A campaign against asbestos

Our plain-English summary of A campaign against asbestos, by C. Levenstein (New Solutions, 1994).

The study

• Author: C. Levenstein
• Journal: New Solutions
• Published: 1994;4(4):3-4
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

In plain English

This was an editorial, not a research study, and it reported no new data. The author wrote that the Health Effects Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, had announced it could no longer fund asbestos research through its division HEI-Asbestos Research. The author tied this to the asbestos industry withdrawing its support while arguing that chrysotile asbestos was harmless. The author also linked it to an industry-funded investigation that the editorial said found chrysotile relatively benign. The editorial stated that chrysotile accounted for 95 percent of all asbestos uses in the U.S. It quoted Dr. Philip Landrigan, who criticized that investigation for discussing only mesothelioma and not lung cancer. It also quoted Dr. Richard Lemen of NIOSH, who said preliminary risk assessments showed chrysotile posed a slightly lower risk of mesothelioma but the same risk of lung cancer and asbestosis as other forms. The editorial raised concern about reported industry influence over a World Health Organization chemical safety program and described a labor-led anti-asbestos coalition. The author invited readers to use the journal to discuss the campaign against what the editorial called the whitewashing of asbestos.

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: editorial (opinion piece); no original research
• Exposure: Chrysotile asbestos, which the editorial describes as one of several forms of asbestos and the one used most widely in the U.S. (95 percent of all uses, citing a 1990 letter in Science)
• Main results:
  • The editorial reported (not a research finding) that the Health Effects Institute announced it would be unable to continue funding asbestos research, and that its division HEI-Asbestos Research, funded by industry with matching federal money, was closing.
  • The editorial stated that the industry, arguing chrysotile asbestos was harmless, had withdrawn its support for asbestos research.
  • The editorial linked the closure to an industry-funded investigation that, in the editorial's description, found chrysotile asbestos relatively benign.
  • The editorial quoted Dr. Philip J. Landrigan, who said that industry study discussed only mesothelioma, not lung cancer, and said lung cancer and asbestosis are the major asbestos-related killers of workers.
  • The editorial quoted Dr. Richard Lemen, acting director of NIOSH, who said preliminary risk assessments showed chrysotile poses a slightly lower risk of mesothelioma but the same risk of lung cancer and asbestosis as other forms of asbestos.
  • The editorial cited a figure attributed to Landrigan of 300,000 deaths, by the year 2000, among American workers exposed to asbestos on their jobs.
  • The editorial expressed concern that the International Program for Chemical Safety, a World Health Organization agency, was expected to issue a report favorable to industry.
  • The editorial described meetings organized by labor unions to mobilize an anti-asbestos coalition that included asbestos victims' organizations and U.S. government agencies.
• The authors' conclusion: The author invited readers to use the journal for discussion of public health policy, strategies, and tactics in what the editorial called the campaign against the whitewashing of asbestos.

Related studies

• How conflicted authors undermine the World Health Organization (WHO) campaign to stop all use of asbestos: spotlight on studies showing that chrysotile is carcinogenic and facilitates other non-cancer asbestos-related diseases — X. Baur, C.L. Soskolne, et al. (2015)
• Banning asbestos in Asia: campaigns and strategies by the Asian Network for the Rights of Occupational Accident Victims (ANROAV) — S. Pandita (2006)
• Channels and vehicles of communication: the asbestos awareness campaign — V.S. Freimuth, J.P. Van Nevel (1993)
• Why did the Nazis have the world's most aggressive anti-cancer campaign? — R.N. Proctor (1999)
• Protest and survive, the U.K. Construction Safety Campaign: a case study of workers' and victims' family action and legal and regulatory inaction on construction health and safety — M. Holder, T. O'Brien (2007)
• Pemetrexed disodium: a novel antifolate clinically active against multiple solid tumors — A.R. Hanauske, V. Chen, et al. (2001)

Browse more research in New Solutions, or return to medical research.