Australia to ban engineered stone
abc.net.au
abc.net.au
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/202...
SafeWork's view is that the industry is too much of a non-compliant mess to recommend any other option apart from a complete ban.
How dare these union thugs get in the way of clear economic progression that provides far more benefit than harm!
The only exception is if producers are already selling at essentially the marginal cost of production for the whole industry. This scenario is extremely rare, especially in base materials.
Like here there are a bunch of people who have lung cancer now. And there's probably a bunch more who will get it from doing all the work up until now.
And this has been in the news for a while I think. I imagine that despite all of this, there's still stuff coming up. The first case was reported back in 2015. 8 years is a pretty long time to think "hey, maybe we should do stuff so our workers won't get lung cancer". The fact that that is not incentive enough is probably a signal that there's not really much left to do, honestly.
No amount of 'criminal liability' will bring back loved ones.
It’s also unclear whether there is a similar safe alternative, so banning one type of product might just shift the problem to a new toxic and dangerous material.
The only solution is to enforce safety regulations and/or come up with better ones. At one time, when I decided I’d sand a wall in my house, I ended up attaching a vacuum cleaner to my sander so that the dust wouldn’t go everywhere. Wearing the filter mask was also extremely uncomfortable, so it might be worth to design better breathing PPEs that are more human-friendly to drive acceptance up.
It’s a judgement about the stupid location the law was applied when it could have been applied somewhere else, achieved the same short term effect, but then would have incentivized solutions to the problem.
Criminal liability is a massive government intervention which is the exact opposite of allowing market forces to decide.
For instance, if I drive 10mph over the speed limit and hit somebody and kill them, I may be criminally liable. However the percentage of people in this set charged (and convicted) in such situations is not high.
You’re likely thinking of civil infractions.
These people know perfectly well they need to take precautions.
> the re-emergence of silicosis in engineered stone workers is also due to a failure of compliance with existing WHS laws … PCBUs [persons conducting a business or undertaking, who are subject to WHS laws] have not done all that is reasonably practicable to eliminate or minimise those risks, and workers have not taken reasonable care for their own health and safety and that of others [which is a criminal offence]. Finally, there has been insufficient compliance and enforcement actions by WHS regulators to drive behaviour change in the sector … A lower silica content engineered stone is not expected to result in improvements in compliance. The features of the sector that have contributed to the current levels of non-compliance remain – the sector is comprised of mostly small businesses with few barriers to entry and a lower understanding of WHS obligations.
National Dust Disease Taskforce Final Report - June 2021
https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/national-du...
[PDF] https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022...
Page 11: (Recomendations ...)
D) Commence the processes required to implement a full ban on the importation of some or all engineered stone products if, by July 2024:
– There is no measurable and acceptable improvement in regulatory compliance rates for the engineered stone sector as reported by jurisdictions; and
- Evidence indicates preventative measures are not effectively protecting those working with engineered stone from silicosis and silica-associated diseases
I don't think this is correct. The SafeWork report (recommending a complete ban) superseded this health report, and the ministers appear to have aligned on the SafeWork recommendation.
My goal was more to point out that two+ years ago a recommendation was made (as quoted above) and there's currently six months left on the clock for those changes recommended to be met.
SafeWork is likely to correct to conclude that the building industry has made no real strides in the past 24 months and won't do squat in the six months remaining.
This may also be a hammer drop intended to put the fear of lost revenue from upmarket kitched remodels into the actors and scare them into action in order to lift the ban.
That's a whole other level of real politik that sometimes plays behind the scenes .. carrots & sticks.
It’s highly fragmented, dominated by men and specifically younger men, who self-select for a high tolerance of risk and a low tolerance of rules.
By the time they find out that they’re not invulnerable and rules exist to protect them, it’s too late.
Hell I work in agronomy and it’s hard enough getting seasonal helpers to wear earplugs when riding ATVs all day. Then there was an old supervisor from a former oil change and tire repair shop job I had, who had hand shakes from nerve damage due to automotive chemical exposure, and he was actually comparatively decent about PPE, especially for helpers.
My response was "No, Carl — they're sound dampeners SO I DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN TO YOUR CONSTANT BITCHING SO MUCH."
Old journeyman immediately took me under his wing, and we were inseparable (he even would wear PPE around me). I learned much from this "kind" old curmudgeon.
Why the machismo exists in construction, I'll never know — just as many former co-workers will never understand how I was one of them, once.
Why is this? I often see firsthand or on television people working in dusty environments with little or no concern for the dust that they are breathing in. It especially horrifies me when I know that dust is silica or like, or perhaps even contains some asbestos. I wince every time I see professional stonemasons chiseling away or using diamond saws to cut up slabs of stone without wearing masks. Surely, if anyone, they ought to be aware of the risks.
I've occasionally had to work in such environments for short periods but I've never done so without wearing a n95/P2 type mask and even then I consider them inadequate protection and go to considerable effort to minimize my time in the dusty environment. I even go to the extent of putting on the mask and removing it outside in a dust-free area so as to minimize breathing in any residual dust.
Whenever I ask others around me why they don't take precautions I never get sensible answers or they offer paltry excuses such as masks fog one's glasses.
Despite all the exposure about the dangers of asbestos in recent decades, the greater dangers of dust inhalation generally just hasn't sunk in. The question is why.
In many respects this rejection seems to closely mimic the rejection of masks during COVID. One wonders what's actually needed to overcome the resistance to wearing PPE. (We've overcome PPE resistance re visibility with the full acceptance of fluorescent hi-vis clothing, so why not dust masks?)
You say PPEs have bad side effects but as I've mentioned those whom I've asked never explain what they are. Why? And why are they undocumented?
Re sucking dust away, active air pressure masks etc., I agree they're a good idea and ought to mandatory in many environments. I accept sucking dust away as the norm on my table saws and planers etc. but even so I still wear a mask (although not an active pressure one) as the sucking up is not 100% effective. Also, what happens in environments where it is not practical to suck away dust such as a stonemason working up on the side of a building or such? The only solution has to be PPEs.
Its no biggy in an office, and I guess for a ton of people that's the reference "work". On construction sites etc you get a ton of pseudo protection where people pretend to comply to escape the jurists and egghead harassment.
I totally agree that stone lung is horrific, but I also think a ton of laws fail that protection goal miserable on purpose.
So what's the solution? It seems that in some situations there is none. Perhaps in those situations the only move would be to inform people of the risks of not wearing masks and let them decide whether to work there or not.
That said, persons who later develop a dust-borne disease are likely to change their tune when the seriousness of their predicament sinks in and then retrospectively blame their employer for allowing them to work sans masks. Moreover, no insurance company would tolerate such a situation if aware of the fact—hence the laws, even if they're unworkable.
Working with power tools while not seeing much due to fogged glasses is much less safe than breathing in the dust, though...
The difference with the early aviation compared to dust-borne diseases is that with aviation it was unclear at the outset what it was that needed regulating and the extent of any such regulation so it's understandable that regulation grew with the industry whereas the effects of dust-bourne diseases on health had been known about for centuries.
Two thousand years ago the Romans knew about the dangers of asbestosis and mesothelioma as the result of mining asbestos although they called it the wasting disease—only criminals and bad slaves were sent to mine it. Similarly, volcanic ash and sand/silica on the lungs disease—whose medical name I cannot pronounce let alone spell—and coal miners' black lung disease have also been known about for centuries.
Moreover, in more recent times (late 19th and early 20th Centuries) these diseases, especially asbestosis and mesothelioma were the subject of government inquiries and the dangers well established. For example, the British Admiralty held inquiries after workers and sailors became ill from the effects of breathing asbestos dust from the lagging on steam pipes. That nothing was done and that no significant regulations introduced as a matter of expediency has to be one of the most unconscionable government decisions of all time—that delayed the introduction of effective regulation in respect of asbestos for over 80 years.
