An aunt passed, an offer was made that would allow us to live in her house and take over ownership so we began renovations. We are currently not in the best financial situation so we decided to do the brunt of the work ourselves. We removed old (25+ years) deteriorating carpet and found beneath it many broken floor tiles and green soft rotted wood below. We decided we needed to replace the rotted board, but there was tile on top. What to do? What to do? "REMOVE IT!" We thought. So we pried up all the tile with putty knives. After wards we decided to look online for directions on removing the adhesive from the floorboards and lo and behold on one website there's a picture of our EXACT tile. Contains asbestos it says. So I was struck near panic and even though that was a month ago it still wells up now and then. We weren't living in the house, still have our apartment, and just went on the weekends to work on it but I think all and all we have had about 17-20 hours exposure to whatever we kicked up in the air with the tile. Whatever dust there was I cleaned up almost immediately because I have allergies. We wore no face masks, no protective clothing, nothing - as I was completely unaware that asbestos floor tile even existed (yes I'm an idiot). I've found a few similar posts of people freaking out about unintended asbestos exposure via removing old tile, and my one and only friend in the world apparently did the same damn thing so I'm not the only idiot in the world that may have set myself on the path to mesothelioma, but like the title says, I'm frightened. We had the tile tested and it came back 93% Vinyl, 7% asbestos and the adhesive somehow has no asbestos at all. I know what's done is done and there's nothing I can do now, but how worried would you be?

I just started a new site about Mesothelioma cancer which is caused by asbestos exposure. Check it out and let me know what you think and how the color scheme looks.
http://www.newmesotheliomapatient.com

I'm planning on visiting an old, rundown building with several friends. I'm concerned about asbestos exposure, as the risk of cancer and other lung issues are prevalent upon being exposed. I don't intend on touching/burning/destroying anything in the building, so as to avoid releasing potential asbestos into the air. Does anyone have any other suggestions as to how I may protect myself? Is it possible to be exposed simply by walking through an old building?

The development of asbestos induced disease can vary depending on several critical factors.  One interesting study that examines this issue is called, "Asbestos-induced phosphorylation of epidermal growth factor receptor is linked to c-fos and apoptosis" by Christine L. Zanella, Cynthia R. Timblin, Andrew Cummins, Michael Jung, Jonathan Goldberg, Rachel Raabe, Thomas R. Tritton, and Brooke T. Mossman - Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 277 - Vol. 277, Issue 4, L684-L693, October 1999.  Here is an excerpt: "We examined the mechanisms of interaction of crocidolite asbestos fibers with the epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor (EGFR) and the role of the EGFR-extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) signaling pathway in early-response protooncogene (c-fos/c-jun) expression and apoptosis induced by asbestos in rat pleural mesothelial (RPM) cells. Asbestos fibers, but not the nonfibrous analog riebeckite, abolished binding of EGF to the EGFR. This was not due to a direct interaction of fibers with ligand, inasmuch as binding studies using fibers and EGF in the absence of membranes showed that EGF did not adsorb to the surface of asbestos fibers. Exposure of RPM cells to asbestos caused a greater than twofold increase in steady-state message and protein levels of EGFR (P < 0.05).

The tyrphostin AG-1478, which inhibits the tyrosine kinase activity of the EGFR, but not the tyrphostin A-10, which does not affect EGFR activity, significantly ameliorated asbestos-induced increases in mRNA levels of c-fos but not of c-jun. Pretreatment of RPM cells with AG-1478 significantly reduced apoptosis in cells exposed to asbestos. Our findings suggest that asbestos-induced binding to EGFR initiates signaling pathways responsible for increased expression of the protooncogene c-fos and the development of apoptosis. The ability to block asbestos-induced elevations in c-fos mRNA levels and apoptosis by small-molecule inhibitors of EGFR phosphorylation may have therapeutic implications in asbestos-related diseases."

