When Asbestos Was a Gift Fit for a King

One of my dads friends had a business installing asbestos siding in the 1960's. He's in his 80's and seems fine. On the other hand his wife died of mesothelioma 20 years ago.

If one has this genetic disposition, it's apparently possible that even moderate or modest exposure early in life is enough to cause the (extremely deadly and almost impossible to treat) disease at some point later in life. This point can come years or decades after exposure.

And if one isn't predisposed, then even heavy exposure to asbestos probably won't cause mesothelioma. It is of course still possible to get other really shitty lung problems from the mineral regardless of genetic factors, but meso itself seems to be very selective. This apparently is why it's relatively rare despite widespread asbestos use for decades before recent years in much of the world.

I visited it on school trips as a kid, and I'll never forget the sight of so many indigenous relics scrolling past the bus window. To think that it is all off-limits now, due to asbestos, is a real tragedy. Australia has so many of these kinds of deeply rich, deeply interesting sights that are tucked away behind a mining company's fence ..

So, its not like asbestos - in Australia - is only killing people. Its also masking a very significant degree of cultural heritage from the current generation that could benefit from understanding it more ..

That said, who knows what other material might come about that causes problems 40 years later in a different way. We will learn when it comes but at least we’re starting to be more aware of potential problems.

[0] https://www.materialstoday.com/carbon/articles/s136970211270...

I don't think it would. Asbestos is a totally natural product. It would probably bypass many of our testing standards.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041008X1...

If any of the people who disagree would like to share why that would be great.

Were it hard/impossible to finely weave it back in those days?

https://mesowatch.com/asbestos-exposure/risk-industries/asbe...

>Because of this enormous risk of death from asbestos exposure and general mining operations, many experts consider asbestos mining to be one of the most dangerous occupations in history.

But yes, the long-term effects are the real problem.

https://ehs.oregonstate.edu/asb-when > When is Asbestos Dangerous?

If it breaks however, the fibers go everywhere, especially to your lungs where they stay. People working with it died of all kinds of problems, but mostly cancer in the lungs iirc.

According to the official CDC report which was used by the EPA to ban new uses of asbestos [1] the gist is that asbestos isn't a traditional poison. We measure most "poisons" in terms of Lethal Dose (LD50) or roughly paraphrased "how much of this would it take to kill 50% of subjects." We tend to think of something, like cyanide, as "very poisonous" if a small amount of something will kill you very quickly. But we measure lethality in other ways - "lethal concentration" (LC0 - whats the lowest concentration in air that has been observed to caused a fatality, LC50 at what concentration is 50% affected), lowest observed adverse affects level (will this mess you up like lead poisoning?), lethal time (LT0 - lowest amount of time observed to cause fatality, LT50 - time to cause fatality in 50% of population), and a host of others.

Asbestos doesn't have an observed LD50 (at least not in that report). No one has died within a few hours of inhaling asbestos like they would if, say, they ate Fugu pufferfish.

What it does have, is a very low LC0 and very long LT0 numbers. Only a little bit needs to get into your lungs, which unlike the pathway we observe in cigarettes, will stick around for a very long time, where it will eventually (on a long enough timeline) cause cancer. Exposure makes these numbers go up. 10% of asbestos mill workers die of mesothelioma, 2% of people who work with asbestos insulating boats and planes die of mesothelioma or related cancers - most within 5-20 years. If you're a smoker, the synergistic effects can further increase your risk of cancer by 90x(!). Other figures in other reports are a bit lower, but the panic was over the issue that there was no 'safe' dose of asbestos unlike with other toxins and no trivial environmental remediation.

I only gave it a scan; happy to be corrected by someone more informed on the subject.

[1] https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp61.pdf - since updated in 2001

Yes and no.

There's a lot of other nastier industrial products. Asbestos is in the public consciousness as particularly bad because it was used widely before we know it reliably caused cancer.

That said, it also reliably gives people cancer so it's bad reputation is not exactly undeserved.

That said, the probability is low for any given fiber. There is asbestos in aftermarket break pads, meaning if you live in a major city, you probably breath in small amounts regularly.