(The lack of regulation is a bit close to home, my father, a mechanical engineer, was exposed asbestos on war ships during WWII and afterwards in the power industry and it severely affected his health. Also, I recall as kids when my brother and I would visit my father's place of employment asbestos was that common we'd make mud balls out of it and throw them at each other. By that time government was well aware of the dangers of asbestos and black lung disease for going on a century but had still done nothing about it.)
This mainly came out of a series of lawsuits and happened industry wide (the fear of millions of dollars of compensation was enough to get all the players to get very serious)
Or anything else. There is enough options around and enough supply for that.
> The federal government will also impose a ban on imported engineered stone to provide an "additional layer of enforcement and deterrence at the border", however the date has not been finalised yet.
The only party in opposition were the engineered stone vendors.
That seems a pretty concerning stance for small businesses. What's next? Ban microbreweries because they don't properly manage the risks of CO2 asphyxiation? Ban small-shop mechanics because they routinely get brake fluid on their hands?
Well-enforced safety regulations are a good thing for everyone. Banning small businesses because regulating them is hard seems... economically undesirable.
That did not happen, so we banned them. I see no reason that we could not replace engineered stone with multiple other things.
True, and CFCs are exceptionally useful chemicals and it's a damn nuisance they've been banned because it's easier to ban them than to get industry to comply with strict regulations in respect of their use.
The trouble is that it's not only CFCs that are banned, there's mercury, lead and any number of valuable and useful chemicals that have been withdrawn from use simply because people use them irresponsibly. One wonders when this practice will cease or how long it will be before industrial development is noticeably slowed by the absence of these materials.
Elsewhere, I have been very critical about the century-long delay in bringing about dust-borne regulations especially so in respect of asbestos dust. That said, I'm not for banning its use outright.
Unfortunately, governnents prefer outright banning in preference to sophisticated regulations and I reckon in the long-term this is unsustainable.
If we're to progress we need sophisticated regulations. Users of certain chemicals/materials need to be licensed before they're allowed to handle them. The license would required knowledge of not only safe handling but also safe long-term installation and storage and eventual proper recycling and disposal somehat akin to the way nuclear materials are handled now (I say that as someone who has worked in the nuclear industry). Also, the failure of a licensee to comply strictly with regulations would not only result in loss of license but in many cases being subjected to criminal sanctions.
Such harsh regulation may seem expensive and difficult to implement and in some instances it will be but it's better than outright banning.
We also need an all together new approach to training people about dangerous materials and their correct handling, as to date it's been an abject failure. Either people have become chemical phobic to the extent of ridiculousness or they're blasé about them to the extent of foolhardiness. Overcoming such general ignorance can only be done through the education system and it needs to start at a very early age—from kindergarten onwards.
Keep in mind that as science and engineering develops there will be ever-increasing numbers of dangerous materials developed, the only way we as a society will be able to handle them safely is with new ways of thinking about safety—and that involves not being frightened of materials but knowing how to handle them carefully and in proper proportion to their intrinsic dangers.
According to the link in the grandparent comment, I think it was the production process that they didn't want the expense of enforcing safety standards on. Not the end product itself. Hence the comment about banning an industry.
And not because the production process inherently deadly, but because of rampant non-compliance with safety standards.
The article does not explain why an obvious solution: certification and severe (severe!) fines for non-compliance would not work. Probably a political issue.
I've noticed in the article that trade unions applauded the ban, and I wonder why.
No. It is the cutting of the product (often on-site at the residence) to fit the kitchen or bathroom that causes silica dust. Workers not wearing mask protection and not using proper ventilation fans and vacuums breathe in the dust.
The odd thing is silica dust is also present in natural stones like quartz (very popular in America right now). I don’t understand how this legislation will help since it only bans engineered stone.
I thought the product was actual tabletops and the like. But this is terminology.
What I did not quite get was that what I'd call "production", i.e. making the actual tabletops, happens not at a central facility but at customer homes. This is much harder to monitor and control.
In this light the ban makes more sense.
Unless you can pierce the corporate veil or somehow make owners criminally liable for low safety standards, levelling huge fines at small companies is meaningless, as the company will just end up declaring bankruptcy and the workers will just get hired by the next company over, with equally low standards.
Silicosis takes years to appear so the proximal link is too weak for post facto punishment to have much deterrent effect. It is much more like asbestos in this way, which can also be safely handled but has also been banned.
The contractor who installed the bench top for us was however very diligent in alerting us to what safety measures we should follow should any on-site cutting be required at our place. Which it wasn’t in the end. So at least he was aware that the sawdust is a major health hazard.
But that’s one contractor, which does not represent an entire industry. Engineered stone is fashionable and I imagine there are many black sheep out there doing it for cheap with under-trained or unsupervised personnel.
> The report found there was no safe level of silica, concluding: "The use of all engineered stone should be prohibited."
I don't understand this logic. Silica is also present in natural stone too! If they are not going to ban natural stone countertops, I don't get why the industry was not allowed to pursue low-silica engineered stone that met or exceeded real stone.
> "It's not just about the silica, it's something specific about the engineered stone products that's causing such a significant issue in workers fabricating these products."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-05/study-finds-safety-co...
> "What we found ... was that the natural products we had in the panel of products that we assessed actually caused the biggest inflammatory response," Professor Zosky said.
I'm not sure why they are saying it's the engineering. Their own study says that natural stone products are worse than the engineered products!
It's probably there's a larger number of cases of silicosis from engineered products despite it being safer. And that's probably because it's easier to cut in the field so people do it more often.
You can see the full study here:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/resp.14625
> In conclusion, this study is the most comprehensive assessment of the physico-chemical characteristics of dusts generated from a wide range of resin-based engineered stones (of high- and reduced-silica contents) and the first to assess how these characteristics relate to the lung cell response, at a scale large enough to potentially identify components of these materials that could be linked to the severity of disease among ES workers. We showed that exposure to high levels of RCS dust during ES processing is likely contributing to disease severity in this occupational group, however, other inorganic components of ES dust, in particular Co and Al, may also be strong contributors. Furthermore, some of the highest inflammatory responses recorded were observed in non-engineered stones, further supporting the view that components other than crystalline silica may be contributing to the pathogenesis of severe silicosis. The outcomes of this study have important implications for future regulation of ES products as they challenge the common view that reducing the crystalline silica alone will eliminate disease risk.
The key take-away I get from that is that it's not silica specifically, but something else about engineered stone that is making it so unsafe to work with. And that's why they are banning the whole product class.
In theory perfectly cured resins are supposed to be non-toxic (eg food safe) but you can get sensitised to specific mixes or accelerants and sometimes the curing isn't perfect...
EDIT: It looks like they considered it but didn't come to any firm conclusions, further research needed etc.
I think the important distinction is that with natural stone, much more is cut to fit from the factory (which is easier to handle dust) vs cut on site.
Granite countertops are typically cut off-site with a waterjet, which creates zero dust.
Since it's a luxury but not a super expensive product, the more expensive process of precise measurement, off-site waterjet/laser cutting is not suitable.
What they aren't confident is their ability to force the installers handle it safely. When it gets to the site there is often a corner to be shaved, or a unexpected hole needed. It only takes slightly more effort to use a wet saw, but to contractors time is money and it's their health they are putting as risk - so it's OK, right? The site is typically a new house or small business. Policing those sites effectively is prohibitively costly, suing for the consequences after they happen doesn't work because the disease takes years to manifest so they've killed a few people by the time it happens.
So in typical Australian fashion they've decided people making decisions in their 20's they maim or kill them in their 30's is not OK (that is what's happening), so they take what seems drastic action. It's entirely in keeping with the Australian way. We were the first insist on plain paper packaging for cigarettes for example, ditto on seat belts, we enforce total alcohol bans in towns where alcohol related violence is deemed too high (typically we see a 60% drop in alcohol related crime when that happens).