Another study is called, "Alveolar macrophage stimulation of lung fibroblast growth in asbestos-induced pulmonary fibrosis." By I. Lemaire, H. Beaudoin, S. MassA©, and C. Grondin - Am J Pathol. 1986 February; 122(2): 205-211.   Here is an excerpt: "Abstract - Asbestotic lesions are characterized by macrophagic accumulation, fibroblast proliferation, and collagen deposition. To evaluate the potential involvement of alveolar macrophages in the subsequent fibrogenic reaction, the authors studied the effects of macrophages from normal and asbestos-treated rats upon lung fibroblast proliferation in vitro. Culture supernatants from bronchoalveolar (BAL) cells (99% macrophages) of normal rats stimulated lung fibroblast DNA synthesis and growth in a dose-dependent manner. Fibroblast growth factor (FGF) release by alveolar macrophages (AMs) was rapid (within 1 hour of incubation) and dependent on the number of AMs in culture. Moreover, culture supernatants from BAL cells of animals exposed to asbestos (single intratracheal injection) stimulated fibroblast proliferation to a greater degree than culture supernatants from BAL cells of control animals. Enhanced FGF production occurred 1 week after asbestos instillation and persisted up to 24 weeks.

This change was accompanied in the early stages (1-4 weeks) by an increase in the total number of BAL cells which returned to control values by 12 weeks. Differential analysis of BAL cell populations showed a transient infiltration of neutrophils in the bronchoalveolar compartment followed by a significant accumulation of macrophages which persisted up to 1 month. Furthermore, lungs of asbestos-treated animals showed evidence of pathologic alterations characterized by fibroblast proliferation and collagen deposition. This study demonstrates that increased production of fibroblast growth factor by alveolar macrophages in vitro coincides with the development of asbestos-induced fibrosis. Prolonged stimulation of FGF release may contribute to excessive fibroblast proliferation and fibrosis."

If you found any of these excerpts, please read them in their entirety.  We all owe a debt of gratitude to these researchers.

We had a flooding problem and had to pull a very old carpet out. Underneath we found 9x9 tiles,probably containing asbestos.A few of the tiles broke in the process and also some tiles are cracked probably from tacking the carpet down.Currently we use the room for storage and my hudbands clothes,but eventually we like to use it for living again. What is the safest and most inexpensive way to deal with that floor. We will not take the tiles out.How big is the danger of Asbestos exposure right now?

Occupational exposure to asbestos causes the death of thousands of people each year.  This has led to an almost unparalleled body of research trying to better understand asbestos and its link to mesothelioma disease.  One interesting study is called, "Kinetics of the bronchoalveolar leucocyte response in rats during exposure to equal airborne mass concentrations of quartz, chrysotile asbestos, or titanium dioxide." by K Donaldson, R E Bolton, A Jones, G M Brown, M D Robertson, J Slight, H Cowie, and J M Davis - Thorax 1988;43:525-533.  Here is an excerpt: "Abstract - The kinetics of the bronchoalveolar response was assessed in rats exposed, at equal airborne mass concentration (10 mg/m3), to titanium dioxide--a non-pathogenic dust--and the two pathogenic mineral dusts quartz and chrysotile asbestos. Rats were killed at intervals over a 75 day exposure period and groups of rats exposed for 32 and 75 days after recovery for two months. Bronchoalveolar lavage was carried out and the lavage fluid characterised for cellular content, macrophage activation, and concentrations of free total protein, lactate dehydrogenase, and N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminidase. Inhalation exposure to the two pathogenic dusts resulted in an increased number of leucocytes, macrophage activation, and increased levels of free enzymes and total protein. The pattern and magnitude of the responses to quartz and chrysotile differed. Chrysotile caused less inflammation than quartz, and the main cellular response peaked around the middle of the period of dust exposure whereas the highest levels of enzymes occurred towards the end. The difference in timing suggests that macrophages were not available for lavage towards the end of the exposure, owing to their playing a part possibly in deposition of granulation tissue. Quartz caused a greater cellular and enzyme response than chrysotile, particularly towards the end of the dust exposure phase. There was a noticeable progression of inflammation in the quartz exposed groups left to recover for two months, but not in the chrysotile recovery groups."

