-M believes that blue asbestos is not more dangerous than white when the medical and scientific literature clearly supports that it is. Ross also disagrees with Leineweber's belief that the basic determinants for biological activity of any fibrous material is durability and fiber dimensions. Ross states that "[i]n essence then it is not just asbestos, according to your 'belief,' but particles of any kind which meet certain size, shape and durability criteria which cause disease."