What alternatives are there to engineered stone?
* Natural stoneI don't understand how you could possibly draw this conclusion based on the evidence we have.
>However doctors began sounding the alarm after noticing a surge in stonemasons developing silicosis, a long-term and sometimes fatal lung disease caused by inhaling unsafe levels of silica dust.
This is all in the last couple decades where doctors were well aware of and tracking cases. It’s very well documented and there’s no debate about cases increasing. The only debate is what exact is it about ES that makes it so much more deadly then natural stone.
It is very much linked to the use of ES not “better tracking of cases”
You clearly did absolutely no research or even read the linked article and are responding with you feelings on the matter.
> Hoy said that long before stonecutters started struggling to breathe, the sheer amount of silica in many kinds of engineered stone — upwards of 90% — should have made it obvious that the material was risky to cut and grind, especially in workplaces without sophisticated measures to control dust.(1)
> But scientists and regulators have grown concerned about whether recommended strategies such as wet cutting, proper ventilation and wearing respirator masks can do enough to protect workers from dust so high in silica. Cal/OSHA officials have generally described silicosis as preventable, but also caution that with 93% silica(2) content, “safe use of engineered stone may not be possible” even with proper workplace practices.(1)
(1) https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-11-19/why-cali...
2. https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA37...
Don't get me wrong our politicians are just as morally bankrupt and self-serving, but it doesn't happen at the same coordinated scale.
Lobbying means someone is trying to influence the government through things as simple as advertising campaigns. Those exist in AU.
Lobbying often involves implicit or explicit offers of campaign funding, PAC support/opposition, and gifts that skirt the edge of what is legally bribery.
Without any funding to the politician involved, a lobbyist’s job is to convince the politician of voting a particular way.
A sleazy lobbyist may try money in indirect ways for/against the politician, but a regular one will try to raise awareness through advertising and public pressure. It’s all lobbying.
Lobbying has a pretty clear definition which you are trying to stretch here.
Let me put it this way: Airing an ad about a government rep or piece of legislation is PR or advertising. Using the threat or promise of airing that ad to try to talk a politician into doing something is lobbying.
Like, when tobacco cost a megabuck per oz in Queen Elizabeth times people smoked a pipe once in a while and in the context of their high exposure to fireplace smoke it was no big deal. Fast forward to when cigarettes cost 10c/pack and the marketing guys are selling them to 8 year olds...now it's a huge health problem.
it's a luxury product, far from the cheapest countertop options.
I suggest people look at the actual numbers -> https://lungfoundation.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/NSP...
Every one of them over zero is bad, but I was surprised how small the sample of active cases actually are. It would have been better to show the change year on year though.
I was surprised that the sample rate was so few, that is active cases.
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/safety-topic/hazards/cr...
From what I can tell, the law itself allows for products under 1% silica. Now where did I read that ...
"According to the ministers’ communique, exceptions will be introduced for the removal, repair, minor modification or disposal of engineered stone installed before 1 July 2024, as well as for products with trace levels of silica under 1%."
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/13/engin...
Yes, that is a massively higher hurdle than natural stone has to meet.
One of the "Suggested safer alternatives" is Granite which can have silica content up to 45% (Engineered stone being 95%+)
So instead of 2 years to develop silicosis it will instead take 4 years of working with the "safe alternatives"?
All the people who were cutting engineered stone with unsafe methods, are now just going to be cutting granite and other natural stone with the same safety practices that led to this being banned.
I really don't get it.
This whole "But we tried to enforce the safety standards on the industry" is a load of nonsense - How many businesses got fined or shut down for unsafe practices that caused silicosis for their staff? None.
The cycle will continue, and we'll be back here in 10 years when the "safe alternatives" are getting banned.
But I imagine there's a method of safely working with this material. And, there's ALWAYS going to be hazardous materials - you can't ban them all. You raise the standard of the people working with materials. This feels like - oh melting steel is too hot and can be dangerous - we'll ban melting steel.
NOW, if it's like asbestos and the end consumer can get affected then I 100% agree with this ruling.
You can read the report if you'd like, basically they weighed up a bunch of options. https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/202...
> NOW, if it's like asbestos and the end consumer can get affected then I 100% agree with this ruling.
It is - the final fitment is usually on site with dry cuts made contaminating the area it's installed in.
> "We actually not only saw people who were directly cutting and grinding the stone, but we saw people who were just sweeping up the work site after the stone had been cut," says Rose. "They were exposed to the silica particles that were suspended in the air just with housekeeping duties."
So, basically everyone needs to wear a P100 all the time when on site until the site has totally been cleaned up. In a manufacturing environment, if you're on the floor you wear a mask and there must be a dust collection system and tools that perform dust collection or mitigation. In this case that'd be water saws.
Read the threads here, a lot people don't like wearing respirators. The outcome isn't surprising.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/10/02/7660282...
Businesses don't want to invest, and even if they do, they find it hard to find any financing as banks don't want to lend. It makes such tooling expensive, and thus a lot of small businesses don't (or can't) upgrade their tooling.
Every construction site should have a HEPA-filtered vacuum with a filter bag. (The bagless kind is to be reserved for special cases that need it, and people should wear respirators when emptying it, TYVM.). Brooms are for non-vacuumable debris only, and subcontractors should be reminded of this regularly.
Surely you use mist sprayers during building demolition though? That's where I first saw them.
The industry is set up so you only get paid for doing the job. If doing it unsafely means doing it faster or being more comfortable then a lot of small time contractors will take that short term gain despite the long term risks.
I don’t know how we incentivize doing the right thing more here.
Also, solutions that require people to consistently do uncomfortable things are not realistic; we know they will fail to comply - just like we would - and they will get sick.
Approaches like this would work but are also a huge can of worms.
In most countries (and I'd expect to include Australia), there cannot be a blanket invasion of privacy - and it'd require a court order. The amount of paper would would be ridiculous, then what if I do that on my own, or I used a cousin to do it for me, for free?
> what if I do that on my own, or I used a cousin to do it for me, for free?
You and your cousin could decide to go and mud wrestle crocodiles, but we'd still ban opening an amusement park where that was offered to members of the public.
Seriously, who in their right mind is going to deny entry to an auditor making sure that your builder isn't an idiot?
Certainly if workers are being coerced into not doing the right thing, that's a problem, and employers need to be fined into oblivion if they pull that crap.
If it's uncomfortable or takes longer to do it safely, that cost should be passed on to the person paying for the work.
Perhaps if the order of responsibility were reversed, it would lead to better outcomes.
The only feasible order is government, employer, then worker. The government is tasked with the making the rules and surprise inspections, and the rest follows from there.
Is it dusty? Wear a mask.
Is it loud? Hearing protection.
And everyone should wear shoes with steel caps.
If you see someone with a bandana over their mouth in sandals you know they are unsafe. They know it too. This is not something that is difficult to understand.
Who polices the customer? The logistics of making everyone a cop make no sense to me.
If you see your contractor not using PPE, you just tell them to put it on. Just like you'd tell him to do it properly if you saw him cutting corners somewhere else.
Contractors want to get paid, so they generally tend to do what the person paying the bill asks them to do.
Bonus points for being able to easily just run an external air hose feed into the helmet when working in environments that don't kill you if you dare to take the helmet off in an emergency.
Uh... tough shit? If you'll most likely get an often-fatal respiratory disease from not wearing your respirator, and you still don't wear your respirator, maybe that's just Darwin in action there.
Banning the entire thing is just dumb, assuming there are actually PPE and mitigations that will keep people healthy. If people don't follow the safety rules, they should be fired. If companies don't implement the safety rules, they should be fined a significant portion of their revenue.
If following the safety practices means it costs more to do a particular thing, then the people paying for that thing should pay more.
> I really don't get it.
Before engineered stone took off like crazy people were already cutting natural stone, working as stone masons, working at BGC quarries (stone mining, crushing, grading, delivery).
