Lung cancer kills 1.3 million people a year and is the leading cause of cancer death across the world. Nearly 220,000 men and women were diagnosed with lung cancer in the United States in 2009, with nearly 160,000 Americans dying from the disease. For years, researchers have been seeking a way to detect lung cancer at its early stages, when it is most treatable. A new device from Israel holds much promise. It may provide an inexpensive, faster, easier screen for cancer than X-rays or blood tests, and has the potential to save thousands of lives.

Using an array of sensors made of gold particles measuring five nanometers wide (one nanometer is 1/100,000 the width of a human hair) layered over a carbon substrate, scientists at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology have developed an “electronic nose” able to distinguish the breath of lung cancer patients from those without the disease. The research results, published at Nature Nanotechnology, could lead to a rapid and non-invasive way of diagnosing and screening for lung cancer In an initial trial, the “breathalyzer” test was able to detect lung cancer with 86 percent accuracy.

Dr. Hossam Haick, one of the scientists working on the sensor, said he hoped it would allow doctors to have a simple test at hand to screen people during routine appointments. “Conventional diagnostic methods for lung cancer are unsuitable for widespread screening because they are expensive and occasionally miss tumors. Given the impact of the rising incidence of cancer on health budgets worldwide, the proposed technology will be a significant savings for both private and public health expenditures,” said Dr. Haick. “The potential exists for using the proposed technology to diagnose other conditions and diseases, which could mean additional cost reductions and enhanced possibilities to save lives.”

This test may give us a way to better understand and better identify those who might have lung cancer earlier, and to treat the disease in more effective ways.

The hypocrisy of Canada’s asbestos industry was spotlighted during Quebec premier Charest’s trip to India . Yet it’s not just India that suffers. Canada’s anything-goes export policy regarding asbestos even extends to our neighbor to the south, Mexico.

Mexico has imported asbestos since 1932. The proliferation of companies manufacturing asbestos products in Mexico accelerated in the 1970s due to increasing regulation in more industrialized nations. By 2001, there were 1,881 companies in Mexico importing different types of asbestos, lured by lax occupational health and safety regulations as well as by cheap Mexican labor. Today, Chrysotile asbestos is most frequently used by local industry. Most of the asbestos used in Mexico today comes from Canada and Brazil.

A 2003 article in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health studied asbestos-related diseases in Mexico from 1979 through 2000, noting how deaths from Mesothelioma, an asbestos-related cancer, increased as the number of asbestos-containing products in Mexico increased. During this period, there were 793 deaths from Mesothelioma with over 90% from people with no more than a primary school education. Lack of occupational health and safety professionals, deficient governmental standards, and an uninformed workforce will continue to fuel a Mesothelioma epidemic in Mexico.

A follow-up article from 2009 demonstrates “a clear relationship between industrial uses of all types of asbestos and MPM [Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma], and in Mexico the major type of asbestos is chrysotile imported from Canada,” and declares, “Based on our findings, we propose that the Mexican government must ban the use and commercialization of all forms of asbestos so as to prevent the epidemic clearly shown…and as an urgent measure to protect the life of future generations.”

We couldn’t agree more.

A week of protests and action meant to highlight the hypocrisy of Canada’s export of asbestos have marred Quebec Premier Charest’s trade visit to India.

Indian activists have woken up to the threat of asbestos. According to the Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI), trade unions and activists have called upon Indian prime minister Dr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Charest to:

* Ban mining, manufacture, use and trade of asbestos in both India and Canada
* Let the health experts set the policy on asbestos
* Revise their stand and support the listing of chrysotile asbestos in the PIC list of the Rotterdam Convention
* Ratify the ILO Convention on Asbestos
* Close all asbestos mines and take concrete steps to address the occupational, safety and compensatory concerns of workers employed in asbestos related industries

Workers, unionists and health professionals also sent the following letter to Quebec Premier Charest:

Dear Premier Charest:

We urgently request your solidarity with workers in India and the Global South. We appeal to you to stop exporting asbestos to India and other countries where it is handled by desperately poor workers under dangerous conditions and is creating a public health tragedy of disease and death for decades to come.

