Re: Historical reasons for attitudes and opinions regarding asbestos and cancer, 1934-1965

Our plain-English summary of Re: Historical reasons for attitudes and opinions regarding asbestos and cancer, 1934-1965, by M. Corn, J.K. Corn (American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1993).

The study

• Authors: M. Corn, J.K. Corn
• Journal: American Journal of Industrial Medicine
• Published: 1993;23(3):513-5
• Type of article: Comment
• Cited by: 2 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

In plain English

This was a commentary, not a research study. The authors responded to Dr. Enterline's 1991 article listing asbestos and cancer literature from 1934 to 1965. They called that article valuable but its explanation of the slow scientific consensus on causation superficial. They argued that in 1935-1950 few scientists worked in the field, peer-review groups were small and dominated by a few influential figures, and publication standards were less strict. They said the absence of federal workplace regulation until the Occupational Safety and Health Act of December 1970 added to the delay. They wrote that a 1938 Dreessen study recommended 5 million particles per cubic foot, time-weighted over a working lifetime, as an acceptable, minimum risk of asbestosis. This guideline was widely accepted as fully protective against fibrotic disease until the study's inadequacies slowly emerged. The authors expected faster future hazard recognition but worried about slow OSHA standard setting. They concluded that the main task of the 1990s would be prevention. They also said Dr. Enterline did not answer that article's questions in the framework of history, the study of change over time.

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: Commentary (letter-style response) on a 1991 article by Enterline; no new data were collected
• Exposure: No study exposure. The commentary discusses asbestos in general and the 1938 Dreessen study's recommendation of 5 million particles per cubic foot as a time-weighted average exposure over a working lifetime, as an acceptable and minimum risk of asbestosis
• Main results:
  • The authors argued that in the 1935-1950 period few scientists did occupational medical and toxicological research, and that peer-review groups were small and dominated by a few influential figures
  • The authors argued that publication criteria were less stringent than today, while readers demanded multiple reports before being persuaded
  • The authors stated that the absence of U.S. federal workplace regulation until the Occupational Safety and Health Act of December 1970 contributed to slow recognition of disease causation
  • The authors stated that the 1938 Dreessen study dominated U.S. thinking. It recommended 5 million particles per cubic foot as a time-weighted average over a working lifetime, as an acceptable and minimum risk of asbestosis
  • The authors stated that the resulting guideline was widely accepted as fully protective against fibrotic disease, and that the study's inadequacies slowly emerged as epidemiology developed
  • The authors expressed concern that OSHA standard setting moves too slowly despite more science being available to support risk management
  • The authors cited an estimate that total U.S. costs of occupational injury and disease exceed $50 billion
  • The authors criticized Dr. Enterline's article for not answering its historical questions, such as why clinical evidence was rejected in favor of epidemiological evidence, in the framework of history, which they described as the study of change over time
• The authors' conclusion: The authors believed recognition of workplace hazards would improve in future. They concluded that the real challenge of the 1990s would be applying current knowledge to prevent occupational injury and disease, which they described as cost-effective
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The authors acknowledged that they did not present figures on the size of the scientific community, saying only that such numbers could be gathered

Topics

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

Related studies

• Re: Attitudes and opinions regarding asbestos and cancer, 1934-1965 — J.M. Harrington (1993)
• Re: Attitudes and opinions regarding asbestos and cancer, 1934-1965 — M.A. Schneiderman (1993)
• Changing attitudes and opinions regarding asbestos and cancer 1934-1965 — P.E. Enterline (1991)
• Re: "Attitudes and opinions regarding asbestos and cancer 1934-1965" — S. Langård (1992)
• Re: "Changing attitudes and opinions regarding asbestos and cancer 1934-1965" — R. Ehrlich, J. Myers (1992)
• Re: Attitudes and opinions regarding asbestos and cancer, 1937-1965 — D.J. Kilpatrick, M. Kottek (1994)

Browse more research in American Journal of Industrial Medicine, or return to medical research.