The Environmental Protection Agency is receiving a host of "thumbs-down" from a panel of scientific advisers who say the Agency's new asbestos regulations are not beneficial.  Over 20 scientists have voiced their disapproval at the EPA's decision to defy years of research and declare asbestos less harmful than it is known to be.

Specifically, the EPA is revising how asbestos is classified and how its toxicity is measured.  In doing so, the EPA has claimed that a common type of asbestos--chrysotile--isn't dangerous and does not cause mesothelioma.  Instead of honoring decades of what is considered solid and substantiated research, the EPA has decided to consider only a few minor reports that minimize the risk of chrysotile.  In Washington, Senator Patty Murray is enraged.  She has long fought for anti-asbestos legislation and has spent years seeking relief for mesothelioma victims.  "I'd like the political appointees at the EPA to look into the eyes of a mesothelioma patient and say that asbestos isn't dangerous. It appears that this administration is once again putting politics before public health," she said.

Many mesothelioma advocates suspect that the EPA's sudden change in regulation was a result of political administrators' efforts to appease the automotive, construction, and mining industries who have faced costly lawsuits from employees who developed mesothelioma and asbestosis.  Representatives for the employers believe that the change in EPA classifications will make it more difficult for asbestos victims to receive compensation because they are more likely to convince juries that chrysotile is not dangerous.

Only one scientist supported the change in EPA regulations--Suresh Moolgavkar, an epidemiologist hired by W.R. Grace.  As you know from the updates in this blog, W.R. Grace is the company nearly entirely responsible for the mesothelioma epidemic that struck Libby, Montana.  But even Moolgavkar, employed by asbestos mogul Grace, criticized the EPA on its weak data and lack of research supporting its new system.

Dr. Michael Silverstein, a University of Washington clinical professor and occupational health specialist, submitted a 29-page report signed by 87 of the nation's leading public health authorities strongly questioning the EPA's efforts to change the risk assessment methods.  He said, "We knew plenty about asbestos. We didn't need more investigations. We didn't need more policy. What we did need was to stop exposure and stop the use of it." He added that the latest effort by the EPA "just came out of nowhere and is one of a number of questionable things being rushed through at the end of this administration."

But even with the disapproval of leading healthcare specialists, the EPA can enact its new regulations.  The Agency has the ability to operate independently of its advisers and can therefore ignore the suggestions, even the pleas, of its scientific board.  Senator Murray said that the current political administration has failed to improve American working conditions, and "now, in its waning days, it appears that they are actually trying to increase barriers to workplace safety."

For more information, click here.

Eleven years ago, the Chicago Sun-Times conducted an investigatory study of asbestos levels on the shores of Illinois Beach State Park. The result? They found that asbestos fibers and asbestos-containing materials contaminate the sands of the 6.5 mile park, where 2 million people visit each year.

But since the publication of these findings, no action has been taken. Park officials claim that the beach is safe, even though documents from the Environmental Protection Agency suggest otherwise. Just two years ago, the EPA determined that the park has "significantly elevated" levels of asbestos contamination, including the presence of amphiboie, the most toxic form of asbestos.

Last year, EPA authorities attempted to stir up the sand with typical beach-going activities, such as games of frisbee and volleyball. In doing so, they hoped to determine if regular beach visitors were at risk of inhaling loosened fibers. Responding to questions just last week, the EPA said a preliminary analysis "confirmed previous studies showing low levels of potential asbestos exposure for recreational users of the beach."

But still, the beach remains open to the public.

Large pieces of asbestos often wash up on the shore. There are signs warning against handling the material, but to children and others who do not read the postings, the asbestos looks just like any other stone.

An EPA authority, Dr. Aubrey Miller, has confirmed that even short-term exposure to low levels of asbestos can cause mesothlioma. Given this fact, it is inexcusable that the beach has remained opened for over a decade after initial asbestos concerns were raised. The EPA has stated that their conclusive analysis won't be available until late August, when (yet another) beach season has ended.

For more information, view this article.

This week, the Billings Gazette publicized the announcement of a federally funded five-year study to be conducted in Libby, Montana. The $8 million research project is sponsored by the US Department of Health and Human Services and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Named the Libby Amphibole Health Risk Initiative, the project aims to determine the effects of long-term exposure to low levels of asbestos. It is clear that long periods of exposure to high volumes of asbestos causes health problems including mesothelioma and asbestosis; over 200 Libby miners and family members have died to due asbestos complications. The new initiative seeks to establish the risk caused by low volumes of exposure, like that which might be incurred by school children or office workers in town.

The initiative will include several projects such as studying the difference in film and digital X-rays of the lungs. Officials said the initiative will seek advice from Libby residents and organizations, and also will include:

• An expanded evaluation of Libby residents who were exposed to asbestos.

• An assessment of whether the health problems related to asbestos exposure extend beyond lung disease.

• Improvements to public health tracking systems and patient health record databases, to better link exposure information to health conditions.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has honored a Hamden, CT man for his effort in protecting children against asbestos.

Ron Skomro, supervisor of the state Department of Public Health's Asbestos Program, worked with suppliers to stop the sale of art clay in the state that contains asbestos-containing talc. At the beginning of the decade, several art suppliers were using talc in their products; items such as crayons, doodled with and chewed on by children everywhere, used asbestos in their formula. Skomoro's work represents the latest step in a long struggle to remove asbestos-containing products from the market.

Skomoro began his efforts after high levels of asbestos were discovered in a school's art room and traced to clay use. Talc is included in clay to lower the temperature at which it needs to be heated, and some forms of talc are naturally contaminated with asbestos. Skomoro lobbied until the Art and Creative Materials Institute mandated that member manufacturers reformulate their products to remove asbestos.

The EPA gave Skomro its 2008 Environmental Merit Award at a ceremony in Boston.

A small town of 700 in North Dakota has closed one of its two ballparks dues to risks associated with its gravel.  Residents of Killdeer are skeptical of the park's closing, but Steve Way of the Environmental Protection Agency says its best to be wary.  The gravel in the ballpark is made of erionite, a substance mined close to Killdeer.  Though erionite is not regulated by the EPA, preliminary tests indicate that the material causes cancer in rats.

In Turkey, a variety of erionite has been linked to mesothelioma.  However erionite there is sodium-based, and in Killdeer is it calcium-based.  Studies are being conducted to evaluate the risks of Killdeer's erionite.  Find the full article here.