Asbestos in Asia

Asbestos is a global killer. Despite lessons learned in the developed world on the use of asbestos and its hazardous pulmonary consequences, its use continues to increase in Asia. Although some countries such as Japan, Korea and Singapore have curtailed the use of this mineral, there are numerous countries in Asia that continue to mine, import and use this fibre, particularly China, which is one of the largest consumers in the world. Numerous factors ranging from political and economic to the lack of understanding of asbestos and the management of asbestos-related lung disease are keys to this observed trend. Awareness of these factors combined with early intervention may prevent the predicted Asian 'tsunami' of asbestos diseases.

Asbestos Dispatches

As the global campaign to ban asbestos gathers momentum, more countries and organizations are restricting the use of chrysotile (white asbestos). Attempting to reverse the fall in global demand, asbestos stakeholders have redoubled marketing efforts in countries such as India where health and safety regulations are not strictly enforced. In the Canadian asbestos heartland, public and media awareness has grown and industry's influence has weakened. In response, chrysotile producers are pressing federal and provincial governments for mandatory increases in consumption, despite new research documenting an asbestos cancer epidemic.

Canadian Asbestos: A Global Concern

The impact of the chrysotile (white asbestos) industry at home and abroad was the focus of the first independent conference on asbestos to be held in Canada. In September 2003, Canadian asbestos victims and international experts met to examine a wide range of issues on Capital Hill, Ottawa; victims and their relatives spoke eloquently of the devious means used by asbestos stakeholders to maintain control of the national asbestos agenda. At the conclusion of the conference, Ban Asbestos Canada, a campaigning group to assist victims and raise awareness of Canada's tragic asbestos legacy, was formed.

Ban asbestos phenomenon: the winds of change

The shift in the public perception of asbestos from "magic mineral" to "deadly dust" owes much to the mobilization by asbestos victims, ban-asbestos activists, health and safety campaigners, and individuals concerned about the global asbestos death toll. Cognizant of the proven links between asbestos and disease, governments of industrialized countries banned further use, as a result of which consumption shifted to developing countries; between 2000 and 2010, asbestos use in Asia grew dramatically. In the face of a powerful industry lobby, members of the ban-asbestos network have lobbied national governments to outlaw asbestos use, challenged industry propaganda, and cooperated with social partners on coordinated multinational initiatives. Major developments in the campaign to end the mining, sale, and use of asbestos which have taken place over the last 50 years are delineated in this paper.

Who is driving Mexico's asbestos policy?

The publication of an article on the global asbestos industry in April 2011 provided a fitting reminder of the contradictory forces engaged in the international struggle over asbestos. In his essay, author James Rice wrote: "Asbestos is now widely recognized as an occupational hazard and an ambient environmental contaminant....[Nevertheless] production and consumption appear to have stabilized and, indeed, have been increasing in recent years". A pertinent question to ask, and one often posed by ban-asbestos campaigners, is, why has the developing world seen an escalation of asbestos consumption in the face of ever more knowledge about the deadly risks associated with its use? After all, human beings have an extraordinary capacity to learn from their mistakes. A child who has burned his finger on an open flame will be wary of repeating the experience. Why, then, do governments, consumers, workers, and members of the public refrain from acting, when the dangers of not doing so are so widely known? The answer is to be found in the complex interaction of asbestos industry stakeholders, government officials, diplomatic representatives, politicians, and professional advisors; the dirty dealings engaged in by the global band of asbestos profiteers rival anything you will have read about "Big Tobacco". A good place to begin the unraveling of the industry's machinations is Mexico.

The 2nd ADAO Asbestos Conference

On National Asbestos Awareness Day 2006, a conference was held at Mount Sinai, the home ground of Dr. Irving J. Selikoff, who, more than any other single individual, started the debate about occupational hazards in the U.S. Four decades after the pioneering conference on the Biological Effects of Asbestos was organized by Drs. Selikoff and Churg, asbestos victims and their relatives, public health campaigners, medical professionals, journalists and community representatives convened in New York City to assess the progress that had been made in raising public, professional and political awareness of asbestos-related diseases. The report which follows conveys the substance of their presentations and highlights key issues which were discussed.

FIOH-sponsored newsletter misrepresents asbestos hazards in Zimbabwe

The Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (FIOH) has received support from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labor Office (ILO) to publish the African Newsletter on Occupational Health and Safety. The African Newsletter on Occupational Health and Safety should not be a medium for industry propaganda, or the source of misinformation among the workers of Africa. Instead, FIOH should provide the same level of scientific information in Africa that it does in Finland and other developed countries.

Asbestos and mesothelioma: worldwide trends

A correlation between national asbestos consumption and the incidence of asbestos disease, including mesothelioma, has been observed. Towards the end of the 20th century, governments in many developed countries banned or seriously restricted the use of asbestos. As a result, global asbestos producers have engaged in aggressive marketing campaigns to sell asbestos to developing countries; consumption of white asbestos is increasing in Asia, Latin America and the Commonwealth of Independent States. In most of the countries, there is little, if any, control on hazardous asbestos exposures from occupational, environmental and domestic sources. It is likely that the lethal asbestos harvest which is occurring in the U.S., the UK and Australia will be reproduced in the developing world.

The asbestos war

That asbestos is still being sold despite overwhelming evidence linking it to debilitating and fatal diseases is testament to the effectiveness of a campaign, spear-headed by Canadian interests, to promote a product already banned in many developed countries. Blessed by government and commercial support, asbestos apologists have implemented a long-term coordinated strategy targeting new consumers in Asia, the Far East and Latin America. At industry-backed "conferences" and on government-funded junkets, they spin a web of deceit, telling all who will listen that "chrysotile (white asbestos) can be used safely." The fact that Canada exports over 95% of all the chrysotile it mines suggests that while chrysotile is supposedly safe enough for foreigners, it is not safe enough for Canadians. Asbestos victims in many countries have struggled to gain public recognition of the human cost of asbestos use. In recent years, nongovernmental organizations working with these groups have created a global anti-asbestos virtual network; with the commitment and support of thousands of "virtual members," this network challenges industry's propaganda and exposes the forces that support its cynical attempt to offload this dangerous substance on developing countries.

Global asbestos justice: South African asbestos victims win right to sue Cape PLC in U.K. courts

A ruling by Britain's House of Lords in July 2000 opened the doors of the English courts to foreign plaintiffs injured by the overseas operation of British companies and their subsidiaries. The ruling authorized 3,000 South African asbestos victims to continue their case in the U.K. courts against the multinational British company Cape PLC, which produced both raw asbestos and asbestos products in South Africa. The Lords sided with the asbestos victims in refusing to transfer the case to South Africa, as requested by Cape. This decision was a reversal of fortune for Cape and has implications for other British multinationals that may be called upon to defend their overseas actions domestically.

Asbestos poisons World Trade Organization atmosphere

In September 2000, a World Trade Organization (WTO) panel published its findings in the dispute between Canada and the European Union/France over France's ban on the import and use of chrysotile (white asbestos). The panel upheld the French ban, established that the use of chrysotile is a health risk and the idea of "controlled use" a fallacy, and used (for the first time) an exception clause in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade that permits trade-restrictive measures to protect human life or health. At the same time, the panel concluded that the French ban violated international trade laws by treating chrysotile products less favorably than domestically produced alternatives. Some WTO watchers believe that with asbestos as the precedent for bans on toxic substances, the regulation of other, much less well-established, toxic exposures could prove much more difficult. Now the French ban has been upheld, chrysotile producers will increasingly target developing countries. Canada is appealing the WTO decision.