Continued research regarding mesothelioma and the link to asbestos exposure is necessary if we ever hope to find a cure. Imagine someone you love returning home from the second world war. They find a job as an auto mechanic, raise a family, and play by the rules. Decades later, they tragically die from mesothelioma cancer because someone failed to warn them of the dangers of asbestos fibers. Does any reasonable person believe this is fair or just? Of course not. Unfortunately, we cannot go back in time and prevent the asbestos exposure. But what we can do is try to promote public awareness about this deadly disease and highlight some of the great research being done.

One interesting study is called, "Malignant mesothelioma: attributable risk of asbestos exposure." By R Spirtas, E F Heineman, L Bernstein, G W Beebe, R J Keehn, A Stark, B L Harlow, and J Benichou - Occup Environ Med 1994;51:804-811 doi:10.1136/oem.51.12.804. Here is an excerpt:

"OBJECTIVES--To evaluate a case-control study of malignant mesothelioma through patterns of exposure to asbestos based upon information from telephone interviews with next of kin. METHODS--Potential cases, identified from medical files and death certificates, included all people diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma and registered during 1975-1980 by the Los Angeles County Cancer Surveillance Program, the New York State Cancer Registry (excluding New York City), and 39 large Veterans Administration hospitals. Cases whose diagnosis was confirmed in a special pathology review as definite or probable mesothelioma (n = 208) were included in the analysis. Controls (n = 533) had died of other causes, excluding cancer, respiratory disease, suicide, or violence. Direct exposure to asbestos was determined from responses to three types of questions: specific queries as to any exposure to asbestos; occupational or non-vocational participation in any of nine specific activities thought to entail exposure to asbestos; and analysis of life-time work histories. Indirect exposures were assessed through residential histories and reported contact with family members exposed to asbestos. RESULTS--Among men with pleural mesothelioma the attributable risk (AR) for exposure to asbestos was 88% (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 76-95%). For men, the AR of peritoneal cancer was 58% (95% CI 20-89%). For women (both sites combined), the AR was 23% (95% CI 3-72%). The large differences in AR by sex are compatible with the explanations: a lower background incidence rate in women, lower exposure to asbestos, and greater misclassification among women. CONCLUSIONS--Most of the pleural and peritoneal mesotheliomas in the men studied were attributable to exposure to asbestos. The situation in women was less definitive."

Another good study is called, "Chrysotile asbestos is the main cause of pleural mesothelioma" by Allan H. Smith, MD, PhD, Catherine C. Wright, MPH

School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA. Here is an excerpt:

"Abstract - In contrast to amphibole forms of asbestos, chrysotile asbestos is often claimed to be only a minor cause of malignant pleural mesothelioma, a highly fatal cancer of the lining of the thoracic cavity. In this article we examine the evidence from animal and human studies that relates to this issue. Reported data do not support widely quoted views regarding the relative inertness of chrysotile fibers in mesothelioma causation. In fact, examination of all pertinent studies makes it clear that chrysotile asbestos is similar in potency to amphibole asbestos. Since asbestos is the major cause of mesothelioma, and chrysotile constitutes 95% of all asbestos use world wide, it can be concluded that chrysotile asbestos is the main cause of pleural mesothelioma in humans."

If you found either of these excerpts interesting, I would urge you to read the studies in their entirety. We all owe a debt of gratitude to these researchers, and should do our best to promote public awareness. This article should not be construed as legal or medical advice."