Asbestos became infamous when it was linked to mesothelioma, an otherwise rare form of cancer affecting the lining of the lung cavity. It is considered to be incurable. It takes an average of thirty years to show up, after exposure to asbestos. The link between asbestos and mesothelioma caused huge financial exposure for Halliburton despite the valiant efforts its subsidiary, the US Government.
The asbestos-in-toys story was first reported, as far as I can tell, by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. It was discovered, not by any US agency, but by a citizen's advocacy group: the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization [press release here (PDF)]. I first saw the report on the public health blog, The Pump Handle. Others have written about it at The Consumerist, Tech Space, Now Public, and A Hugle.
Here's part of the Seattle PI article:
Asbestos turns up in toys, children's clay
DIYers who use duct tape, spackle, roof sealer also at risk of exposure
By ANDREW SCHNEIDER
P-I SENIOR CORRESPONDENT
Asbestos has been found in a variety of consumer products, including one of this season's biggest-selling Christmas toys, according to the nation's largest asbestos victims organizations.
The CSI Fingerprint Examination Kit, two brands of children's play clay, powdered cleanser, roof sealers, duct tapes, window glazing, spackling paste and small appliances were among the products in which asbestos was found by at least two of three labs hired by the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization.
The group, which was created in 2004 by asbestos victims and their families, spent more than $165,000 to have government-certified laboratories examine hundreds of consumer products over 18 months to determine whether asbestos was present.
It is unusual for a group of volunteers, many of whom have asbestos-caused diseases, to fund research that impacts public health.
"We had to. No one else was doing it," said Linda Reinstein, the group's co-founder and executive director. "This is information that consumers and Congress must have because asbestos is lethal and we naively believe that the government is protecting us, when it's not." ...
There is a special problem with the fingerprint kit. Asbestos is most hazardous when it is inhaled as a powder. The asbestos in the fingerprint kit is in a powder, which is placed over the area of the fingerprint, then brushed off with a soft brush. This, of course, puts it in the air. Curious kids are likely to have their faces right up close to the area in which they are working.
From a corporate point of view, this all makes perfect sense. It will take thirty years for any problems to show up. By then, the link to the product will be have to remember, much less prove. Plus, all the profits and executive bonuses will already be spent by then.
All that is what we have come to expect in the USA. But what about the situation is Canada? That is perhaps the strangest aspect to this whole story. As noted on the [Canadian] New Democratic Party's website:
New regulations allow asbestos in toys
Thu 1 Mar 2007
OTTAWA – Today, new regulations on the use of asbestos were condemned by NDP MP’s Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre) and Catherine Bell (Vancouver Island North).
New regulations introduced by the Conservatives specifically cite that: “…a person may advertise, sell, or import an asbestos product… that is used by a child in learning or play.”
“You’d have to be crazy to put asbestos in children’s toys,” said Martin. “The rest of the world is banning asbestos in all its forms and Canada is actively seeking out new markets and applications. It defies reason.”
Martin and Bell were joined by toy puppets, ‘Toxic Timmy’ and ‘Ms O’Thelioma’ in making the case that putting toxic carcinogens into children’s toys and playthings is a spectacularly bad idea and shows an appalling lack of judgment on the part of this Conservative government.
“What’s even more absurd is that the Canadian government is spending a fortune subsidizing and promoting this deadly material,” said Bell.
Canada has a national health care plan. This is sensible, because it gives the Government a financial incentive to avoid craziness like this. A government should have an incentive to protect its people. Protecting the people from threat, foreign and domestic, is one of the primary functions of government. Financial incentives tend to work. But not in this case. Apparently, the lure of quick, dirty profit has overtaken the risk of long-term costs. The fact that the profit is small, relative to the cost, seems to not matter.
Medicine & Health
Politics
Comments
The Canadian legislation was presumably a sop to Quebec mining interests. The largest asbestos mines in the western hemisphere are in southern Quebec, between the St. Lawrence and northern New England.
No matter what, it still pure idiocy to deliberately enable exposing kids to asbestos in any form.
Posted by: chezjake | December 1, 2007 12:34 PM
To be honest, I need to see some more detailed information before jumping.
Remember that 'asbestos' is a trade term, not a mineralogical one. Chrysotile is one mineral that has an asbestiform habit, but on occasion some varieties of amphibole do as well (in fact, it is the asbestiform amphiboles that are most strongly liked with lung cancer and mesothelioma).