A second article that is interesting is called, "Chemical Characterization of Asbestos Body Cores by Electron Microprobe Analysis" by Arthur M. Langer, Ivan B. Rubin, and Irving J. Selikoff - Environmental Sciences Laboratory, Mount Sinai School of Medicine of the City University of New York, New York, New York 10029 - Journal of histochemistry and Cytochemistry May 18, 1972.  Here is an excerpt: "Inhalation of asbestos may be associated with increased risk of developing malignant neoplasms. Some of the fibers become coated in the lung, resulting in "asbestos bodies." The occurrence of structures with the appearance of asbestos bodies in the lungs of urban dwellers the world over, individuals with no known exposure to these mineral fibers, has raised the question of whether the community at large may also have increased risk of neoplasia as the result of chance environmental asbestos exposure. Since other fibrous materials may also sometimes become so coated, epidemiology evaluation of the presence of asbestos bodies has been hampered by difficulties in obtaining absolute identification of the cores of the bodies found. Five fibrous silicates, consisting of four amphiboles (amosite, anthophyllite, crocidolite and tremolite) and one serpentine (chrysotile), constitute the asbestos mineral group. Chemically, they are diverse enough for unique identification. The electron microprobe analyzer permits microchemical analysis of particles in the sublight microscopic size range. Analysis of asbestos body cores requires particle selection, extraction from tissue matrix, a suitable conducting substrate, proper coating material, selection of optimal instrumental operating conditions and comparison of unknown cores with known fiber standards. In this investigation, asbestos body cores have been analyzed from tissues obtained from occupationally exposed individuals (known fiber exposure), laboratory animals (known exposure) and individuals with no known occupational exposure. Cores of bodies have been analyzed as amosite, chrysotile, chemically degraded chrysotile and cores of undetermined nature. Amosite fibers as cores of asbestos bodies show no marked chemical degradation even after prolonged biologic residence, whereas chrysotile asbestos cores are markedly degraded. Cores of asbestos bodies from the general population, from individuals with no known exposure, may consist of degraded chrysotile, synthetic silicate fibers and, in some cases, amphibole asbestos."  If you found any of these excerpts interesting, please read the studies in their entirety.  We all owe a debt of gratitude to these researchers.

The assertion that asbestosis must be present in order to attribute a lung cancer to asbestos exposure does not meet accepted standards for establishing causation.  One interesting study is called, "Historical perspectives in occupational medicine. Changing attitudes and opinions regarding asbestos and cancer 1934-1965" by Philip E. Enterline PhD - American Journal of Industrial Medicine Volume 20, Issue 5, pages 685-700, 1991.  Here is an excerpt: "Abstract - Literature published in the years 1934-1965 was reviewed to determine attitudes and opinions of scientists as to whether asbestos is a cause of cancer. In Germany, the issue was decided in 1943 when the government decreed that lung cancer, when associated with asbestosis (of any degree), was an occupational disease. In the United States, however, there was no consensus on the issue until 1964. Opinions of scientists over a 22 year period are shown and the contributions of various cultural, social, economic and political factors to these opinions are discussed. A lack of experimental and epidemiological evidence played a major role in delaying a consensus. Other important factors included a rejection of science conducted outside of the U.S. during this period, particularly a rejection of German scientific thought during and after WWII, and a rejection of clinical evidence in favor of epidemiological investigations. Individual writers rarely changed their minds on the subject of asbestos as a cause of cancer."

