A camel through the eye of a needle: expertise and the late recognition of asbestos-related diseases

Our plain-English summary of A camel through the eye of a needle: expertise and the late recognition of asbestos-related diseases, by A. Menéndez-Navarro (International Journal of Health Services, 2011).

The study

• Author: A. Menéndez-Navarro
• Journal: International Journal of Health Services
• Published: 2011;41(1):121-35
• Type of article: Historical article
• Cited by: 4 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

The aim of this study is to provide new insights into the late recognition of asbestos-related diseases in contemporary societies. It addresses the role of expert culture in the identification, management, and control of asbestos risks, and examines the contribution of these processes to the late recognition and minimization of risks. After focusing first on Spain, the article presents three historical case studies to illustrate some shortcomings of the expert explanatory model. First, the narrow definition of asbestosis forged by medical experts in interwar Britain helped shape a public perception of the asbestos issue as finite and controllable. Second, the alternative approach to asbestos hazard management proposed by the Spanish trade union Comisiones Obreras in the early 1980s, inspired by the so-called Italian workers' model, prioritized locally produced knowledge. Finally, in the changing public view of asbestos risks in France during the last third of the 20th century, cultural and social factors played a crucial role in broadening the issue beyond its conception as just an occupational health problem. The author argues that expertise itself becomes a deproblematizing agent for industrial health issues, paving the way for their social invisibility.

In plain English

In this historical essay, the author examined how expert culture contributed to the late recognition of asbestos-related diseases. The author used three historical case studies. The first two drew on the author's own research in archives and published sources. The third was based entirely on research by the French sociologist Emmanuel Henry. For interwar Britain, the author argued that the 1930 Merewether and Price report studied only the asbestos textile industry and left out social factors such as working conditions. The 1931 regulations did not require dust protection where dust levels were below those in spinning areas. For Spain, the author described a 1982 report by Francisco Báez Baquet, a member of the trade union Comisiones Obreras. It called for medical checks of ex-employees, workers' families and neighbors of factories. The author called this case study preliminary. For France, renewed public attention in the mid-1990s was linked to treating asbestos as an environmental issue. The author concluded that expert knowledge helped keep the social dimensions of occupational hazards out of public debate, paving the way for their social invisibility.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Historical and social-science essay built on three historical case studies; not an epidemiological or clinical study
• Who was studied: No study subjects. Three historical settings: the asbestos textile industry and Factory Department policy in interwar Britain; trade union proposals in Spain in the 1970s and early 1980s; and public perception of asbestos in France, 1970 to 1997. The French case relies entirely on another researcher's work.
• Exposure: Asbestos dust in general; no fiber types are named. Settings include the British asbestos textile industry and the Uralita fiber-cement factories in Spain.
• Main results:
  • The author reported that the 1930 Merewether and Price report selected 363 workers from an estimated workforce of 2,200. This was about 4.3 percent of the 8,500 asbestos textile workers in the United Kingdom in 1930.
  • According to the author, the account of how dust caused disease used in interwar Britain left out social factors.
  • Under the 1931 British regulations, dust protection was not required for tasks with dust levels below those recorded in spinning areas.
  • From minutes and reports on the drafting of the regulations, the author found that Factory Department policy was limited to what manufacturers found acceptable and what was technically feasible.
  • The author argued that the limited picture drawn by British medical experts shaped a public perception of asbestos as finite and controllable.
  • In Spain, Báez Baquet's 1982 report called for regular medical examinations to be extended beyond current workers.
  • Drawing on Henry's research, the author reported that the mid-1990s reemergence of asbestos as a public issue in France was linked to treating it as an environmental health issue.
• The authors' conclusion: The author concluded that by neglecting social, political and cultural factors, expert knowledge contributed to a narrow definition of occupational hazards and helped keep their social dimensions out of public debate. In the author's view, expertise thus acts to 'deproblematize' industrial health issues, paving the way for their social invisibility.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The author stated that the Spanish case study was at a preliminary stage and part of an ongoing project.

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Asbestosis.

Related studies

• Too little, too late? The home office and the asbestos industry regulations, 1931 — P. Bartrip (1998)
• Too little, too late? The home office and the asbestos industry regulations, 1931: a reply — M. Greenberg, N. Wikeley (1999)
• Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (FIOH): prevention and detection of asbestos-related diseases, 1987-2005 — M.S. Huuskonen, J. Rantanen (2006)
• Late industrial development and occupational health in southern Italy — G. Assennato, L. Bisceglia, et al. (2005)
• Double standards: the multinational asbestos industry and asbestos-related disease in South Africa — J. McCulloch, G. Tweedale (2004)
• Inequities in occupational diseases recognition in France — J.F. Gehanno, S. Letalon, et al. (2019)

Browse more research in International Journal of Health Services, or return to medical research.