Author's response to: "Letter to the Editor" regarding content of "Mesothelioma from asbestos exposures: Epidemiologic patterns and impact in the United States" by R. A. Lemen, Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B 2016; 19: 250-265

Our plain-English summary of Author's response to: "Letter to the Editor" regarding content of "Mesothelioma from asbestos exposures: Epidemiologic patterns and impact in the United States" by R. A. Lemen, Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B 2016; 19: 250-265 (Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. Part B, Critical Reviews, 2017).

The study

• Journal: Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. Part B, Critical Reviews
• Published: 2017;20(8):389
• Type of article: Letter, Comment
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

In plain English

This is a letter, not a study. The author of a 2016 article on mesothelioma from asbestos exposure in the United States replied to Magnani and colleagues. They had written that the article wrongly described their position on a subject, which this letter does not name. The author explained that the III Italian Consensus Conference on Malignant Mesothelioma of the Pleura existed in two versions. One was an 8-page summary, which the article had quoted. The other was a complete 27-page version published only online, which the author had not known about until the letter writers supplied it. The author said the reading of the shorter version still seemed valid, but the full version further clarified their position. Had it been seen, the article would not have emphasized "in contrast" when comparing the conference's conclusions with statements by Selikoff and Lee (1978) and Churg and Green (1998). The author concluded that the full paper confirmed the letter writers' explanations and supported the weight of the scientific evidence on that section. A note states that the author generally testifies as an expert for plaintiffs in asbestos litigation.

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: Letter to the editor: the author's reply to a letter criticizing the author's 2016 article. It reports no new data.
• Who was studied: Not applicable: no people, cases or data were studied.
• Exposure: Not applicable: the letter discusses how a publication was cited, not a specific exposure.
• Main results:
  • Magnani and colleagues had objected that the author's 2016 article wrongly described their position on a subject. The letter does not say what that subject was.
  • The author explained that the Italian consensus conference report existed as a shorter 8-page summary, which the author had quoted.
  • A complete 27-page version had been published only online. The author was unaware of it when writing the article, and the letter writers provided it in recent months.
  • The author maintained that the interpretation of the shorter version still seemed valid.
  • The author said the full online version further clarified the letter writers' position. Had it been seen, the author would not have emphasized "in contrast" when comparing the conference's conclusions with statements by Selikoff and Lee (1978) and by Churg and Green (1998).
  • An acknowledgement states that the author generally testifies as an expert on behalf of plaintiffs in asbestos litigation.
• The authors' conclusion: The author concluded that the full paper confirmed the letter writers' explanations and, as per the author's 2016 paper, supported the weight of the scientific evidence on the subject of the section in question.

Topics

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

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Mesothelioma, Asbestos Exposure.

Related studies

• Comment on "Mesothelioma from asbestos exposures: Epidemiologic patterns and impact in the United States" by R A Lemen, Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B 2016;19:250-265 — C. Magnani, D. Mirabelli, et al. (2017)
• Response to Letter to the Editor Regarding "Ambient Asbestos Fiber Concentrations and Long-Term Trends in Pleural Mesothelioma Incidence Between Urban and Rural Areas in the United States (1973-2012)" by Finkelstein — K.A. Keeton, M.E. Glynn, et al. (2018)
• Mesothelioma from asbestos exposures: Epidemiologic patterns and impact in the United States — R.A. Lemen (2016)
• Authors' response to Finkelstein's letter to the editor regarding our recent review of ambient airborne asbestos concentrations (Abelmann et al., 2015) — A. Abelmann, M.E. Glynn, et al. (2016)
• Response to Letter to the Editor from Egilman, Castleman and Bird (2020) concerning Bullock (2020), Perspectives on the knowledge of asbestos disease in the United States - what was known, by whom and when — W.H. Bullock (2020)
• Response to a letter to the editor by Dr. Murray M. Finkelstein regarding the article by Finley et al. (2012) — B.L. Finley, J.S. Pierce, et al. (2013)

Browse more research in Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. Part B, Critical Reviews, or return to medical research.