their keen interest in the information materials of the Association substantiating fallacy of calls for the chrysotile ban and negative consequences for hundreds of millions of people on the planet of the ban of its use and substantiation by polymers, bituminous and other materials. The pickets obviously wanted to provoke an acute conflict but miscalculated: their actions were left unnoticed, and they had nothing to do but silently leave the “battle field”. The provocation failed.

It is noteworthy that the European leaders of “Ban Asbestos” movements, when encouraging the poor and poorest countries to ban chrysotile, fail to mention the fact that in their native countries chrysotile is still used in many buildings, in highly dangerous technologies, e.g. with chlorine. In Defense Departments opponents of chrysotile are not welcomed because nobody wants repetition of tragedies that already happened as a result of replacing chrysotile-containing products by alternatives (a notoriously known catastrophe of American “Challenger”, etc.).
It is amazing that some leaders of the Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI), that also unites workers of the chrysotile industry, are, in fact, “Ban Asbestos” accomplices. By playing the role of hired agents of the European and American capital, they discredit the whole trade union movement. They have no concern about the future of millions of workers, whose rights they are to protect.

Unfortunately, several ‘independent’ experts of the WHO and ILO (Mrs. I. Fedotov and I. Ivanov) form an alliance with the most odious apostles of the anti-asbestos campaign, thus discrediting respected organizations, the main activities of which include the ensuring of social protection, elimination of poverty, etc. It is evident that due to this cooperation and under the pressure of “Ban Asbestos” all possible anti-asbestos resolutions are adopted by international organizations with violation of valid regulations, regardless of scientific data.

We notice with satisfaction that the participation of representatives of the chrysotile industry in this Congress helped rebuff “Ban Asbestos” advocates and their attacks on workplaces of millions of people. We express our solidarity with workers of Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Cuba, Vietnam, and other countries, which governments need no “Ban Asbestos” recommendations and they independently decide what to use in the interests of their citizens and what to ban. Everybody knows that unfounded prohibitions lead to huge additional expenses and never achieve the goal of improving safety, in the guise of which administrative barriers to various products are set. It is necessary to be very careful when stiffening safety regulations, to substantiate them properly and weigh all possible consequences of such decisions.

Let us reason based on factual data. Chrysotile and chrysotile-containing products have been used for over a century in the whole world, including Europe. After the World War II the use of asbestos-cement helped quickly restore the destroyed, give shelter to millions of people, re-establish water supply of towns. Yet, “Ban Asbestos” urges not to believe true facts that contradict their fixed idea of a global asbestos ban.

Statistics show that the majority of people occupationally exposed to chrysotile and chrysotile-containing products in the past live a long and healthy life. This means that occupational diseases are rather caused by subjective factors affecting certain categories of people (e.g. smokers), not chrysotile. So the question is whether it is essential to ban the production and use of chrysotile. Isn’t it simpler and cheaper to teach people safety work practices?
Let us imagine (even though we are sure that this variant is impossible) that chrysotile were banned globally, as “Ban Asbestos” wants. Hundreds of enterprises would stop, millions of workers would have to search for jobs or get another profession. The number of people having no means to buy affordable chrysotile-cement building (roofing) materials and multifunctional pipes would increase tremendously. Who can assess all negative consequences of this madness?

The struggle for the chrysotile ban is business of “Ban Asbestos”. In Seoul their positions lost their stability to a certain extent since their conjectures were given an objective evaluation during the Congress. “Ban Asbestos” failed to influence the contents of the Declaration on Occupational Safety and Health adopted in Seoul.
We think it is not expedient to comment on emotional attacks of “Ban Asbestos” concerning the chrysotile use. There is nothing new in them. They are just traditional accusations of incompetence of everybody and everything having the position different from the opinion of “Ban Asbestos”. They accuse governments of some countries of conspiracy with the chrysotile industry, doctors diagnosing no asbestos-related diseases in healthy people – of medical ignorance and lack of objectivity, etc.

The analysis of “Ban Asbestos” and IBAS activities shows that the interests of own business take precedence over needs of millions of people. This is concealed by discussions about love to the poor and poorest inhabitants of the Earth. But in the end any lie is recognized, and this will be the end of the “Ban Asbestos” business built on this lie. In this connection the nervousness of “Ban Asbestos” publications is quite clear. They all end by the demonic cry “Nobody will escape!” that speaks for itself. Is it possible to speak about the adequacy of authors of anti-asbestos publications?

In conclusion, we encourage you once again to think about the following questions. What kind of organization is the International Ban Asbestos Secretariat? Whom does it represent? Who has empowered “Ban Asbestos” to impose the global asbestos ban on countries? Whose interests, in addition to own commercial ones, are being served? What do they actually produce except for asbestos paranoia?
There is only one answer to all these questions: “Ban Asbestos” groups were born in a lie, and they will die from their own lie. The society does not need them.

Department of International Informational Public Relations of the Chrysotile Association

previous next article