Each day many of us have to live with the fact that certain corporations deliberately exposed their workers to hazardous asbestos, knowing full well the consequences. It is hard for many to believe the callous attitudes behind such decisions. Fortunately, there are people committed to trying to right those wrongs. Many people have dedicated their lives to studying asbestos and the links to mesothelioma and lung cancer. It is this dedication that will be the impetus for someday finding a cure.

One study that examined asbestos exposure and shipyard workers is called, "Asbestos content of lung tissue, lymph nodes, and pleural plaques from former shipyard workers" by Dodson RF, Williams MG Jr, Corn CJ, Brollo A, and Bianchi C. - Am Rev Respir Dis. 1990 Oct;142(4):843-7. Department of Cell Biology and Environmental Sciences, University of Texas Health Center, Tyler 75710. Here is an excerpt:

"Autopsy samples from eight former shipyard workers were collected from lung parenchyma, tracheal lymph nodes, and pleural plaques. The tissue from each respective area was prepared by a modified bleach digestion technique, and the residue was collected on a 0.2-micron pore polycarbonate or 0.22-micron mixed cellulose ester filter. Quantitation of ferruginous bodies and uncoated fibers was done by light and transmission electron microscopy, respectively. Differences in the asbestos burden were noted for each site. Ferruginous bodies were observed in both parenchyma and nodes but not in plaques. Three subjects were found to have more ferruginous bodies per gram dry weight in their lymph nodes than in their lung parenchyma. Likewise, all subjects were found to have more uncoated fibers per gram in the nodes than in the parenchyma. Amphibole and chrysotile fibers were noted in the lung and extrapulmonary sites, with chrysotile being the predominant asbestiform in plaques. The majority of the uncoated fibers in both the nodes and the plaques were less than or equal to 5 microns in length. However, some fibers with dimensions conforming to the "Stanton hypothesis" reached both areas. These residual patterns most likely reflect the impact of clearance on lung burden as opposed to the eventual accumulation and stasis in the extrapulmonary areas."

Please read the study in its entirety. Another interesting study that examined asbestos exposure and factory works is called, "Mortality experience of amosite asbestos factory workers: dose-response relationships 5 to 40 years after onset of short-term work exposure." By Seidman H, Selikoff IJ, and Gelb SK. Am J Ind Med. 1986;10(5-6):479-514. Here is an excerpt:

"A cohort of 820 men in a Paterson, New Jersey, amosite asbestos factory which began work during 1941-1945 was observed from 5 to 40 years after start of work. Most of the cohort had limited duration of work experience (days, weeks, months), though some men worked for several years until the factory closed in 1954. With white males of New Jersey as the control population, Standardized Mortality Ratios (SMRs) of 500 are evident for the cohort for lung cancer and for noninfectious pulmonary diseases (including asbestosis), while being almost 300 for total cancer and about 170 for all causes of death. A statistically significant SMR of almost 200 is seen for colon-rectum cancer. Mesothelioma incidence initially shows a strong relationship with advancing time since onset of exposure and then tails off. The main concern of the study is with dose-response patterns. Response is measured by the mortality for relevant causes of death, while the direct asbestos dosage was measured in two ways. One way was the length of time worked in the factory and the other was the individual's accumulated fiber exposure, calculated by multiplying the aforementioned length of time worked by the estimated fiber exposures associated with the particular job that the worker had in the factory. Whichever measure of dosage is used, it was found that, in general, the lower the dose, the longer it took for adverse mortality to become evident and, also, the smaller the magnitude of that adverse mortality."

If you found either of these studies interesting, please read them in their entirety. This article should not be construed as legal nor medical advice.