Asbestos and product defence science

Our plain-English summary of Asbestos and product defence science, by B. Terracini, D. Mirabelli (International Journal of Epidemiology, 2016).

The study

• Authors: B. Terracini, D. Mirabelli
• Journal: International Journal of Epidemiology
• Published: 2016;45(3):614-8
• Type of article: Editorial
• Cited by: 5 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Summary of the article

In this editorial, the authors discussed 'product defence science' in relation to asbestos. They defined it as research whose goal is not scientific knowledge but influencing policy decisions on an industrial product. They noted that in 2015 the Collegium Ramazzini issued three statements on chrysotile, the only form of asbestos still in use, and that 2 million tons of asbestos are used annually, mostly in low- and middle-income countries. The authors argued that a 2012 review concluding that stopping exposure does not materially modify mesothelioma risk had selected findings and ignored duration and cumulative exposure. They reported that it was accepted five days after submission and used by the defence in an Italian criminal trial. A 2015 corrigendum corrected its conflict-of-interest statement and disclaimed funding from the Italian Association for Cancer Research. They reported that a Medline search (1 March 2016) for 'controlled use' and 'asbestos' gave 18 references that did not clarify the term. They also stated that, to their knowledge, no thorough 'controlled use' programme had been implemented and evaluated in any country. They criticised claims that chrysotile is harmless or that lung fibre burden data disprove its carcinogenicity. They concluded that conflict-of-interest statements and standard peer review had proven insufficient, and they called for resources to monitor and respond to biased publications. They warned that trade agreements such as TTIP could be used to challenge health regulations.

PubMed has no abstract for this study, and the article doesn't print one. We wrote this summary from the full article with the help of AI. It is not the authors' wording.

In plain English

This was an editorial, not a new epidemiological or experimental study. Responding to three 2015 Collegium Ramazzini statements on chrysotile (white asbestos), the authors argued that 'product defence science', meaning research aimed at influencing policy rather than at scientific knowledge, has helped keep chrysotile in use. They stated that 2 million tons of asbestos are used each year, mostly in low- and middle-income countries. They criticised a 2012 review that concluded stopping exposure does not materially change later mesothelioma risk, saying it ignored duration and cumulative exposure. They reported that the review was submitted on 28 September 2011 and accepted on 2 October 2011, and that a 2015 correction revised its conflict-of-interest statement. A Medline search on 'controlled use' of asbestos found 18 references, and the authors knew of no country that had implemented and evaluated a thorough controlled-use programme. They argued that lung fibre burden at death does not reflect lifelong exposure. The authors concluded that misuse of scientific evidence will likely increase with trade agreements such as TTIP.

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 and commentary piece; not a new epidemiological or experimental study, though it reports the authors' own Medline search)
• Exposure: Chrysotile (white asbestos), the only form of asbestos still in use, discussed in comparison with amphiboles (amosite, crocidolite)
• Main results:
  • The authors stated that 2 million tons of asbestos are extracted and/or used annually, mostly in low- and middle-income countries
  • The authors defined 'product defence science' as research whose goals are to influence policy decisions on an industrial product rather than to produce scientific knowledge
  • The authors criticised a 2012 review (La Vecchia and Boffetta) that claimed exposures after 'early' ones play no role in mesothelioma, saying it ignored duration of exposure and cumulative exposure
  • The authors reported that the 2012 review was submitted on 28 September 2011 and accepted on 2 October 2011, and that a 2015 corrigendum revised its conflict-of-interest statement and disclaimed support from the Italian cancer charity AIRC
  • A Medline search (1 March 2016) combining 'controlled use' and 'asbestos' gave 18 references, 14 of them by known pro-ban authors. The authors knew of no country that had implemented and evaluated a thorough controlled-use programme
  • The authors noted that after the 2012 IARC Monograph, the evidence was strengthened by findings in Chinese occupational cohorts exposed only to chrysotile
  • The authors stated that chrysotile is cleared from the lung faster than amphiboles, so lung fibre burden at death provides little information on the relative carcinogenic potential of different asbestos types
  • The authors noted that earlier meta-analyses reported chrysotile potency one to two orders of magnitude below amphiboles, that IARC questioned these estimates, and that any lower potency is largely balanced by the amount of chrysotile used
  • The authors stated that pollution from the Eternit plant in Casale Monferrato (closed in 1987) is still producing 40 to 50 mesothelioma cases per year
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that conflict-of-interest statements and standard peer review have been insufficient to protect readers from misleading information. They said resources are needed to monitor the literature, respond to biased publications and produce independent reviews, and that misuse of scientific evidence will likely increase with TTIP and other trade agreements

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Collegium Ramazzini, Chrysotile, Mesothelioma, Cumulative Exposure, Controlled Use.

Related studies

• Re: Asbestos and product defence science — P. Boffetta, C. La Vecchia (2016)
• Asbestos and product defence science. Response to: Boffetta and La Vecchia — B. Terracini, D. Mirabelli (2016)
• Potential health hazards associated with exposures to asbestos-containing drywall accessory products: A state-of-the-science assessment — A.D. Phelka, B.L. Finley (2012)
• Dust diseases and the legacy of corporate manipulation of science and law — D. Egilman, T. Bird, et al. (2014)
• MetLife and its corporate allies: dust diseases and the manipulation of science — D.S. Egilman, T. Bird, et al. (2013)
• History of knowledge and evolution of occupational health and regulatory aspects of asbestos exposure science: 1900-1975 — C.A. Barlow, J. Sahmel, et al. (2017)

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