Search

Fiber dimension and concentration may vary substantially between two necropsy populations of former chrysotile miners and millers of Thetford-Mines and Asbestos regions. This possibility could explain, at least in part, the higher incidence of respiratory diseases among workers from Thetford-Mines than among workers from the Asbestos region. The authors used a transmission electron microscope, equipped with an x-ray energy-dispersive spectrometer, to analyze lung mineral fibers of 86 subjects from the two mining regions and to classify fiber sizes into three categories. The most consistent difference was the higher concentration of tremolite in lung tissues of workers from Thetford-Mines, compared with workers from the Asbestos region. Amosite and crocidolite were also detected in lung tissues of several workers from the Asbestos region. No consistent and biologically important difference was found for fiber dimension; therefore, fiber dimension does not seem to be a factor that accounts for the difference in incidence of respiratory diseases between the two groups. The greater incidence of respiratory diseases among workers of Thetford-Mines can be explained by the fact that they had greater exposure to fibers than did workers at the Asbestos region. Among the mineral fibers studied, retention of tremolite fibers was most apparent.

Estimates from environmental risk assessments are criticized by professionals who indicate that inaccuracies occur in exposure assessment, model selection, and determination of the population at risk. In the current study, we tackled the aforementioned issues and estimated the risks of lung cancer and mesothelioma caused by airborne asbestos among individuals who lived near asbestos factories in Taiwan. We conducted 8-h full-period samplings upwind and downwind from each factory, and we used transmission-electronic microscopy (10,000x) and phase-contrast microscopy to determine asbestos concentrations in and around each factory. We estimated the numbers of residents who lived in concentric circles of 200-m, 400-m, and 600-m diameters around each factory. A dose-response model for asbestos-induced lung cancer was adopted from a summary of seven epidemiological studies. The asbestos-mesothelioma models were patterned after the first-exposure-effect models developed by Peto and Finkelstein. The data obtained from phase-contrast microscopy significantly overestimated the risk, compared with transmission-electronic microscopy. The estimates we calculated from adopting the arithmetic mean were approximately 2-fold higher than those we calculated with the geometric mean. There were relatively low concentrations of asbestos in the study areas, thus causing an absence of a significant difference in risk estimates between different models for mesothelioma. Among the more than 20,000 residents who lived near 41 asbestos factories in Taiwan, we found that the numbers of expected excess deaths from lung cancer and mesothelioma were 5 and less than 1, respectively. We concluded that in future risk assessments for ambient asbestos exposure, investigators should adopt transmission-electronic microscopy and the geometric mean estimate. Moreover, Taiwan should enhance asbestos-control programs to assure the safety of residents who live near asbestos factories.