The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has produced a report on 28 U.S. sites that have processed asbestos-containing vermiculite from the mines of Libby, Montana. While the EPA identified a total of 245 U.S. sites that may have received the asbestos-containing vermiculite from Libby, the ATSDR narrowed its list down to 28 in which they would base their study on. All of the sites studied had processed a minimum of 100,000 tons of vermiculite from the Libby mines and had been mandated by the EPA to take further action at the site due to contamination.

The report contains information compiled while evaluations were done on sites that processed the vermiculite. The evaluations focused on potential past, current, and future pathways of exposure to asbestos associated with the Libby mines. The report summarizes the findings of the evaluations along with recommendations that local, state, and federal agencies can use to address similar sites. 

ATSDR started the evaluations of these sites per the Environmental Protection Agency’s request based on a report pertaining to Libby, Montana the ATSDR had done in 2002.

The 2002 report showed asbestosis mortality rates in the community as much as 40 to 80 times higher than expected; lung cancer mortality rates 20% to 30% higher than expected. Most of the asbestosis cases were former Libby mine employees along with employees from the facilities that processed the vermiculite from Libby. Moreover, the family members of some of these employees were also affected due to the asbestos fibers retained on the worker’s clothing.   

Based on their evaluations, the ATSDR concluded that three main groups of people experienced significant exposure to asbestos from the Libby mines; former employees, former employees’ families, and members of the communities that surrounded the processing sites. Although the Libby mine hasn’t been running since 1990, there is still believed to be residual asbestos located in settled dust as well as the soil surrounding the facilities where the vermiculite was processed.

In the report, ATSDR made recommendations on how to improve awareness about exposure to asbestos associated with these sites.   

It has been three years in the making, but a federal judge has finally set a date for the largest environmental criminal trial in US history. 

Jury selection will begin February 19 in the case against WR Grace Co., alleging that the company knowingly endangering the lives of thousands by exposing them to asbestos-tainted ore from a vermiculite mine right outside of Libby, Montana.

Judge Molloy, the federal judge assigned to the case, is eager to move forward with the trial as it has been roughly two years since the last hearing, and the trial is expected to last nearly four months. Over the years, Molloy has ruled on a number of government efforts to hold WR Grace accountable for the asbestos contamination and has already levied huge fines that add up to hundreds of millions of dollars.  

The thirty three lawyers representing WR Grace in the trial will argue that the people of Libby could not have been harmed by the asbestos in the vermiculite ore. Environmental lawyers say that Grace’s legal team will make their argument with the help of industry-paid-for scientists who will conclude that the asbestos in Libby is not dangerous. In their counter argument, the government can point to hundreds of deaths that appear to be directly linked to asbestos-related diseases in Libby.

From the outset, this trial can be deemed unusual. The case was brought to the Federal Grand Jury just as the Bush administration was trying to force Congress to protect industry from civil asbestos claims. According to congressional investigators, the White House told the EPA and OSHA that it wanted to make sure unwarranted attention was not given for issues involving asbestos safety. 

WR Grace, if found guilty, could be fined up to $280 million, and WR Grace’s executives could receive maximum sentences of 55-70 years. The WR Grace executives that are in danger of being sentenced include Henry Eschenbach, who was the health and safety director in WR Grace's industrial chemical group; Jack Wolter, a former WR Grace vice president; Bill McCaig, an early general manager of the mine; Robert Bettacchi, also a WR Grace senior vice president; O. Mario Favorito, former general counsel for the corporation; and Robert Walsh, who was another senior vice president. A seventh official, Alan Stringer, the last general manager of the Libby mine, was also indicted. He died shortly after pleading not guilty.

A month before Stringer’s death, Les Skramstad, a former Libby miner, died of mesothelioma. Not only did the asbestos take Skramstad’s life, his wife and three children were all exposed to the asbestos through the clothing he wore home from work, and now have all been diagnosed with fatal asbestos-related diseases. Skramstad had hoped to survive to see WR Grace and the company’s executives tried in court.

A decision was handed down Tuesday at the Rotterdam Convention in Rome that confirmed chrysotile asbestos will be left off of the United Nation’s international list of harmful substances. This decision means that Canada, the world’s second largest producer of chrysotile asbestos, will continue to be able to export the harmful substance to developing countries. Despite information that exposure to asbestos can lead to health complications such as lung cancer, mesothelioma, and asbestosis, Canada still maintains the stance that the developing countries they export the asbestos to are able to manage and handle it in a safe manner.  

Back in 2006, Canada was the only western democracy to oppose the substance’s inclusion on the list of harmful substance. The Canadian delegation did not even participate in the meetings this year and, instead, got others to work on their behalf.

In the Canadian Medical Association Journal, Dr. Matthew Stanbrook likened the Canadian government's support for exporting asbestos to developing countries to the deadly arms trade. Moreover, Stanbrook said he was “deeply disappointed” with the results of the meeting. "This is something we hoped would be an opportunity for Canada to take a stand and make a decision that would benefit the health and welfare of people in the world, especially people who are in the developing world in countries least prepared to cope with the health burden that asbestos imposes everywhere that it's used."

During the 1970s, hundreds of men worked in Sarnia’s chemical industry in Ontario, Canada which thrived on asbestos during that time. It is here where these workers were regularly exposed to asbestos and, as a result of years of exposure, their lungs are now marked with pleural plaques, often predictors of asbestos-related diseases.

Each year, many of these men travel to Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto, ON, Canada hoping for the best, but fearing the worst. It is here where radiologists and doctors are conducting an early mesothelioma and lung cancer diagnosis study. Researchers hope to predict the diseases that are sometimes linked to pleural plaques. Dr. Heidi Roberts, the principal investigator, says a person who is diagnosed early may be saved using surgery, chemotherapy and radiation.

Nearly all of the study's 766 participants are from Sarnia. So far, researchers have detected five cases of mesothelioma and two cases of lung cancer. The men with mesothelioma have since died.

One of the study’s participants, Bill Trenouth, has no idea how he was exposed to the dangerous material. And while most of the other men are in there 70’s and 80’s, Trenouth is only 52 and 7 years away from retirement. Yet, he is uncertain that he will live to see retirement or his children grow older.

A recent study published in the British medical journal Lancet, analyzed the impact of chemotherapy on active symptom control treatment in malignant pleural mesothelioma patients. The reason for the study, according to the researchers, is that active symptom control is commonly recommended for managing mesothelioma, but medical researchers and doctors have yet to come to a consensus on the role of chemotherapy in mesothelioma treatment. In an attempt to explain if chemotherapy improved survival rates and quality of life, researchers combined chemotherapy and active symptom control treatments.

A total of 409 participants from the UK and Australia with malignant pleural mesothelioma, were randomly assigned to either active symptom control treatments alone or active control treatments in conjunction with one of two chemotherapy medications. Active symptom control treatments included steroids, bronchodilators, analgesic medications, and palliative radiotherapy. Researchers followed up with patients every 3 to 21 weeks after the random treatment and then every 8 weeks thereafter. The two groups receiving different chemotherapy medication were combined for analysis and compared with the group receiving only active symptom control treatment.

Researchers found that the group receiving chemotherapy with active symptom control methods received only a small, non-significant survival benefit compared with the group receiving only active symptom control treatment. Moreover, researchers found no difference among the groups when it came to quality of life among the patients.

In conclusion, researchers believe the addition of chemotherapy to active symptom control presents no significant benefit or advances in survival rates or quality of life in malignant pleural mesothelioma patients.