After engineered stone became fashionable the rates of silicosis in under 35 year old tradespeople spiked in a sharply noticable way.
After the engineered stone ban things will likely return to previous levels of "it happens but it's acceptably rare".
For whatever reason ( . . . insert theory . . . ) engineered stone manufacture and cutting is much much much worse wrt health issues.
For whatever reason your desk bound rational rule of thumb doesn't track against the data.
IIRC in the nineties and earlier, porcelain tile countertops were very common. Granite and marble were exotic.
Porcelain is high in silicates, but not so high in silica. Glaze is (I think) amorphous, like glass. And your average tile installer cuts with a wet saw.
Marble is mostly calcium carbonate. Granite contains lots of quartz.
I don't think Porcelain is as dangerous.
Reference: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/resp.14625
"The qualitative comparison of in vitro responses between the categories of particles we examined revealed some interesting patterns. Firstly, the ES dusts were the most potent stimulus in inducing cytotoxicity and pro-inflammatory responses in epithelial cells while the standard silica sample was particularly toxic to macrophages. All particles (ES, BM,NS and standard silica) showed some potential to promote IL-8 (CXCL8) and TNF-α production in macrophages, as well as IL-1β, with the exception of natural stone. These observations are consistent with our overarching hypothesis that particle characteristics are key drivers of the lung cell response and, therefore, the risk of disease. In more in-depth analyses with a focus on ES dusts, we found that the quartz concentration was significantly associated with the inflammatory response in macrophages. This is an important observation as there has been consistent rhetoric regarding the crystalline silica content of ES being the key driver of the high disease prevalence. 7,39Indeed, crystalline silica has been shown to be related to the dose-dependent macrophage accumulation response,40aggravated inflammatory cell infiltration, thickened alveolar walls and enhanced expression of collagens. 41However, the relationship between quartz and the macrophage inflammatory response was not the sole driver of the cellular responses we observed."
If you feel that way, take it up with:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/resp.14625
https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OSHA37...
and the tradies getting physical reactions in their lungs from the dust.
There are a whole lot of jobs that are safe when done properly and unsafe, when not done properly. It seems as if they are punishing an entire industry for not knowing what they didn’t know.
The PPE available for this sort of work is just not up to the job.
The other kind of obvious solution with engineered stone is to avoid cutting it at the installation site. If it's cut to spec at the factory in a controlled environment (surely not that difficult in this age of CAD design etc), you wouldn't be blasting dust around during installation.
It's reasonably safe for other people in cars, but it's hell for pedestrians, wheel-chair users and cyclists. So much so, that we have re-organised our whole society around avoiding this danger. Eg kids don't play on the streets anymore.
Cars and streets have also been getting safer here: advanced pedestrian and cyclist-aware AEB is already in many cars - and becomes mandatory in all new cars in Europe from July 2024. Streets are getting safer with better designs (more choke points, raised pedestrian crossings, etc), and speed limits being reduced in urban/residential areas.
I'm mostly worried not so much about the actual number of casualties, but about the avoidance actions people engage in, ie not playing outside.
Modified acrylic or compact laminate?
That will save lives.
But of course they're cheaper and lighter and probably still cheaper than stone even if you end up replacing them a couple of times over the lifetime of the kitchen...
Polished concrete is another decent alternative to engineered stone, although again perhaps not as durable.
(You still should use PPE and avoid inhaling it, of course!)
The 'engineered' stone is just very fine dust along with binders.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000888460...
It's just bog standard denialism
I'm building a house, and I have a stone countertop installed. None of the cutting was done on-site. All the work was done in a specialized workshop.
It's the silica plus the adhesive additives combined in your lungs that does the damage.
> In February 2021, a WorkSafe Inspector attended the workplace and observed an employee using a powered abrasive polishing tool to abrasively polish a slab of white coloured stone which was from the brand Stone Ambassador. The tool was being used without the required control measures in place. Instead, the employee was applying water to the stone from a bottle with a small hole in the lid when the tool was in use.
As per the rest of the comments here, it just seems that most tradies would rather literally die than implement any reasonable safety precaution.
I watched a grave marker carver absolutely bathing in dust with just a thin bandanna, I was in there for 5 minutes and was left choking in their hazardous work environment.
WitH sufficient PPE and dust control, it's not a problem. This is just barking up the wrong tree because they can't get workers to not be idiots, so they pick a scapegoat to ban at random. It's not fucking asbestos. It's apparent but ineffective motion by expediency.
Is it that or is it that someone doesn't want to pay for those industrial-scale air cleaners?
I got a little interested in particulate air quality during covid so I ran across the entrepreneurs selling them. You can probably make the air in a quarry as clean as in a surgery room, if you're willing to pay.
> A total of 12 successful prosecutions have been reported since 2021, with many related to the uncontrolled processing (dry cutting) of engineered stone materials
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/202...
It is. The air-driven rock drills were called "widowmakers" by miners because of silicosis that quickly reaped its operators.
> Silica is everywhere, we don't wear PPE to drive down a dirt road.
Silica down the road is not in the form of fine dust.
My theory: engineered stone allowed us plebs to get stone benches. Previously we had stainless, Formica and other bench tops that were less toxic to work with.
Maybe it cuts so easily that they skip using water.
> So instead of 2 years to develop silicosis it will instead take 4 years of working with the "safe alternatives"?
It isn’t a good idea to assume linear effects, especially with biology.
Just like heavy metals, some poisons, and some radioactivity.
Cutting natural stone is not a 100% safe occupation (like almost every occupation).
The specific difference here in the case in Australia is that since Engineered Stone first entered the Australian market in the early 2000’s medical data shows a significant rise in silicosis cases.
It's not that Before Engineered Stone was 100% safe,
it's that Post Engineered Stone appears to be considerably less safe.
Maybe it's the resin, maybe it's the particle size that's so uniform, maybe it's a coincidence . . .
With silica it’s a similar story, we were moving in to an older office block that again had asbestos in the ceiling tiles, and I was wearing a respirator because again electricians had drilled it in a bunch of places (inside this time, ended up going through very expensive decontamination a couple of days later including ripping out and replacing half of the brand new carpet). Anyway, I was in the server room where an air-conditioner guy was installing a split system unit, and he asked me about it and I told him what was happened. He then said something like “Oh yeah, I definitely should have been more careful with that kind of stuff when I was a young fella”, and then proceeds to start drilling through the double brick wall (to install the piping to the outdoor unit) with no mask or hearing protection… Cutting brick and concrete releases silica into the air too, most tradies just give no thought to using proper PPE…
Don’t be a scold, show the benefit, which is it’s easier to clean up after work.
Also latex gloves cause latex allergies frequently, vinyl gloves can be a good alternative.
A similar situation exists with mostly men who work outside and refuse to wear hats or sunscreen but develop malignant melanoma at far greater rates than other groups.
The definition of stupid is someone who believes they can smoke 5 packs a day and not get cancer. But it's the inconsiderateness of someone who doesn't love their family enough to watch out for their own health to not leave them prematurely rather than hurry death along.
He is also the only person I know who went cold turkey off a pack-a-day smoking habit, and years before indoor smoking bans and higher tobacco taxes. He gained a lot of weight that he’s never managed to shift, but he’s not touched a cigarette in over 30 years.
I’m sure he inhaled and handled plenty of other awful things on job sites without any pretense at PPE. He diligently wore a hard hat and steel-toed boots, and wouldn’t let any of his crews work without them. All I can guess is that he saw some gruesome, very preventable injuries, but vague figures on higher risk in old age just didn’t quite outweigh the inconvenience of PPE.
He can't have been much older than 20.
Realized how wrong I was when I woke up the next morning, felt like I had gritty sand in my eyes for two or three days.
