The debate on banning asbestos
==============================

* David Janigan

The proposal to ban asbestos1 is based on arguments that neglect certain facts. Although I agree that the dusty asbestos workplaces that existed for 7 or more decades resulted in excessive exposure and undoubtedly caused malignancies, current industry regulations have dramatically improved workplace conditions. Anxieties about asbestos were initiated and then amplified by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) beginning in the 1970s and continuing well into the 1980s. At one point the EPA estimated that 100 to 8000 schoolchildren would die prematurely because of exposure to asbestos in school building materials. Without evidence, the EPA came to believe, at one point, that a single asbestos fibre could cause cancer. Such claims generated enormous media attention and caused public panic. In 1990, EPA Director W.K. Reilly admitted, “[We] must accept a share of the responsibility for the misperceptions that led to the unwarranted anxiety and unnecessary asbestos removal.”2 This statement, however, received little attention. 

These facts are obfuscated or ignored by ban-the-asbestos advocates; in the past, balanced presentations about this issue3,4 have had little or no impact on legislators and international trade regulators. If the arguments for a ban on asbestos1 are accepted, can a call for a ban on gravel, a crushed rock that may contain up to 90% silica, be far behind because of the risk of silicosis from its dust? 

## References

1.  1. LaDou J, Landrigan P, Bailar JC III, Foa V, Frank A, on behalf of the Collegium Ramazzini. A call for an international ban on asbestos [editorial]. CMAJ 2001;164(4):489-90.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY21haiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiIxNjQvNC80ODkiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMzoiL2NtYWovMTY1LzkvMTE5MC4xLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

2.  2. Reilly WK. Asbestos: sound science and public perceptions. Why we need a new approach to risk. In: *Proceedings of the American Enterprise Institute Environmental Policy Conference*; 1990 June 12. Washington (DC): US Environmental Protection Agency. Report no.: 20Z-1006.
    
    

3.  3. Camus M. A ban on asbestos must be based on a comparative risk assessment [editorial]. CMAJ 2001;164(4):491-4.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY21haiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiIxNjQvNC80OTEiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMzoiL2NtYWovMTY1LzkvMTE5MC4xLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

4.  4. Siemiatycki J. Should Canadian health care professionals support the call for a worldwide ban on asbestos? [editorial]. CMAJ 2001;164(4):495-7.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY21haiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiIxNjQvNC80OTUiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMzoiL2NtYWovMTY1LzkvMTE5MC4xLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==)