The debate on banning asbestos

Our plain-English summary of The debate on banning asbestos, by D. Ahmad, W.K. Morgan (CMAJ, 2001).

The study

• Authors: D. Ahmad, W.K. Morgan
• Journal: CMAJ
• Published: 2001;165(9):1190; author reply 1191-3
• Type of article: Comment, Letter
• Read it: PubMed · Free full text

In plain English

This item is a letter to the editor, not a research study, and reports no new data. The authors, an internist and a retired respirologist from London, Ontario, responded to a 2001 CMAJ editorial by the Collegium Ramazzini calling for an international ban on asbestos. They wrote that much could be said about the Collegium's exaggerations of asbestos hazards, but did not argue that point here. Instead, they disputed the editorial's statement that the Collegium receives no support from trial lawyers, writing that this may be true now but was not in 1991. According to the letter, the plaintiffs' executive committee in the School Asbestos Litigation case gave US$50 000 from the settlement fund to the late Irwin J. Selikoff, founder of the Collegium. The money was to pay in part for a conference on the dangers of asbestos (the "Third Wave Conference"). The Collegium convened the conference, and 15 US judges attended, several of whom had been handling asbestos matters. A further US$22 500 came from private donations, including from committee members. They cited court documents.

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 (correspondence); no study was carried out
• Main results:
  • The authors disputed the Collegium Ramazzini editorial's statement that the Collegium receives no support from trial lawyers. They wrote that this may be true now but was not the case in 1991.
  • The letter states that the plaintiffs' executive committee in the School Asbestos Litigation case gave a cheque for US$50 000, from the settlement fund, to Irwin J. Selikoff, founder of the Collegium. The money was to pay in part for a conference on the dangers of asbestos.
  • The letter states that the conference (the "Third Wave Conference") was convened by the Collegium. It also states that the conference was attended by 15 US judges, several of whom had been handling asbestos matters.
  • The letter states that a further US$22 500 came from private donations, including donations from members of the plaintiffs' executive committee.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors wrote that much could be said about the Collegium Ramazzini's exaggerations of the hazards of asbestos. They said the most significant point to rebut was the Collegium's statement that it receives no support from trial lawyers.

Related studies

• The debate on banning asbestos — R. Wilson, R.P. Nolan, et al. (2001)
• The debate on banning asbestos — D. Janigan (2001)
• The debate on banning asbestos — T.L. Guidotti (2001)
• The debate on banning asbestos — D.C. Muir (2001)
• The debate on banning asbestos — L. Kazan-Allen (2001)
• The debate on banning asbestos — D.V. Bates (2001)

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