Search

OBJECTIVE: This paper discusses the failure and success of society to decrease the adverse health effects of asbestos exposure on workers’ health in relation to scientific knowledge. METHODS: The findings are based on a narrative literature review. RESULTS: Early warnings of the adverse health effects of workplace exposure to asbestos were published already in the 1930s. Serious health effects, such as malignancies and fibrosis due to occupational asbestos exposure, were highlighted in major medical journals and textbooks in late 1960s. New technologies could detect also asbestos fibers in the lung of non-occupational exposed persons in the 1970s. The first bans for using asbestos came in the early 1970s, and more general bans by authorities came in the 1980s and continue until today. CONCLUSIONS: The rather late recognition of adverse effects of asbestos exposure in the general population and measures to decrease the exposure through more general bans came rather late. However, the very strong measures such as general bans in many countries have been a success. A Swedish study showed that the general ban and other measures have decreased the risk of malignancies due to occupational exposure. The effect of the bans on adverse effects in the general population has yet to be studied. Analysis of fibers in the lungs of persons born after the bans could be an efficient method.

OBJECTIVE: Retinal detachment (RD) has been associated with exposure to heavy lifting. Many occupations within the construction industry are likely to involve lifting tasks. We investigated the association between occupational heavy lifting and rhegmatogenous RD in a retrospective cohort study of Swedish construction workers. METHODS: We studied Swedish construction workers who participated in an industry-wide health and safety program from 1971 to 1993. Individual occupation codes were linked to a job exposure matrix, assigning intensity of exposure to heavy lifting to each worker. The Swedish National Patient Register was used to identify cases of RD that occurred during follow-up through the end of 2012. We used Poisson regression modeling to calculate incidence rates of RD associated with heavy lifting, age and other covariates. A subcohort of those age ≤25 years at enrollment was studied to reduce bias from missing exposure information from work prior to enrollment. RESULTS: Of 256 241 construction workers, 17% were classified with high exposure to heavy lifting in their occupation. Within the cohort, 1588 cases of RD were identified. Average exposure intensity of heavy lifting was not associated with risk of RD. However, RD risk increased with increasing cumulative exposure to heavy lifting, both in the full cohort and subcohort of those who were ≤25 years old at entry into the construction-worker cohort. CONCLUSION: Construction workers’ risk of RD appeared to increase with time spent exposed to heavy lifting.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the association between occupational biomechanical exposures and the occurrence of surgical treatment for subacromial impingement syndrome (SIS). METHODS: A cohort of 220 295 male constructions workers who participated in a national occupational health surveillance program (1971–1993) were examined prospectively over a 16-year follow-up period (2001–2016) for surgically treated SIS. Worker job title, smoking status, height, weight, and age were registered on health examination. Job titles were mapped to 21 occupational groups based on tasks and training. A job exposure matrix (JEM) was developed with exposure estimates for each occupational group. Surgical cases were determined through linkage with the Swedish national in- and outpatient registers. Poisson regression was used to assess the relative risks (RR) for each biomechanical exposure. RESULTS: The total incidence rate of surgically treated SIS over the 16-year observation period was 201.1 cases per 100 000 person-years. Increased risk was evident for workers exposed to upper-extremity loading (push/pull/lift) (RR 1.45–2.30), high hand grip force (RR 1.47–2.23), using handheld tools (RR 1.52–2.09), frequent work with hands above shoulders (RR 1.62–2.11), static work (RR 1.77–2.26), and hand-arm vibration (RR 1.78–2.13). There was an increased risk for SIS surgery for all occupational groups (construction trades) compared with white-collar workers (RR 1.56–2.61). CONCLUSIONS: Occupational upper-extremity load and posture exposures were associated with increased risk for surgical treatment of SIS, which underlines the need for reducing workplace exposures and early symptom detection in highly exposed occupational groups.

Objective: This paper discusses the failure and success of society to decrease the adverse health effects of asbestos exposure on workers' health in relation to scientific knowledge., Methods: The findings are based on a narrative literature review., Results: Early warnings of the adverse health effects of workplace exposure to asbestos were published already in the 1930s. Serious health effects, such as malignancies and fibrosis due to occupational asbestos exposure, were highlighted in major medical journals and textbooks in late 1960s. New technologies could detect also asbestos fibers in the lung of non-occupational exposed persons in the 1970s. The first bans for using asbestos came in the early 1970s, and more general bans by authorities came in the 1980s and continue until today., Conclusions: The rather late recognition of adverse effects of asbestos exposure in the general population and measures to decrease the exposure through more general bans came rather late. However, the very strong measures such as general bans in many countries have been a success. A Swedish study showed that the general ban and other measures have decreased the risk of malignancies due to occupational exposure. The effect of the bans on adverse effects in the general population has yet to be studied. Analysis of fibers in the lungs of persons born after the bans could be an efficient method.