Quebec’s export of asbestos brings dishonor to the international reputation of Quebec.

Prominent health experts in Quebec, as well as the Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Cancer Society, the Canadian Labour Congress, the Canadian Teachers’ Federation and professors of health at nine universities across Canada, have all asked that Quebec’s indefensible export of asbestos stop.

Health professionals in Quebec and elsewhere have condemned the misleading and untruthful information disseminated by the asbestos industry, pointing out that this untruthful information is endangering public health, especially in the world’s emerging economies.

95% of all asbestos ever used is chrysotile asbestos and everywhere it has been used, it has left behind a tragic epidemic of disease and death, such as the epidemic of mesothelioma, lung cancer and asbestosis happening today in Quebec and in other industrialized countries that, to their regret, used it in the past.

Consequently, Quebec and Western industrialized countries, such as the U.S., Europe and Australia, no longer use asbestos because they know from experience that it is impossible to use it safely. In fact, your government is spending millions of dollars to remove chrysotile and other forms of asbestos from Quebec’s schools, hospitals and buildings in order to protect the lives of the Quebec people.

We ask you not to practise a double standard: exporting chrysotile asbestos to people overseas while removing it from buildings in Quebec.

Your government’s own Quebec National Public Health Institute (INSPQ) has published fifteen reports, all of them documenting that it has proven impossible to handle chrysotile asbestos safely in Quebec itself, in spite of Quebec’s advanced technology and substantive regulatory regime. Consequently, your own Public Health Institute has recommended against your government’s policy of increased use of chrysotile asbestos.

We note that the Quebec government has asked the Canadian government to obstruct a U.N. environmental convention, the Rotterdam Convention. This Convention gives countries the right to be informed that chrysotile asbestos is hazardous, before it is exported to them. We consider it dishonours Quebec’s reputation to thus undermine human rights and to give greater priority to the interests of the asbestos industry than to the rights and the lives of people in developing countries.

We ask you to take this opportunity to show the international solidarity that the people of Quebec believe in. We ask you to put the health and lives of workers in India and the Global South ahead of short-sighted politics.

All the major trade unions of India and labour support groups have called for a ban on asbestos. Please listen to the voices of workers in India, as well as to your own Quebec health experts.

The government of South Africa, which was a major supplier of chrysotile asbestos, has now banned it. If the government of South Africa can put the lives of people ahead of the interests of the asbestos industry, we hope that you, representing the people of Quebec, will do the same.

We await your response with much hope.

Respectfully,

Endorsed by:

[Name – Organisation/affiliation]
1) Ashim Roy – New Trade Union Initiative
2) Dr Rajeev Sharma – Building and Wood Workers’ International
3) Dunu Roy – Hazard Centre New Delhi
4) H Mahadevan – All India Trade Union Congress/World Federation of Trade Unions
5) Jagdish Patel – People’s Training and Research Centre
6) Gopal Krishna – Ban Asbestos Network India
7) Madhumita Dutta – Corporate Accountability Desk-The Other Media
8) Madhuresh Kumar – National Alliance for People’s Movement
9) Manshi Asher – Researcher, Himachal Pradesh
10) Mohit Gupta – Occupational and Environmental Health Network of India
11) Nityanand Jayaraman – Independent Journalist, Tamil Nadu
12) Pralhad Malwadkar – Occupational Health and Safety Centre
13) Raghunath Manwar – Occupational Health and Safety Association
14) Rana Sengupta – Mine Labour Protection Campaign
15) Ravi Mohite – Krantikari Kamgar Union
16) Sanjay Singhvi – Trade Union Centre of India
17) Shibayan Raha – Activist, New Delhi
18) Shweta Narayan – Community Environmental Monitoring, Tamil Nadu
19) SIPCOT Area Community Environmental Monitoring Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu
20) Sreedhar Ramamurthi – Environics Trust, New Delhi
21) Dr Annie Thebaud-Mony – Ban Asbestos France
22) Dr Arindam Basu – Senior Lecturer in Health Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
23) Dr Arthur Frank – School of Public Health, Drexel University, USA
24) Eliezer Jo&atiltde;o De Souza – ABREA – ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DOS EXPOSTOS AO AMIANTO (Brazilian Asbestos Victims)
25) Fernanda Giannasi – Rede Virtual-Cidadã Pelo Banimento Do Amianto Para A América Latina (Ban Asbestos Virtual-Citizen Network For Latin America)
26) Laurie Kazan-Allen – International Ban Asbestos Secretariat
27) Omana George – Asia Network for the Rights of Occupational Accident Victims
28) Sanjiv Pandita – Asia Monitor Resource Centre
29) Shalini Sharma – Student, UK
30) Sugio Furuya – Ban Asbestos Network Japan and JOSHRC-JAPAN
31) Yeyong Choi – Ban Asbestos Network Korea
32) Dr Barry Castleman – Environmental Consultant, US
33) Dr Sabu George – Researcher, India
34) Asia-Ban Asbestos Network
35) Dr Domyung Paek – Scientist, Korea
36) Dr Takehiko Murayama – Scientist, Japan

Quebec Premier Jean Charest and 130 provincial leaders arrived in Mumbai, India’s business capital on Sunday to participate in a trade mission in order to solidify economic relations in the region.

His visit was met with protest. Sanjay Singhvi, secretary-general of the Trade Union Center of India, led a protest with union members affected by asbestos-related diseases, while Charest was in Mumbai. Singhvi spoke out against the asbestos industry, blaming it for sickening Indian workers. At least 20 percent of workers in India are exposed to asbestos on a regular basis.

The Canadian Asbestos Lobby claims chrysotile asbestos can be used safely as long as strict precautions are followed. The Indian asbestos industry also claims that the country’s factories have safety protocols in place to protect workers. Here are some photos of India’s asbestos industry. What do you think?

Over 100 scientists from 28 countries are calling on Quebec Premier Jean Charest to ban the use and export of all forms of asbestos, on the eve of his trade mission to India.

The scientists accused Quebec of having a double standard regarding asbestos use, claiming the province’s behavior "seems to represent a high level of hypocrisy." Virtually none of the asbestos Quebec mines is used locally, yet it is promoted and exported to developing countries "where protections are few and awareness of the hazards of asbestos almost non-existent." India is the primary importer of Quebec’s deadly mineral fiber. The scientists reminded Charest, “Your government is spending millions to remove chrysotile asbestos and other forms of asbestos from Quebec’s schools, hospitals and buildings, while at the same time exporting it to developing countries and telling them it is safe."

"We are extremely disturbed that the asbestos industry in India – Quebec’s No. 1 asbestos customer, with whom the Quebec industry works closely – has recently sent letters to a number of scientists in India saying that legal action will be taken against them if they do not retract their statements and published articles concerning the threat to health posed by chrysotile asbestos," the letter says.

Signatories include assistant U.S. Surgeon General Richard A. Lemen, Devra Davis, Professor of Preventive Medicine at New York’s Mount Sinai Medical Centre, and Sue Janse van Rensburg, Executive Director of the Cancer Association of South Africa.

Canada’s $100-million-a-year asbestos industry is localized mainly in Thetford Mines, Quebec, home to the country’s last operational mine.

View the Montreal Gazette article dated January 29, 2010 here

Recently the New York Times magazine blog published a brief note about two classic science fiction novels bound in asbestos cloth. This has triggered widespread indignation around the world and I am pleased to report that I was the first to post a critical comment. The blog entry and comments can be found here. If you are as offended as we were, please feel free to log on, register with the New York Times (it’s free), and add your comments.