I don't know how true that is but I've heard the same exact story from several different contractors. I do know that getting those linoleum/asbestos floor tiles ripped up will cost you a lot to get somebody to do it for you, but there aren't any real safety precautions you need to take since it isn't getting airborne, it's basically just pure profit for the contractor.
Asbestosis killed over 3,600 people in 2015. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestosis
Asbestos has affected all sorts or people, not just in the Navy. A close relative of mine who was a plumber has been diagnosed with it and it is an awful disease.
This woman is dying from cancer caused by inhaling asbestos dust while washing her husband's work clothes. https://www.thompsonstradeunion.law/news/news-releases/asbes...
My house has never burned down, therefor firemen, smoke alarms, and extinguishers are a scam. Got it.
You conflated the two.
Making harsher laws doesn’t seem to reduce the murder rate. Having a death penalty doesn’t seem to stop the murders.
The only reason asbestos is becoming less and less deadly is that we banned it decades ago.
Even if the husband took off his clothes, separately bagged them and then handed them to his wife to clean, it's hard to see how his exposure is less to the point where only she was diagnosed.
Different people can have dramatically different reactions to identical things. Totally insane, right?
Smoke usually means fire yes, but not always - could be someone heating oil on a pan.
I'm certainly on board with the belief asbestos increases likelihood of cancer. But so does driving through a dirty tunnel in peak hour traffic every day of your life. Quantifying which one were more likely to 'cause' your cancer is a not a straighforward thing.
I’ve heard of a number of these cases of wives of construction workers contracting these asbestos related diseases, it’s a population that had a higher chance of contracting them (just like construction workers themselves exposed to asbestos, of which there were many in this country). As I understand it, none of this is disputed by any of the medical science, epidemiology or experts in those fields…
Since asbestos is still around in various (mostly old) materials, it is possible to have additional exposure unknowingly, but it’s quite rare to contract something like asbestosis or mesothelioma without known exposure.
So over a population you'd generally expect to see the incidence correlate to the level of exposure, but not in a way that precludes unusual shit like this.
As an anecdote, you could even die from asbestos from working at a TV station... The Spanish public TV station used asbestos as insulation in stages and apparently, when there were vibrations from loud sound, applauses, etc., dust particles fell on the workers and public. A famous TV anchor, José María Íñigo, died from that, as well as other workers from the station.
Western European countries (including Spain, I am guessing) and Australia tended to use the most dangerous varieties of asbestos - crocidolite and amosite. By contrast, North America and ex-USSR countries used the less carcinogenic chrysotile.
There were (and are) still many mesothelioma and asbestos deaths in tradesmen building with chrysolite containing products here, as well as people whose only known exposure was renovation of houses containing it.
The general feeling was that every asbestos removal company goes out of business (dissolve, chapter 7) in order to escape the permanent liability of the stuff. At which point it now becomes a SuperFund issue.
In the commercial case we had also very clearly told them that it was asbestos containing but there was some miscommunication to the workers, so they just drilled all these holes…
Anyway, at the end of the day, while there are rules for commercial buildings to have asbestos registers, I wouldn’t expect every homeowner to know what every part of their house is made of, but at the same time, basically every building built for a period of more than 60 years in Australia contains (or contained) asbestos containing materials - so it’s a pretty scary lack of training or ignoring of the risks for somebody working in the building industry to not take even basic precautions when at least 1/3 or so of the houses these people are working in contains asbestos. For the solar guys, the eaves are the most likely place for it to exist, because even when houses have been pretty extensively renovated inside and had a lot of the AC sheeting removed indoors (as mine has), or might not have had asbestos sheeting inside originally (plaster was more expensive, so a more premium finish), it’s one part that was very likely to have still been AC sheeting (since it was mould resistant) and much less likely to have been replaced with non-asbestos fibreboard in the meantime.
You've probably crossed a road at a non-ideal location right? Because you had somewhere to be and you figured you were paying attention - the risk was managed. Same dynamic basically.
Zero compliance with hard hats, straddling a 4th story window without fall protection, incredibly sketchy scaffolding, dust everywhere etc. I was half expecting a worker fatality at some point.
Though I'm not sure I'd blame the Germans (other than for very lax oversight) it was an entirely Eastern European work crew. Which seems to be the case for many job sites around here. Bunch of young folks hustling for money to take home with zero regard for health and safety.
https://www.nrk.no/vestland/xl/kvartsstovet-som-gjer-folk-sj...
Seems to work fine in Google Translate.
It’s honestly remarkable.
20 mph over gets a one month driving ban plus about a 200 EUR fine.
Only the longer, rural stretches of Autobahns still have unlimited speed, and your insurance probably has the condition that they won’t pay out if you were going over the national recommended limit (130 km/h, or about 80 mph)
It’s a looser driving environment than most of its neighbors (Switzerland is covered in speed cameras), but it’s nowhere near the nationwide speed track a lot of Americans imagine it is.
Get caught speeding enough, and you can lose your license for longer, or even for life. Driving is a privilege in Germany - there’s always the bus and train, or somewhere to move that has them.
The only thing different here is that we don’t have a general speed limit, if sections of the autobahn meet the safety requirements, they can be marked unrestricted. You can drive as fast as you want there, but the majority of sections are limited to 130km/h due to steep(ish) curves, visibility, traffic and noise pollution guidelines.
That said, we do love our Autobahn and there ARE quite a few unrestricted sections left, my favorite is the A30. All open, starting at the NL border up until Osnabrück.
Their reasons are usually bullshit, such as their Vape ban, which implies that border farce cant keep nicotine out of the country in this one specific product category.
I have no insight into Australia's workings here, in California this kind of WTF can happen in the sort of situation where there is an industry that is being disrupted/destroyed by the 'thing' in question and as a result a way is found to make the 'thing' bad (but not in a way that just says "It makes other options noncompetitive but in a way you can't argue with." Health issues are the go to straw man in that case.
You absolutely could create big fines for the contracting and construction companies that sold an engineered stone solution which would protect the workers as it would be noncompetitive to not follow the rules and risk a huge fine. But that wouldn't help the granite and stainless steel countertop folks would it? Or the contractors that install granite or stainless steel.
>So instead of 2 years to develop silicosis it will instead take 4 years of working with the "safe alternatives"
I doubt that the connection is linear. Half the silica doesn't mean double exposure time has the same effect.
I’m not sure it works like that?
With many things, a lower dose gives more time for repair mechanisms so the effect of a reduction could be outsized. I’d like to see some data.
Also, granite is likely more expensive. So less of it will be used.
In the extreme case they only feel sorry for animals or small children, since they are always innocent.
Exposure to RCS from engineered stone causes silicosis typified by a faster onset and more rapid progression than that caused by RCS [Respirable crystalline silica] from other sources, including natural stone.
When engineered stone is processed, the dust generated contains higher levels of RCS, and that RCS has different physical and chemical properties that likely contribute to the more rapid and severe disease. There is also evidence to suggest that other components of engineered stone may contribute to the toxic effects of engineered stone dust, either alone or by exacerbating the effects of RCS.
...
The increased risks posed by RCS from engineered stone, increased rate of silicosis diagnosis amongst engineered stone workers, and the faster and more severe disease progression amongst this group, combined with a multi-faceted failure of this industry to comply with the model WHS laws means that continued work with engineered stone poses an unacceptable risk to workers. The use of all engineered stone should be prohibited.
https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/202...
1. PPE can get in the way of being efficient.
From personal experience this is one of the most painful things. Engineers design equipment to meet requirements. The people setting these requirements are often bureaucrats who have no knowledge of what it feels like to be doing the manual labor. Some of them may never have even handled any heavy machinery in their life - the end result is you end up with unergonomic tools. Since, the workers are not the ones paying for the tools, the upper management will select things that hit their own KPIs. Some how you are expected to hit unrealistic throughputs with tools that dont work well with your PPE. End result is most people will neglect PPE and find ways around it.
