Chrysotile industry faces ‘scientific reality’

Insists chrysotile asbestos is safe

Manila, Philippines – The IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) study in March 2009 reconfirming the carcinogenicity of all forms of asbestos – including chrysotile – and confirming that there is sufficient evidence that asbestos causes ovarian cancer provides the ‘new evidence’ and ‘scientific reality’ on the issue, replied the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP) and the Associated Labor Unions (ALU) to the chrysotile industry’s claim that those against chrysotile asbestos must be open to ‘new evidence’ and ‘scientific reality’.

Studies by independent experts, individuals and organizations must be the basis when citing scientific and medical studies and the IARC is one such organization with experts on the subject, TUCP and ALU said further in a consultation on 4 November 2009 on developing a national program for the elimination of asbestos related diseases (NPEAD) called by the Occupational Safety and Health Center (OSHC) of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) and attended by other government agencies and stakeholders.

Chrysotile is ‘safe’, used in malls

The Association of Chrysotile Industry of the Philippines (ACIP) maintained that chrysotile is safe and that the industry has been in existence for more than 50 years with no casualties. Negligible fiber exposure due to ‘controlled use’ does not pose hazards to human health. Chrysotile is less dangerous than the other forms of asbestos and is safer and better than substitutes.
To prove its point, ACIP said SM and other malls, the Iglesia ni Kristo and Gawad Kalinga use asbestos products in their buildings. The MWSS (Metropolitan Water and Sewerage System) also asked ACIP to operate its water pipes made of asbestos because the pipes are still in good condition compared with other pipes.

Since the industry believes that chrysotile is not hazardous, listing it in the PIC (Prior Informed Consent) process of the Rotterdam Convention is not warranted. But the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) said the PIC process would help track the entry of chrysotile in the country when the Bureau of Customs (BOC) suggested cross checking the EMB and BOC records on import clearances to address misdeclaration of imports.

Medical surveillance and mesothelioma cases

The Occupational Safety and Health Center, the Department of Health (DOH) and the World Health Organization (WHO) requested sufficient medical records of workers of ACIP members to determine the health status of their workers. Companies engaged with asbestos should be doing medical surveillance of their workers, which is far more different from medical records of a few workers shared by ACIP.

The Philippine Cancer Society confirmed that lung cancer is the number one killer disease in the country and asbestos could be a factor. They will separate mesothelioma cases – cancer caused only by asbestos – when getting reports from hospitals to find out the effects of asbestos on public health. There was no decision on how to address installed asbestos in, or to make an inventory of, buildings and structures until this data is available.

For next meeting

Based on these concerns, addressing import misdeclaration will be discussed next meeting, ACIP will submit medical records based on medical surveillance of their workers, EMB will present the PIC process, and OSHC will present a literature review on substitutes to balance perspectives.

The NPEAD encourages the participation of other stakeholders in the process. The following government agencies and departments will be invited to join the consultations based on their functions:

– Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)/Local Government Units (LGUs) for regulations and standards, implementation and inspection at the local level
– Board of Investments (BOI) for incentives in manufacturing alternative materials
– Department of Finance (DOF) for fiscal incentives to the entry of alternative materials
– Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) for trade impact of the ban and product standards

The chrysotile industry is now engaged in the process. Whether the industry will be open to ‘new evidence’ or remain confined to its own ‘scientific reality’ is anybody’s guess.