Recently, an advertisement appeared in the Hindustan Times, “Blast Those Myths About Asbestos Cement.” The notice that the ad was paid for by the Asbestos Cement Products Association may very well be the only factual statement printed.

The manufacturers proudly proclaim, “Only safe White Fibre is Used in Manufacturing of Asbestos cement products in India.” Safe white fibre? Do they mean chrysotile? Let’s examine what real experts have to say about chrysotile:

Since asbestos is the major cause of mesothelioma, and chrysotile constitutes 95% of all asbestos use worldwide, it can be concluded that chrysotile asbestos is the main cause of pleural mesothelioma in humans. Smith AH, Wright CC. Am J Ind Med. 1998 Jan; 33(1):94-6.

Chrysotile with little contamination of tremolite can lead to early development of malignant mesothelioma when heavily exposed from childhood at a company residence with household exposure. Yano E, Wang ZM, Wang XR, Wang MZ, Takata A, Kohyama N, Suzuki Y. Am J Ind Med. 2009 Apr; 52(4):282-7.

The cluster of 14 mesothelioma cases among workers who were active in the mine and 13 among other people exposed to Balangero chrysotile provides further evidence that tremolite-free chrysotile is carcinogenic. Mirabelli D, Calisti R, Barone-Adesi F, Fornero E, Merletti F, Magnani C. Occup Environ Med. 2008 Dec; 65(12):815-9.

This study confirms the findings from previous investigations of excess mortality from lung cancer and asbestosis and a strong exposure-response relation between estimated exposure to chrysotile and mortality from lung cancer and asbestosis. Hein MJ, Stayner LT, Lehman E, Dement JM. Occup Environ Med. 2007 Sep; 64(9):616-25.

The hypothesis that tremolite-free chrysotile caused no lung cancer was rejected. Ogden TL. Ann Occup Hyg. 2009; 53(4):307–309.

There are excessive risks of lung cancer and mesothelioma among workers exposed to chrysotile fiber alone. Li L, Sun TD, Zhang X, Lai RN, Li XY, Fan XJ, Morinaga K. Biomed Environ Sci. 2004 Dec; 17(4):459-68.

The conclusion is that in order to ensure adequate protection, there is no alternative to a total ban. The evidence for carcinogenicity of chrysotile is as good as for the amphiboles… Terracini B. Med Lav. 2006 Mar-Apr; 97(2):383-92.

Remind the Asbestos Cement Products Manufacturers Association (ACPMA) that a lie told a million times is still a lie. It’s time to ban all forms of asbestos. Contact them at acpma@sify.com

Virotherapy is the use of biotechnology to convert viruses into cancer-fighting agents by reprogramming viruses to replicate in cancer cells and destroy them from within. In 2006 researchers from the Hebrew University succeeded in isolating the Newcastle disease virus, in order to specifically target cancer cells. The researchers tested this new virotherapy on patients with glioblastoma multiforme and achieved promising results for the first time. There are indications that virotherapy may also be useful in treating mesothelioma.

In order to create an effective virus, it is necessary to understand the molecular workings of the specific cancer. An adenovirus-based virotherapy agent is engineered by incorporating a tumor specific promoter (TSP) into virus genes. The TSP restricts the expression of certain genes and viral replication in tumor cells, while sparing normal cells. A team from the Center for Gene and Cell Therapy at Okayama University Hospital in Japan has been working on heparanase-assisted dual virotherapy. Initial animal experiments have been successful. Virotherapy has the ability to deliver localized treatment exactly where it is needed. According to a recently published report in Oncogene, “Telomerase-specific, replication-selective adenovirus OBP-301 can efficiently infect and kill human mesothelioma cells by viral replication. Intrathoracic administration of virus significantly reduced the number and size of human mesothelioma tumors intrathoracically implanted into nu/nu mice.”

The Mayo Clinic has been experimenting with using a recombinant measles virus for treating ovarian cancer, glioblastoma multiforme, and multiple myeloma. Clinical trials for virotherapy for mesothelioma are expected to begin next year.