However, most amphiboles do not have asbestiform habits, and there have been cases where people have concluded that since some amphiboles are asbestiform, all amphiboles are toxic.
So the question should be, what are the mineral powders in question - are they actual chrysotile or asbestiform amphibole powders, powdered talc with trace amounts of chrysotile, or simply powdered rock that originally contained some amphiboles?
Posted by: NJ | December 1, 2007 4:01 PM
And your conclusion ("fact") doesn't offend your sense of rational probability enough to look beyond a blurb on the website of the NDP, a party which is no stranger to hyperbole?
The item is dated 9 months ago. I'm in Canada, and there has been little if any outcry about this.
I don't know the underlying truth here, but I would also wonder along with NJ about a slanted use of the term "asbestos."
Federal governments being accused (sometimes justifiably) of leaning toward Quebec interests is a recurrent theme in Canada, but stating that the government is composed of sociopaths just weakens any worthwhile point you might have dreadfully.
Posted by: Scott Belyea | December 1, 2007 5:40 PM
NJ: I agree that more information would be better, but note that the PDF press release from ADOA contains a statement from the Dr. Harbut, co-direcor of the Karmanos Cancer Institute's National Center for Vermiculite and Asbestos-Related Cancers. He appears to be concerned.
Also, I can't claim to have done a thorough literature review, but I did find this:
I think in the context of toys, it is important to consider the risk-benefit balance. My opinion is that no asbestos of any sort is tolerable, because there are lots of toys, and there is no particular redeeming quality to this particular toy.
Scott: Sociopaths can be found in any government, in any political party. If there are some scientists who believe that all forms of asbestos are hazardous, then asbestos does not belong in toys. Period.
Posted by: Joseph j7uy5 | December 1, 2007 5:42 PM
Right. And there are some scientists who believe that humans are not affecting global warming, so we can all relax. Period.
Posted by: Scott Belyea | December 1, 2007 6:38 PM
One of the known problems about the earlier work on asbestos epidemiology was the inability to distinguish the different types of fibers used; most of the asbestiform materials used were obtained from multiple sources so there were unknown levels of mixing of chrysotile and amphibole types.
Chrysotile was later discovered to be relatively soluble in lung fluids with an estimated lifetime of 9 months:
Hume, A. H., and D. Rimstidt. 'The Biodurability of Chrysotile Asbestos." American Mineralogist 77 (1992): 1125-1128.
so this greatly limits its ability to have long term effects.
Obligatory flame-retardant: Note that I am not trying to claim that chrysotile or any asbestiform material is not potentially hazardous, or that potentially (or perceived) hazardous materials should be used in toys. I just want to make sure we stay on a factual basis on this topic, having suffered through an unfounded asbestos hysteria previously.
Posted by: NJ | December 1, 2007 6:41 PM
As I understand it, there are at least 11 types of asbestos identified. The US only has toxicity statistics on the few (3 or 4?) most used industrially here. The others may be completely innocuous, or much worse. Details matter.
What was this "unfounded asbestos hysteria"? I'm with Joseph: in the absence of definitive information, asbestos doesn't belong in toys. The burden of proof should be on vendors, not on parents.
Posted by: Nathan Myers | December 5, 2007 1:40 AM
Nathan,
The unfounded asbestos hysteria story - While I was in grad school, it was noted that some of the ceiling insulation was falling off in some rooms, and at least one stairwell. We were told at a meeting that the material had been sent for testing and discovered to be up to 20% asbestos. Much panic and anger ensued, and a number of areas of the building were cordoned off.
Being enterprising mineralogy Ph.D students at a major US research school (VT), we decided to analyze the material ourselves. We collected about a kilogram of the drooping insulation and added dilute HCl to see if calcite was present.
Fizzz. Net remainder was about 600 grams. A colleague took samples for optical analysis. Mostly fine-grained material with perhaps one fibrous grain that could be asbestos. More samples given to me for powder X-ray diffractometry. The result? 100% (+ or - 1 to 5%) gypsum.
Although the asbestos testing firm was statutorily prevented from doing the remediation, it appeared to us that an "I'll scratch yours if you scratch mine" mentality existed in that business, one that took advantage of the fact that the word 'asbestos' was then the equivalent of the boogeyman.
I would agree - asbestiform minerals don't belong in toys, and that the burden of proof belongs with vendors. But, as you noted, details matter. And a few cleavage fragments of regular old tremolite or hornblende does not constitute asbestos contamination nor a reason to hit the panic button.
Posted by: NJ | December 8, 2007 3:51 PM