2. PPE upkeep
One has to keep equipment in good condition. Using boots with holes is not going to be a good idea. Corporate culture however is such that they make replacing PPE very painful, in part because PPE is ridiculously expensive in certain contexts. Good managers and supervisors will make sure their crew has safe equipment but often have to take the blame if they overspend. Lazy managers/supervisors will make it a nightmare if anything gets damaged. Unfortunately the number of lazy supervisors far outstrips good supervisors. This can result in things like black markets for PPEs.
3. Workplace culture
It can be "manly" to do things in an unsafe manner. This takes a lot of work to solve but the best way to solve it is by trying to inculcate a culture where people don't cause suffering for others just because they suffered. There is no need to "pay forward" a malpractice. If someone abused you earlier for conforming to something, that doesn't give you the right to abuse your junior. The problem is people who do this kind of change often go unnoticed.
Year ago I was cleaning my flat after renovation, there was lots of dust settled everywhere and my first thought was - how do I protect my lungs? There were many one-time-use face masks in hardware store, but those masks did not look like good enough- mainly because of lack of filter. So I bought slightly more expensive aparatus with proper filters. Yet, trademen who were doing the work did not care, they were not wearing anything to prevent dust from being inhaled. I felt so bad for them that I was vacuuming whole place each evening when they were gone (including walls), so at least they would start with no dust... Still, I was wondering how much of their future suffer will be because I was not asking them to protect themselves...
Invest in some good PPE that doesn't get in the way. I have an air-fed mask I use when spraying lacquer, I do woodworking as a hobby. My small shop is set up with two different filtration systems to keep dust and VOC out of the air. I refuse to use isocyanate catalyzed compounds because of the health implications.
maybe it's because the "underlying problem" they are trying to address is people contracting and dying from silicosis
The government and various professional bodies tried to enforce the use of PPE when working with this material, but there has been a housing construction boom going on and a lot of corners were cut (hah!), resulting in young immigrant workers especially turning up in hospitals with lung cancer.
No matter how carefully you cut this stuff in a shop with a filtered HVAC, water sprays, and well-fitted respirators… there’s always that customer that just needs “one quick adjustment” on-site. One quick cut turns into one per day and a weird chest pain that just won’t go away.
So it’s been banned outright.
PS: Apparently engineered stone is mostly quartz (silica), whereas other bench top materials are typically other kinds of stone that don’t cause silicosis, or nowhere near at the same rate.
90–93%: 99.9% pure silica in grits and powder form constitutes; 7–10%: Matrix of unsaturated polyester resin with catalysts to help with ambient temperature curing, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineered_stone
Technically you can safely handle it, just like technically you can have lead or even asbestos in a lot of places. But some poorly paid worker ends up with ruined health in the end, so I can totally understand the ban.
If companies can't be penalized for that, then they'll pull a walmart and "forbid" their workers from taking shortcuts and then set quotas that are impossible to complete without said shortcuts.
If workers don't follow safety guidelines once, there's a simple solution: warning/firing them. If workers don't follow safety guidelines constantly, then the company is complicit in it.
One of life's more specific amusements is describing a system that's been in widespread successful use since for over a century – and then having someone confidently say that it's unworkable. It's called "no-fault worker's compensation", and you can read more about it here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_compensation
Australia already has these laws on the books! They just, apparently, didn't set a high enough price on silicosis.
> Especially when a large number of workers are self employed. You can send them bankrupt with a penalty, but then have to support the disabled worker with social security and health care.
Rules vary by state and I haven't looked them all up, but New South Wales has a remedy for this: self-employed workers in fields like construction are also required to provide worker's comp for themselves – and to make sure the money is actually there when needed, they're required to carry insurance.
Holes on the other hand tend to be done in the field. But, people don't wear PPE even though it's simple and easy to do.
I’ve never seen someone cut a countertop on site. They do it in a shop. (Why didn’t Australia instead ban all countertop cutting in shops that doesn’t use dustless tools?)
Hmm, I just looked it up. Home Depot sells the tool for under $30.
I would NOT recommend this to anyone though. At the time, the turn time and expense of having the counter removed, altered at a proper shop, redelivered and installed was prohibitively expensive.
This is in contrast to cutting dry, which causes all the swarf to fly into the air.
So the exposure isn’t zero, but it’s low. It would be interesting to see if it registers on a particle counter (Plantower, etc).
My 8yo son came out to see what was going on, looked at the workers doing the cut without masks, and said "silicosis ain't no joke" and went back inside. I've taught him well.
So not everything he says is wisdom beyond his years...
Not only is it stupidly messy, it's less precise, dangerous, and often the crews are too careless to protect the inside of the cabinet boxes (where the slug of stone that's being cut from the top will drop and bounce around).
And even if something is off, the drywall should be gouged to make the slab fit, rather than stone being cut onsite.
I give up. Everything is screwed.
Your job is temporary, but please wear a respirator. :-)
Do everyone a favor and call OSHA on your last day. Nothing about this sounds "okay".
are you saying that wearing the PPE is simple and easy to do, or did you mean they don't wear PPE because the job is so simple and easy to do?
You see it in factories too, where workers will disable safety devices just to save them a tiny amount of movement.
Maybe we should mandate people wear PPE, but if they decide to flaunt the rules and risk their health for no reason, I just don't really feel all that sympathetic.
A mandate isn't really necessary. Everyone involved has every incentive to cut stone in a shop rather than in the field.
The problem is people don't wear PPE. Guess what? Everyone already has a mandate to wear PPE.
Sometimes you can't fix stupid.
"Safe Work found that while silicosis cases could emerge in several industries, the numbers were "disproportionate" among engineered stone workers. Engineered stone workers also suffered a faster disease progression and were more likely to die from it, the report said."
The product is generally installed onsite in a fast paced building industry that doesn’t have time/room to do it properly and often no supervision (1-2 often independent trades doing the installs) to ensure the appropriate measures are actually taken.
The risk has already been known for a while and in practice still lots of “YOLO” onsite cutting without even respirators.
This reeks of unnecessary heavy-handedness that hurts everyone. The specified natural alternative (granite) is nearly half silica and is a known health hazard.
All this regulation does is allow sloppy work that'll kill people a little more slowly.
There's already an automatic process for this. They get silicosis.
But I agree, this would be good.
But I think the decision here is basically that, in practice, it's very difficult to actually get people to follow the required practices, in practice. As has been shown in practice.
I feel for the people who were early in the industry who had no idea this could happen to them, but now that it's known, if a contractor doesn't feel like taking appropriate precautions, then they get what they deserve.
Banning an entire industry because people cut corners is just dumb.
But I, personally, am happy to accept the 'Human Factors' side of reality.
It doesn’t just affect them. Everyone nearby gets exposed. People who come later to clean get exposed. Customers can get exposed.
asbestos was banned for similar reasons, or are you saying that it shouldn’t have been banned either because of “people cutting corners with ppe” - it too is perfectly safe when handled safely
Gas welding the material results in lead fumes. There is a big quarrel about the usage of lead in water pipe connector brass parts going on in the EU.
You can still find it all over the place in things like cabinet pulls, door handles, and even ceramic tile.
Asbestos can get into your air through accidental damage to insulation, or in the case of lead, paint chipping or pipes aging can do the trick. This is just something that happens incidentally through the regular lifetime of the material, not because someone decided to do something to it.
Opening up a dry wall on the other hand, will inevitably dust up the whole house.
Having workers wear PPE is the worst, last resort form of protection. Solutions like switching to safer materials and improving ventilation work much better in practice.
I completely disagree. Is it less comfortable than not wearing a mask? For sure. Do I consider it a burden to wear a P100 respirator when dealing with silica? Nope.
Have you had a professional fit test to see whether your respirator is making an adequate seal? Many folks wear these things far too loosely to pass a basic fitment test.
How many hours a day do you spend moving objects that weight >20lbs while wearing your respirator?