Virotherapy is emerging as yet another technique in ultimately defeating mesothelioma.

But we have reason to be proud of one Californian. Linda Reinstein, co-founder (with her husband Alan, who died of mesothelioma) and Executive Director of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, has started a campaign to revoke the asbestos carcinogen-bearing serpentine rock’s recognition as our official State Rock. She began at home, with her local city council, and we wish her success in spreading this effort statewide. The non-profit ADAO is the United States’ premiere asbestos victims’ advocacy group and has earned a worldwide reputation for its efforts. Now, for a bit of history…

On April 14, 1965, Director of the California Department of Conservation DeWitt Nelson wrote a letter to Governor Edmund G. Brown urging approval of Senate Bill No. 265, designating serpentine as California’s State Rock.

“Serpentine indirectly is of great economic importance to California. It is a host rock for the state’s newest and most rapidly-growing mineral industry – asbestos, now bringing in several millions of dollars annually… Designating serpentine as the state rock will … improve the local economy in a number of places.”

It was approved by the California Senate on March 22, 1965. Assemblyman Pearce Young of Napa County sponsored the bill in the Assembly, where it was unanimously (69-0) approved two weeks later.

By choosing serpentine as the State Rock in 1965, California became the first state in the union to pick a favorite stone. It was meant to be a symbolic act with practical significance. However, chrysotile asbestos, found in serpentine, causes diseases such as mesothelioma, asbestosis, and lung cancer, and has already killed hundreds of thousands of people worldwide. The timing was curious – in October 1964, the world’s experts on asbestos and disease gathered in New York for a major seminar sponsored by the New York Academy of Sciences, chaired by Mt. Sinai’s Dr. Irving Selikoff. The conference got a lot of press attention and was well attended by corporate and insurance representatives. Asbestos had already been proven to cause fatal asbestosis (by the 1930s), lung cancer (by 1955), and mesothelioma (by 1960), and industry was getting worried.

The Selikoff Symposium was published later in 1965 as a special volume of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, and it seems obvious that California was duped as part of an industry public relations effort to neutralize these advances in medical knowledge and public awareness.

The last asbestos mine in California closed in 2002 and is now an EPA Superfund clean-up site. Asbestos mining and usage has left a legacy of death and suffering. 10,000 Americans die each year of asbestos disease; thousands of Californians have died from asbestos since 1965.

It’s long past time for another symbolic act with practical significance. It’s time to dump the rock – to remove serpentine as the State Rock of California. Such an action may serve to prevent exposure to this deadly fiber through increased attention and awareness.

Last week, the City Council of Manhattan Beach passed a resolution urging repeal of California Government Code section 425.2, which designated serpentine as California’s State Rock.

“I thank the Manhattan Beach City Council for moving quickly to pass this important resolution,” said Portia Cohen, Mayor of Manhattan Beach. This act represents the first official request to the California legislature to remove serpentine as California’s state rock. The campaign to remove serpentine was spearheaded by Linda Reinstein, who plans to take the campaign to other cities. “We have a strategic plan in place and look forward to working with other victims and political leaders in the state of California,” she said.

If California feels the need to adopt a new State Rock, my personal nominee would be Huey Lewis!

In its October 5 online issue, Forbes.com published an article about Stephan Schmidheiny, heir to the Eternit asbestos fortune, lauding him for his charitable good works and calling him “the Bill Gates of Switzerland.”

I wrote the attached letter to the editor, who will publish a brief extract because of space limitations. Thereafter, I published a brief comment in the comments section attached to the article on the Forbes.com web site, but their space limitations prevented me from saying everything I wanted to say. My full letter to the editor dated October 1, 2009 is reproduced below

Schmidheiny and his family have never lived up to their legal and moral obligations. It is often said that the acorn does not fall far from the oak tree; his family tree was rotten and is still bearing poisonous fruit.

View letter as PDF