Comments on the article by Jeffrey Simpson

Mr. Simpson, all you do is repeat what you have read, outrageously simplifying a reality you clearly do not understand. Not once in your text did you have the decency, or perhaps the knowledge, to mention that there are different types of asbestos fibre. For the past approximately 25 years, only chrysotile fibre has been extracted and used. This fibre is completely different from the other asbestos fibres, which are known as amphiboles. Chrysotile fibre has a different chemical composition. Its biopersistence in the lungs is much lower than that of all other replacement fibres studied. Amphibole fibres are very biopersistent, but less so than wood fibres (cellulose).

The biopersistence of fibres is an important factor in their dangerousness. You should also know that the ratio of risk for lung mesothelioma is 500 with crocidolite, versus 1 with chrysotile. And you should be aware that chrysotile fibre has obvious qualities that cannot be matched by other fibres, except at an astronomical cost.

This is clearly, therefore, a commercial war. We can and should use this fibre with simple precautions. This simply means avoiding creating and breathing in dust. You are wrong in saying that fibres can penetrate filtration masks. Of course, in the past, there were inappropriate methods for use, such as asbestos spraying, as well as poor working conditions. Today, in 95% of cases, chrysotile is used in non-friable products, i.e., cement, asphalt, resin, latex. The production of fibre cement is a wet process that does not release dust.

For your information, among employees hired since 1975, when the first standards for exposure to asbestos dust were imposed in Québec, there have been no new cases of illness related to chrysotile asbestos in our plants in Asbestos and Thetford. Mr. Simpson, former workers - many of whom worked more than 40 years in the mines or in construction and renovation - who have become sick, on average die at the age of 73 years. We have even compensated the heirs of workers who died at over 90 years of age. The majority of these workers were also smokers. Finally, why should Canada ban exports of chrysotile because of a few irresponsible industries? Why should we leave the market to other producing countries like Russia, Brazil, Zimbabwe or Kazakhstan? If we are going to ban chrysotile exports, we should also ban exports of tobacco products, motor vehicles, alcohol, uranium, lead, mercury and any other product that has the potential to be dangerous to health or life.

Mr. Simpson, as a journalist, you have a responsibility to provide all the relevant, scientific and up-to-date information, and not just what is sent to you by the anti-asbestos lobby.

Serge Boislard, President,
Mouvement PRO Chrysotile Québécois.
Tel and fax: (819) 879 5558
E-mail: sergeboislard@hotmail.com