French ministries in argument over release of asbestos report

Our plain-English summary of French ministries in argument over release of asbestos report, by D. Butler (Nature, 1997).

The study

• Author: D. Butler
• Journal: Nature
• Published: 1997;389(6652):649-50
• Type of article: News
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

In plain English

This is a news article, not a research study. The author reported from Paris in October 1997 on a dispute between French government ministries over a 560-page report on the health effects of asbestos. The report was prepared by an expert panel of INSERM, the national biomedical research agency. A short summary had been released in July 1996, just before the government announced a ban on all forms of asbestos. INSERM then decided not to publish the final report as a book, as originally agreed. Several independent sources alleged that the office of INSERM's director general blocked publication while awaiting authorization from the science ministry. The science minister, Claude Allègre, had been an outspoken critic of the report. An INSERM spokeswoman denied political interference, and the official explanation given was printing cost. Labour relations officials said publication had been agreed in their contract with INSERM. The article noted that the Canadian and Quebec governments had contested the ban, including its inclusion of chrysotile asbestos. The article did not report the report's scientific findings.

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: news article (journalism), not a research study
• Exposure: No exposure was studied. The article concerns an INSERM report on the health effects of the principal forms of asbestos.
• Main results:
  • A short summary of the report was released in July 1996, just before the French government announced a ban on all forms of asbestos.
  • INSERM decided not to publish the final report as a book as originally agreed.
  • The science minister, Claude Allègre, had been an outspoken critic of the report.
  • Several independent sources alleged that the office of INSERM's director general, Claude Griscelli, blocked publication while awaiting authorization from the science ministry.
  • An INSERM spokeswoman, Suzy Mouchet, denied the allegations of political interference.
  • INSERM's official explanation was that the market for the report was too small to justify an estimated printing cost of FFr60,000 to FFr70,000.
  • A labour relations department (DRT) official pointed out that publication had been agreed in the DRT's contract with INSERM.
  • The French ban and the full INSERM report had been contested by the Canadian federal government and the government of Quebec. France was criticized for including chrysotile asbestos in the ban.

Related studies

• Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal perfusion with chemotherapy in children with peritoneal tumor spread: A French nationwide study over 14 years — A. Scalabre, P. Philippe-Chomette, et al. (2018)
• French agency agrees to publication of asbestos report — D. Butler (1997)
• Justice for asbestos victims and the politics of compensation: the French experience — A. Thébaud-Mony (2003)
• Canada and France fall out over the risks of asbestos — D. Butler, D. Spurgeon (1997)
• Attributable risk in men in two French case-control studies on mesothelioma and asbestos — A. Lacourt, P. Rolland, et al. (2010)
• WTO upholds French ban on chrysotile — L.K. Allen (2001)

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