A second study is called, "Lung cancer and asbestos exposure: Asbestosis is not necessary" - David Egilman MD MPH, Alexander Reinert - American Journal of Industrial Medicine - Volume 30, Issue 4, pages 398-406, October 1996.  Here is an excerpt: "Abstract - Recent commentaries on the issue of asbestos-related lung cancer have raised important points. One major question is whether lung cancer can be attributed to asbestos exposure in the absence of asbestosis. This review attempts to place the debate in the proper context for establishing causation. Relevant epidemiologic and pathologic studies are analyzed, as well as the scientific basis for each position in the debate. The assertion that asbestosis must be present in order to attribute a lung cancer to asbestos exposure does not meet accepted standards for establishing causation. In addition, some evidence has been incorrectly cited in support of this position. This discussion can benefit from clearer definitions of asbestosis, a more thorough evaluation of the available scientific information, and a proper context for determining causation. This review of the available evidence indicates that lung cancers can occur as a result of asbestos exposure, in the absence of clinical or histologic asbestosis. Causation in an individual should be assessed by considering duration of exposure, intensity of exposure, and appropriate latency."

A third study is called, "Induction of micronuclei, hyperdiploidy and chromosomal breakage affecting the centric/pericentric regions of chromosomes 1 and 9 in human amniotic fluid cells after treatment with asbestos and ceramic fibers" by Elke Doppa,  Maik Schuler, Dietmar Schiffmanna and David A. Eastmond - Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis - Volume 377, Issue 1, 9 June 1997, Pages 77-87.  Here is an excerpt: "Abstract - This article describes the induction of micronuclei, hyperdiploidy and chromosome breakage in human amniotic cells in vitro by amosite, chrysotile and crocidolite asbestos, and ceramic fibers. The response of human (amniotic fluid cells) and rodent (Syrian hamster embryo fibroblasts, SHE) cells to fiber treatment was compared using the micronucleus assay. The data of the rodent studies were taken from a previous investigation (Dopp, E. et al. (1995) Environ. Health Perspect., 103, 268-271). All types of mineral fibers caused a significant increase of micronucleated cells. The kinetochore analysis revealed that all three types of asbestos and ceramic fibers yielded similar effects. Approximately 50% of the induced micronuclei were kinetochore-negative indicating formation through clastogenic events. Human amniotic cells were much less susceptible than SHE cells to the induction of micronuclei by mineral fibers. This again demonstrates that SHE cells are more susceptible to chromosomal changes than human amniotic fluid cells. The application of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with tandem DNA probes yielded more detailed information about specific structural chromosome aberrations in the 1 (cen-q12) and 9 (cen-q12) regions and about abnormal numbers of chromosomes in interphase human amniotic fluid cells. Using this FISH approach we found a statistically significant increase of chromosomal breakage in the pericentric heterochromatin regions of chromosomes 1 and 9 in interphase human amniotic cells after exposure to asbestos and ceramic fibers compared to control cells. The number of hyperdiploid cells was also significantly increased. Our results show that asbestos fibers as well as ceramic fibers are inducers of structural and numerical chromosomal aberrations in human amniotic fluid cells."

We all owe a debt of gratitude to these fine researchers for their important work.  If you found any of these excerpts helpful, please read the studies in their entirety.

Information about asbestos lung cancer provide that there is no cure for asbestos lung cancer as the disease is detected very late in its development stage. Therefore eliminating chances of survival in the stage wherein the disease can still be controlled. What remains to be the only solution in the battle against asbestos lung cancer is to stay away from asbestos and minimize exposure as much as possible. Prolonged asbestos exposure causes lung cancer. However, the effects of the exposure develop and progress through the years and manifests only after the development is in its later stages. Asbestos exposure causes lung cancer, mesothelioma, asbestosis, along with many other similar diseases which are related to the respiratory tract. Needless to say, prolonged or repeated exposure can prove to be fatal.

Asbestos exposure causes damage to the lungs and other vital organs in the respiratory system. This is manifested by oughing, a pain in the chest wall, abdominal pain, a swollen abdomen, the existence of fluid around the lungs, dramatic weight loss, fatigue, among others. All of which are common symptoms in lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis.

