Health progress in an asbestos textile works

Our plain-English summary of Health progress in an asbestos textile works, by J. Mitchell (Archives of Environmental Health, 1961).

The study

• Author: J. Mitchell
• Journal: Archives of Environmental Health
• Published: 1961;3:37-41
• Cited by: 4 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. 001588).

Summary of the article

This article, written by the manager of the Charlotte Works of the Thermoid Division, H. K. Porter Company, Inc., in Charlotte, North Carolina, described changes in dust conditions and health surveillance at that asbestos textile plant between 1936 and 1960. The author said company records from the 1930s were not available. He described a hypothetical small asbestos textile plant in 1936, employing 175 to 200 people, where possibly half the work force might be affected by asbestosis, and said events at the plant may have roughly compared with this. He described past working rooms so dusty that workers could not see the end of a row of machines. In 1936 the North Carolina State Board of Health began x-ray and medical examinations of workers in dusty trades, including asbestos, and issued or withheld work cards. Dust counts from State Board records were compared. Air samples taken in January 1936 showed roughly 45 to 210 million particles per cubic foot. Samples taken in July 1960 showed 0.3 to 4.6 million particles per cubic foot, against a threshold limit of 5 million. The plant then employed more than 400 people and used exhaust hoods, air filtering and air conditioning. The author stated that, under the state system, a worker with even first-stage asbestosis would be refused a work card and compensated.

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 1961 article by the plant's manager is not a research study but a description of dust control and medical checks at the Charlotte Works of H. K. Porter Company, an asbestos textile plant in Charlotte, North Carolina, with more than 400 employees. It named no asbestos type and gave no documented disease counts. The author asked readers to imagine a small 1936 plant of 175 to 200 workers with possibly half affected to some degree by asbestosis, noting company records were unavailable but reality may have roughly compared. North Carolina State Board of Health dust counts from January 1936 showed 11 air samples ranging from 45.0 to 210.0 million particles per cubic foot. The author called these extremes, saying few were within the 5,000,000 threshold. In July 1960, 17 samples ranged from 0.3 to 4.6 million. The author described dust and exhaust hoods, air filtering, yearly state chest x-rays and state work cards. The author stated that under the state system any lung injury would be quickly detected and a worker with even first-stage asbestosis refused a work card.

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: Descriptive account (not a systematic study) of dust conditions and health surveillance at one asbestos textile plant, written by the plant's manager; no documented disease counts are reported
• Who was studied: Workers at one asbestos textile plant, the Charlotte Works of the Thermoid Division of H. K. Porter Company, Inc., Charlotte, North Carolina; more than 400 employees at the time of writing (1961)
• Exposure: Airborne dust in asbestos textile manufacturing (card rooms, spinning, winding and weaving areas), measured in million particles per cubic foot of air by the North Carolina State Board of Health; fiber type not stated
• Main results:
  • As an imagined scenario, not documented data, the author described a small asbestos textile plant in 1936 employing 175 to 200 persons, with possibly one-half of the work force affected to some degree by asbestosis; the author said the company's records were not available but what happened may have roughly compared
  • In the January 1936 State Board of Health dust counts, the 11 samples ranged from 45.0 to 210.0 million particles per cubic foot; the highest, 210.0, was at a stock bin
  • The author described the 1936 counts as extremes and said few figures were within the 5,000,000 particles per cubic foot threshold limit
  • In the July 1960 State Board of Health dust counts, the 17 samples ranged from 0.3 to 4.6 million particles per cubic foot
  • The author described dust controls in 1961, including an air-conditioned card room with dust hoods where 80,000 cubic feet of air per minute was filtered, and exhaust hoods on automatic looms
  • After an annual visit of the State Board of Health mobile x-ray unit, employees received a state work card certifying their health and stating they could continue working in the industry
• The authors' conclusion: The author stated that under the North Carolina State Board of Health system any lung injury would be quickly detected, and a person with asbestosis, even in the first stages, would be refused a work card. The author also said employees received above-average medical attention.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The author stated that company records from the 1930s were not available, so the description of 1936 conditions (presented as an imagined scenario) is only said to have possibly compared roughly with what happened

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Asbestos textiles, Asbestosis.

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Million Particles per Cubic Foot (mppcf).

Related studies

• Technological feasibility of the 2 fibers/cc asbestos standard in asbestos textile facilities — R.A. Curtis, P.H. Bierbaum (1975)
• Pulmonary fibrosis and ferruginous bodies associated with exposure to synthetic fibers — A.J. Ghio, W. Funkhouser, et al. (2006)
• Increased lung cancer mortality among chrysotile asbestos textile workers is more strongly associated with exposure to long thin fibres — D. Loomis, J.M. Dement, et al. (2012)
• Dust control in a conventional asbestos textile factory — H.C. Lewinsohn, C.A. Kennedy, et al. (1979)
• Health effects of natural dust: role of trace elements and compounds — A.G. Cook, P. Weinstein, et al. (2005)
• Guadalupe corridor transportation project asbestos health risk assessment, San Jose, California — W.E. Steiner, J.L. Koehler, et al. (1990)

Browse more research in Archives of Environmental Health, or return to medical research.