How often do you work on days >30C while decked out in your respirator?
Do you keep your face shaved baby smooth at all times?
Filter list: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0128/4037/0235/files/Full_...
It has large outter seals which are great if you wear glasses and it's extremely light. The inner seal is also pretty thick and I have shortish facial hair that doesn't impact the seal at all.
You wouldn't get wearing it while carrying etc. It's while cutting.
Don't get me a lot of establishments are probably not set up for proper dust control (eg cutting in a dust extraction room) but that's still not a reason to ban the product.
This was incredibly political. Our media outlets scared the crap out of everyone with a good month long campaign on it, so it became entirely political.
>How many hours a day do you typically spend wearing your respirator?
Minimum 6, as much as 14.
>Have you had a professional fit test to see whether your respirator is making an adequate seal?
Absolutely.
>How many hours a day do you spend moving objects that weight >20lbs while wearing your respirator?
~75% of any given shift.
>How often do you work on days >30C while decked out in your respirator?
About 2 months out of the year.
> Do you keep your face shaved baby smooth at all times?
Not any more! This was one of the driving factors in me leaving the job that required near full time respirator use, actually. I like my beard. :V
That said, I value my long term health much more than any discomfort throughout the current day to day. Give me that PPE, baby.
To me, saying "I work too many hours to wear PPE the entire time" is akin to saying "I drive too many hours to be sober the entire time."
Also nthing what other people said about just using a full face respirator if you don't like smaller variety. I don't like respirators as such but they do the job.
I have a short beard (5mm) and the 3M silicon masks [1] still have a very tight seal. So I don't think a smooth shave is necessary.
Or a PAPR if your job is willing to pay for one.
Engineered stone is undoubtedly more hazardous than natural stone, but (as the researchers quoted in this article suggest) there is no safe level of exposure to respirable crystalline silica. The problem of silicosis long pre-dates the advent of engineered stone and will remain even if the product is banned. If I were working with stone - engineered or natural - I'd want a respirator unless I was absolutely confident in the mitigation measures in place.
> Coal — There is a prevalent opinion that coal miners do not suffer from silicosis or tuberculosis. But coal mining may produce silicosis when the associated rock has a sufficiently high silica content [0]
> Analyses of speciments of rock drilled from various sites on Manhattan Island showed that the free silica content ranged from zero to 84 per cent. In the case of dry jackhammer drilling, 50 per cent of the silica particles were less than three to four microns in size, while with the water Leyner (wet) drill, 50 per cent of the particles were less than 1-8 microns in diameter. Of the 208 drillers, blasters and excavators examined, 42 per cent showed early, and 15 per cent well-developed silicosis. Evidence of tuberculosis, including both active and inactive cases, was present in nine per cent of the total number.
I believe miners of many types began suffering from silicosis when powered jackhammer drills were first introduced. It wasn't until people started dying that water began being piped to to the tip of the drill.
This document is old, but very interesting. Many of the questions being asked in this thread can be answered here. The various industries where silicosis can occur are outlined beginning on page 47.
[0] "SILICOSIS AND ITS PREVENTION" (1946) https://digirepo.nlm.nih.gov/ext/dw/37721440R/PDF/37721440R....
But the fact is, sufficient dust, of any material is dangerous. I have a friend who was hospitalized with a literal hole in his lung. Partially collapsed lung. He's under 35.
Hard work is hard, it's often uncomfortable, let's not pretend magic bullets are here. If anything they are, PPE is miraculous in what it protects against.
Wet tile saws and waterjets can cut stone (and engineered stone) with essentially no dust. An angle grinder with a dust shroud and HEPA filtered extractor (total cost starts around $400) can do the same thing a regular angle grinder does but with a lot less dust.
And one really can work all day in a pouch-style N95 mask. They don’t collect much more than 95% of fine dust, but they do work, they’re easy to fit, and they’re easy to breathe through. I would wear one for added protection if I were using an angle grinder with a dust extractor. (Although I might use a full mask respirator instead for eye protection. And PAPRs are pretty great if rather expensive.)
"Essentially no dust" is not "no dust". There are no safe levels of silica that can be introduced to your lungs.
> And one really can work all day in a pouch-style N95 mask
N95 is basically the bare minimum in terms of filters. In my shop I have a shop vac with a tornado tumbler that attaches to tools for fine wood dust and a full face P-100 mask.
This is the one: https://parcilsafety.com/products/pd100-full-face-respirator
Here's the full filter list: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0128/4037/0235/files/Full_...
"No level of alcohol consumption is safe when it comes to human health, according to a WHO statement released in January, 2023."
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanrhe/article/PIIS2665-9...
If you ask yourself „should I wear safety equipment“ the answer is always yes.
https://rousseauco.com/product/rousseau-5000-l-lighted-dust-...
No profession experience, yet the pouch style I found both uncomfortable at higher temperatures and unreliable. So for a normally hobby/around-the-house work I use only half mask respirator Pretty much, it requires proper shaving to ensure it actually does something.
Saves a lot of cleanup time too!
If we can make earbuds comfortable enough so that people can wear them 8 hours a day, there's got to be something to do for breathing.
Software devs are notoriously anti-union. Software companies notoriously have huge cash reserves that didn't go into the pockets of those devs.
Join your union.
If you're in Australia you can start the process, here: https://www.australianunions.org.au/join/begin-join/#/
Union penetration is decidedly low in tech, and tech companies coincidentally have some of the highest cash reserves of any industry. People in tech often think, why should I join my union, I already get paid a lot! Bosses love that attitude.
Additionally unions can offer you support in workplace disputes, and so function as a kind of legal employment insurance, even when density in your workplace is low.
"Additionally unions can offer you support in workplace disputes,"
It also makes it really difficult to fire bad/incompetent workers.
If unions are anything like they are in the US, you lose your individual bargaining power in favor of the collective. IE: if you want a raise as a software developer, everyone at your level will also need to get a raise.
In addition to this, you end up paying the unions a tax in the form of dues, like a small government and you are forced to strike (like the UAW), even when you are satisfied with your current position/salary.
I can negotiate my own salary with any employer and I am normally well compensated. A union will not help me and will only hinder my future success.
Unions are normally for people that have lower-skilled jobs that can easily be replaced by the thousands of other people that can do the same thing (hence, having no individual negotiating power and needing someone to protect them).
This generally doesn't apply to people in the tech industry.
With today technology you can 3d scan the dimensions, water cut with automatic machines and only minor adjustments need to be done on site.
And who pays? The low paid workers.
I don't want to apologize for companies, as many will supply the bare minimum/cheapest PPE. Have you ever wore a n95 while doing physical labour? It really sucks.
On the other hand, I've worked on job sites where there was an unlimited budget for PPE. Don't like working in an N95? No issues ordering a $1200 battery powered forced air respirator mask. People would still not wear them sometimes.
For these reason I agree with banning things like this. Even with the best PPE in the world people are still not going to use it when it's an inconvenience/uncomfortable.
it didn't.
But really terrible stuff, I know that's who the article focuses on, but it's just intrinsically, like mostly guys in their late 20s and 30s. If they have families, the kids are gonna be young, and then their lungs are just shot.
I don't remember if there was a water conservation angle to it, but there was discussion of using water for some measure of dust suppression, and they just didn't have it.
So is this basically what we would call quartz countertops in the states? I can't say that I've heard the term engineered stone. Preaching to the choir but feels like this stuff should be phased out yesterday. The PPE is almost beside the point, though it feels lower h hyprocrite to me maybe because its closer to home. There's so many resources that inflict a toll e.g. metals coffee palm oil, but you don't think about them since the people are halfway around the world.
>They didn’t know how bad it is, and I bet the contractor that owns the shop didn’t know until recently either.
That's the issue. It wasn't well known or well talked about, and proper safety wasn't put in place.
