What to do about the asbestos currently in ships and industry?

Our plain-English summary of What to do about the asbestos currently in ships and industry?, by G.W. Wright (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1979).

The study

• Author: G.W. Wright
• Journal: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
• Published: 1979;330:383-6
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 004016).

In plain English

This article was a commentary, not a study, and reported no new data. The author asked whether asbestos materials already installed on ships and in industrial plants should be systematically removed to protect people nearby. Workers directly handling the materials were excluded. The author knew of no systematically organized epidemiologic data on such people. Instead, the author cited studies indicating that essentially all adult lungs contain asbestos fibers, while mesothelioma is rare in the general population. The author stated that approximately 1.5 million Royal Navy seamen and officers served for substantial periods on asbestos-containing ships between 1918 and 1948, with no recognized mesothelioma epidemic among nonoccupationally exposed naval personnel. Also, 85-90% of mesotheliomas recorded in England in recent years could be accounted for by occupational exposure. The author concluded there is little or no overriding need for immediate systematic removal of asbestos in place, except where it creates uncontrollable exposure approaching occupationally regulated levels. The author held that dust control and personal protection for all potentially exposed persons are mandatory during handling, and called for direct study, including lung residue measurement.

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 (opinion article); no original data, methods or study population
• Who was studied: No population was studied. The author discussed people who lived and worked on ships or worked in industry where asbestos products were installed, excluding those directly exposed occupationally, with particular reference to Royal Navy personnel in England.
• Exposure: Asbestos left in place (in situ) on ships and in industry, in products for thermal and acoustic insulation and fire protection, including asbestos sprayed on bulkheads and deck undersurfaces. Fiber types are not named.
• Main results:
  • The author noted that studies indicate essentially all adult lungs contain asbestos fibers, while mesothelioma is rare in the general population (the author's argument; no data presented).
  • The author stated that an estimated approximately 1.5 million Royal Navy seamen and officers served for substantial periods of time on board ships containing asbestos products between 1918 and 1948.
  • The author stated there had been no recognized epidemic of mesothelioma in nonoccupationally exposed naval personnel, even though enlisted seamen lived next to sprayed asbestos material.
  • The author stated that 85-90% of mesotheliomas recorded in England in recent years could be accounted for by occupational exposure to asbestos.
  • The author stated that autopsy experience in the general public had not shown diffuse pulmonary fibrosis or asbestosis unexplained by direct occupational exposure.
• The authors' conclusion: The author concluded there is little or no overriding need for immediate systematic removal of asbestos in situ, except where it can be shown to create uncontrollable exposure approximating occupationally regulated levels. The author also held that all necessary precautions, including dust control and personal protection for all potentially exposed persons, are mandatory when asbestos products are handled, and that direct systematic study of those serving on ships or working in industry is needed.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The author knew of no systematically organized epidemiologic data on people nonoccupationally exposed on ships or in industry.
  • The author acknowledged possible underreporting of mesotheliomas in England.
  • The author stated that the no-response level of exposure is very difficult to determine.
  • The author said it was unclear how to assess the experience of people nonoccupationally exposed to asbestos in situ in industry.

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Shipyards and maritime work.

Related studies

• Radiological evidence of asbestos disease among ship repair workers — I.J. Selikoff, W.J. Nicholson, et al. (1980)
• Asbestos and ship-building: fatal consequences — J. Hedley-Whyte, D.R. Milamed (2008)
• Assessment of the future mesothelioma disease burden from past exposure to asbestos in ship recycling yards in India — R. Singh, J.W. Cherrie, et al. (2020)
• Asbestos-related disease in Bangladeshi ship breakers: a pilot study — M.N. Courtice, P.A. Demers, et al. (2011)
• Historical state of knowledge of the health risks of asbestos posed to seamen on merchant ships — D.G. Dodge, B.D. Beck (2016)
• Parenchymal asbestosis due to primary asbestos exposure among ship-breaking workers: report of the first cases from Bangladesh — V. Muralidhar, M.F. Ahasan, et al. (2017)

Browse more research in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, or return to medical research.