EPA and asbestos removal

Our plain-English summary of EPA and asbestos removal, by J. Berry (Science, 1990).

The study

• Author: J. Berry
• Journal: Science
• Published: 1990;248(4963):1595
• Type of article: Letter
• Cited by: 2 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 004447).

In plain English

This item is a short letter to the editor published in Science on 29 June 1990. It is not a research study and reports no data, measurements, or health findings. The author responded to an earlier letter (1 June, p. 1064) by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator William K. Reilly. According to the author, Reilly's letter disclaimed EPA responsibility for the removal of asbestos from buildings. It stated that EPA only requires removal when building demolition or renovation threatens to release significant amounts of asbestos fibers into the air. It also said some owners were removing asbestos because of concerns about property devaluation, insurance, and liability that may be unrelated to health risks. The author argued that EPA press releases over the years had pointed to the danger of asbestos, and that EPA alone bore responsibility for asbestos's "killer" image. The author concluded that the American public, after spending billions of dollars on removal, deserved to hear the facts with which EPA could prove its claims about the danger of asbestos, and that disclosure of that proof was long overdue.

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 (opinion; no study conducted), replying to an earlier letter by the EPA Administrator
• Exposure: asbestos in buildings and its removal; EPA policy on removal during demolition or renovation (no fiber types or doses given)
• The authors' conclusion: The author argued that EPA alone bears responsibility for the "killer" image of asbestos and that EPA's disclosure of proof for its claims about the danger of asbestos is long overdue.

Related studies

• Comparing epidemiologic studies of ingested asbestos for use in risk assessment — L.S. Erdreich (1983)
• An assessment of the Environmental Protection Agency's asbestos hazard evaluation algorithm — M.E. Findley, V.E. Rose, et al. (1983)
• EPA as a public health agency — B.D. Goldstein (1988)
• Asbestos in drinking water: a status report — J.A. Cotruvo (1983)
• How do you interpret regulations: through science or agency rules? — J.H. Lange (2002)
• The asbestos removal fiasco — P.H. Abelson (1990)

Browse more research in Science, or return to medical research.