Bloody hell wheat is both a drowning risk AND an explosive. Hell better ban that too!
As for not knowing, well, we humans been cutting stone for a long time and know the dust isn't good for you.
People love to talk shit about California (I don't mean OP, but generally, and increasingly), but that state gets right as much as it gets wrong. And at least it fucking does something. It's expected to pass strict regulations tomorrow on the type of stonecutting that Australia is banning. That adds up because Australia is a country that likes to ban things and America is not. That holds true even in California, which is far more pro-commerce than people seem to pretend.
But the bigger point is that outside of Australia and California, a small but tragic number of working people will continue to die a rough and premature death because most states, countries, counties, whatever jurisdiction, don't have the basic competency and clear-sightedness to pass laws that cause no one true harm but save literal human lives.
https://www.kqed.org/news/11969381/california-regulators-to-...
Regulations do more than regulate/ban things, they raise awareness. Just reading about the Australia ban had me thinking "I'll have to see what else we like to use instead" before I even got to your comment about the California ban.
Is there really absolutely no other options available? That is we will now go hungry as there is no more tables in world to prepare our food on...
It’s not short sighted to save lives
I have to say the alternatives from the article are significantly more expensive, not durable or silly (concrete) Anyone had luck with one of the alternatives
* Natural stone * Porcelain * Laminate * Tiles * Concrete * Wood/Timber
The house was being sold by flippers trying to dress up a kitchen with structural mold issues, they thought concrete would be a cheap way to hide the damage.
Just live if with after few years. Nothing stays perfect when you use it.
A small if any durability reduction seems acceptable for the health and safety improvement.
Aesthetically they're ugly but stainless steel is probably the best in terms of cost, ease of maintenance and cleaning
Either from your sponge, turning off the faucet with wet hands, or just splash back, it always is wet.
Then the wood gets moldy or rots or is disfigured.
It can also me cheaper, as you don't need a solid slab of it, a 1-3mm plate of stainless glued to MDF will do.
This solves a few things
1. Significantly reduces stone transportation (import, from shop to location)
2. Reduces stone cutting (at 1/8" thickness, much quicker, easier to cut than 2" slab) (easier to fit in tight places, easier to fix with epoxy filler.
3. Reduces waste if and when it is shipped off.
CWP (Coal Miner's Pneumoconiosis) is the long-term risk vs. the mining accidents, and it involves silicosis too. The US and Australia have lowered these statistics vs. China which is increasing.
Many people mix household cleaners that each contain ammonia and chlorine and create poisonous gases, but usually the concentration of the cleaners is sufficiently low enough to be more of a long-term health hazard, however, industrial cleaners can cause death, though rare, as in this case:
https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/tragic-accide...
The solution is to boost safety practices, heavily fine the offenders, and educate the workers, not ban a product that in its final form is not just a "fashion finish", but a safe, practical, easy-to-clean surface with good durability and dimensionally stable over time.
[0] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-19/history-of-safety-in-...
[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6266950/#:~:tex....
You could pass a law imposing strict liability all the way up the supply chain, up to and including the importers.
If a worker gets sick, they could sue for damages, maybe even punitive damages, from their employer, any middlemen, and the importer.
If you align the incentives right, companies will figure out how to enforce PPE usage.
This is why governments tend to enforce as they tend to minimally align with protecting the individual since they loose tax revenue if they do not...
Maybe I’m misreading it, but from the article, comments here, and linked alternative readings (as well as very limited personal experience), the issue could be that the workers themselves are actively not participating in wearing PPE. I know this sounds like blaming the victim, but if that is truly what’s happening (and I’d appreciate information explaining the opposite), why should the workers get to sue someone else? Is the PPE not effective enough?
Or are you suggesting that allowing the employee to sue would create incentives for the employers to actually enforce the workers use PPE?
"The Hawks Nest Tunnel disaster was a large-scale incident of occupational lung disease as the result of the construction of the Hawks Nest Tunnel"
Dad worked for the federal government in the Canadian Coast Guard for 35 years. He worked in ship engine rooms or on barges but also had odd jobs like painting. One job was to make boiler filters. He had to use a fluffy powder to make big "patties" flat filters. The powder had asbestos in it.
The I in IPF is idiopathic as in "don't know" but I'd say it was the filter powder. So even federal level there are terrible PPE policies or lack of enforcement. I'm sure Dad was under peer pressure or pressured into not caring or toughing it out type of attitude among his co-workers.
You’d be shocked in the U.K. if you saw someone scaffolding a building without a helmet. In the EU, you’re shocked if they are wearing one.
That said, it's all a wash in residential. I've seen plenty of plumbers and heating engineers drilling walls without any eye or ear protection. I've seen plenty of heating engineers soldering copper pipes without a mask and in poor ventilation (e.g. tight cupboards). I've even seen other electricians installing meter tails into a live supply without any gloves, standing on conductive surfaces like surface drainage grates.
There are already laws and regulations about employers having to provide the proper PPE - why not enforce that strongly instead of just outright banning a particular item?
My guess is within a few months larger companies will just shift their production out of jurisdiction, and smaller ones go out of business.
they would have banned pottery
also isn't concrete technically 'engineered stone'
i'm puzzled how breathing granite dust instead of so-called engineered stone dust is supposed to be better for you
Engineered stone might not be exact analogy granite dust, but different in way that prevent these mechanism to be effective.
The root problem is obviously lack of protective equipment being used, but that's a universal workplace safety issue and that requires stricter laws.
[1]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-11-09/asbestos-found-in-imp...
[2]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-14/australian-building-s...
I was already decided to not buy engineered stone again because it seems to basically be overhyped crap to scam uninformed people like me with. If apart from that it causes such health hazards... Good riddance if they ban it.
It does not make much sense to me that engineered stone would be much worse than natural stone on the regard of silicosis, and I highly doubt the natural stone industry is any more compliant in protection equipment and worker safety.
This sort of smells like natural stone industry fighting back to recover ground they lost to the engineered stuff, but being on the opposite side of the World it’s impossible for me to understand this beyond conspiracy theorizing.
Yeah there was a recent visit by rock-rich Croatian foreign ministry that heavy handed its small Aussie counterparts and pressured them on banning a whole industry :)
quarry workers probably get silicosis...from cutting natural stone? MDF is still legal - and is horrible material *most building materials are toxic
wtf has been achieved here? Seems like someone has buddies in industry and has lobbied for a ban on offshore produced building material to keep "honest local industries afloat"...ffs.
https://www.actu.org.au/media-release/the-trade-union-moveme...
b) At least here in Australia the government any by extension taxpayers will have an increased health care burden because of this. Therefore it is entirely justified to limit its use.
Asbestos degrades over time and releases fibers with almost no effort/interaction with the material.
Engineered stone only releases dangerous particles when cut. It does not degrade.
They both require special care when being disposed of, but they are not "on par"
Lol.
> Workers should have refused to work with the material if it were truly dangerous, and the free market would have eventually pushed engineered stone out, giving way to innovation for a better, safer material.
I think you need to consider this from a game theory perspective. Sometimes there are systemic negative outcomes that can only be addressed with systemic mitigations. Governments/the law serve a purpose by establishing the ground rules in which the market operates. How you structure those rules changes systemic outcomes.
Without the ground rules, UFC would devolve into people just shooting each other.
https://web.archive.org/web/20231204184119/https://www.econo...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38634213#38635045
Let's face it: HN is a hotbed of libertarian dogma such as this, so while the OP may or may not be trolling, the people on this site need to own this. Heck, one of the very founders of this site was a staunch libertarian, so the OP's post really isn't abnormal here at all.
With the exception of vivid imaginations, there is no free market to speak of.
They did -- several months ago. The relevant unions members voted to refuse to work with engineered stone at all, if it was not banned outright by the government, which is what happened yesterday.
https://www.australianunions.org.au/2023/10/24/unions-vote-t...