More often that that, these individuals who are suffering from asbestos cancer are those individuals who are poor enough to begin with. Individuals who gamble their lives and health in hopes of providing for their families. Which is why it is alarming to know that these same individuals who suffer from poverty are the ones who are more easily subjected to asbestos cancer. . Justice is needed to be served, or at least the proper compensation for these victims of asbestos cancer.

For more information and tips on Asbestos Lung Cancer visit the website, http://asbestos-lungcancer-information.com

Copyright (c) 2008 Katie Kelley

During the holiday shopping season of 2007, an asbestos watchdog group known as the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization uncovered a children's toy containing elements of asbestos, which is a cancer-causing fiber.

While production of the toy has ceased, an article from The New York Times in April 2008 elaborated on the near forgotten incident. Currently, litigation has been developed in the Los Angeles Superior Court between ADAO and CBS Corporation, Planet Toys Inc. (manufacturers of the CSI Fingerprint Examination Kit) and several retailers for their involvement in the sale of the asbestos-tainted toy. Families affected by the contaminated toy should also consider developing litigation for the exposure of "substantial quantities of tremolite asbestos."

The ADAO has also continued its testing of other products and found several containing asbestos, including additional children's toys.

ADAO is an organization that utilizes volunteers, several of whom have either been affected directly by asbestos-related illnesses or have watched friends and family suffer from the diseases, including mesothelioma. The organization funds research that may affect public health, and the group acts as a watchdog for asbestos-tainted products or violations of asbestos policies, which have been set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

What is Asbestos?

Asbestos is considered a human carcinogen by the federal Department of Health and Human Services and is a "naturally occurring, fibrous silicate mineral," according to the EPA. Asbestos becomes deadly when microscopic fiber bundles bind and become airborne.

When inhaled, the results can be deadly and severely damage an individual's body through the development of mesothelioma cancer. In addition to mesothelioma, asbestos can cause lung cancer or asbestosis, in which fibrous tissue scars the lungs.

Asbestos that was mined was used in an array of industries, according to the EPA:

* thermal/acoustic insulator used for fire proofing

* roofing and siding shingles made with asbestos cement

* textured paint and patching compounds used on wall and ceiling joints

* artificial ashes and embers for gas-fired fireplaces

* stove-top pads

* vinyl floor tiles, flooring and adhesives

* asbestos blanket or tape for hot water and steam pipes

* oil and coal furnaces

Asbestos-Affected Children's Toys

Tracing asbestos can be a difficult process because it is often overlooked, especially since it is not a common ingredient in manufacturing products anymore, although, it was at one time. The ADAO has been testing thousands of products for the contamination of asbestos in toys as well as regular products. Currently, they have determined several toys to have had trace amounts of asbestos including:

* CSI Fingerprint Examination Kit

* Ja-Ru Toy Clay (found among three varieties of the product)

* Art Skills' Clay Bucket (asbestos found in six colors of clay)

Additionally, there are several other products the ADAO found with asbestos traces that are not directly related to children's toys, but could still affect a child's health. One of the major concerns is use of talc baby powder on babies, which could contain small amounts of asbestos. Other products that have been found with asbestos contamination, according to the ADAO, include:

* Scotch High Performance and All Weather Duct tapes

* DAP Crack Shot Spackling Paste

* DAP 33 Window Glazing

* Gardner Leak Stopper

The organization also found that hair rollers, hot plates, powdered cleansers and small appliances were at risk for adversely affecting public health with asbestos fibers. The organization noted that these products are all being sold at national retail chains including:

* Wal-Mart

* Costco

* Toys "R" Us

* Home Depot

* Lowe's

* Macy's

* Bed Bath & Beyond

* CVS

Consumer Affairs, a Web-based consumer news and resource center, issued the following tips to assist parents, relatives and friends with purchasing toys for children, in order to better protect children from asbestos exposure. The list includes the following:

* Be a vigilant shopper and read all warnings that may include a toy breaking, containing small parts or fire and choking hazards.

* Read product reviews that are both done by independent panels and consumers.

* Research information on the most recent product recalls.

* Inspect toys; any toys that are broken should be thrown away.

* Research how, where and when a product was created.

What to do if Your Child is Exposed to Asbestos

If a child is exposed or even may have potentially been exposed to asbestos containing tremolite, it is imperative that medical assistance is sought immediately. Because of the nature of asbestos-induced conditions, if a child is exposed to asbestos and goes untreated as if everything were fine, they could develop mesothelioma cancer years later, which is why immediate medical care is advisable.

Because asbestos exposure among children is considered extremely avoidable, developing a lawsuit for damages incurred may be a necessary step. Victims should located an experienced mesothelioma attorney to learn more about developing a mesothelioma lawsuit.

One group of people that have been particularly impacted by asbestos exposure is shipyward workers and their families.  Asbestos was so prevalent in the construction of ships because of its fire retardant qualities and durability.  During a ships construction, the workers would typically handle asbestos insulation products and consequently inhale large amounts of toxic dust.  Unfortunately, many of these workers have died because of this asbestos exposure. 

One thing we can all do is try to raise public awareness about asbestos exposure and the link to lung cancer and mesothelioma.  One good study is called, "Asbestos exposure: factors associated with excess cancer and respiratory disease mortality." By Henderson VL, and Enterline PE.  Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1979; 330:117-26.  Here is an excerpt:

"A cohort of 1075 men who completed their working lifetimes with an asbestos company, worked at a facility in the United States, and retired with a company pension during the period 1941--67 was updated for deaths through 1973. The average length of employment was 25 years, and all had been exposed to asbestos dust. Respiratory cancer and pneumoconiosis-pulmonary fibrosis mortalities were examined in relation to cumulative dust exposure and to other factors after taking into account cumulative dust exposure. Men who worked in the production of asbestos cement pipe exhibited a higher risk of respiratory cancer, as did men with some crocidolite asbestos exposure. Because these two groups overlap, we could not be certain that crocidolite asbestos was responsible for the increased risk. Men working in general plant maintenance displayed a striking lack of deaths due to pneumoconiosis-pulmonary fibrosis, as compared with production workers and with maintenance personnel assigned to specific departments. Five mesothelioma deaths were observed at age 65 and over. Three of these deaths occurred during the period 1970--3."

Another good study worth looking at is called, "Asbestos-related pleural disease and asbestosis: a comparison of CT and chest radiography" by AC Friedman, SB Fiel, MS Fisher, PD Radecki, AS Lev-Toaff, and and DF Caroline - Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Temple University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA 19140.  Here is an excerpt:

"High-resolution CT (HRCT) has the ability to demonstrate both asbestos-related pleural disease and parenchymal abnormalities consistent with asbestosis. The role of CT in the diagnosis of asbestosis can be defined by comparing it with radiography. We evaluated 60 men who had a history of occupational exposure to asbestos and whose outside chest radiographs were considered abnormal. Chest radiographs (inside films) and HRCT were performed in all patients at our institution and were interpreted independently by experienced radiologists. Outside film results were compiled from the submitted reports. The final conclusion regarding the interpretation of the radiologic examinations was determined by consensus when disagreements existed. Positive predictive values (the likelihood that a positive report is correct) for pleural disease were: outside films 56%, inside films 79%, HRCT 100%. The positive predictive values for parenchymal disease were: outside films 51%, inside films 83%, HRCT 100%. The addition of HRCT to chest radiography is most useful in eliminating false-positive diagnoses of asbestos-related pleural disease caused by subpleural fat and false-positive diagnoses of parenchymal asbestosis in patients with extensive plaques or emphysema obscuring lung detail. The interpretation of chest radiographs in patients exposed to asbestos is often extremely difficult and subjective, and we recommend that positive findings (except calcified plaques) be confirmed with HRCT."

This article should not be construed as medical advice.  Its purpose is to raise awareness.  If you found either of these excerpts interesting, please read the studies in their entirety.