Fact 7. The use of substitute (asbestos-free) building and other materials more and more often becomes the cause of occupational diseases in builders and non-occupational – in tenants of houses built of these substitutes; at this, factors of their toxic effect and, as a result, methods of preventing the diseases are unknown.

The most respected scientists from Germany, Switzerland and the USA have recently published study results showing that such fibers as cellulose, aramid and refractory ceramic fibers recommended as chrysotile substitutes under the pretence that they are less dangerous for human health, have a greater biopersistence. The study of biological potency of substitutes, their fibrogenicity and carcinogenicity is still at the primary stage and, therefore, there is no evidence that substitutes are harmless for workers and pose no risk to health of their users.

We can continue the list of such facts but even those mentioned above demonstrate that the basis of the anti-asbestos campaign is formed by the an unconcealed lie, deceit of the public opinion with the purpose of achieving commercial and political goals by its initiators.

Strict limitations of the chrysotile use are necessary to the initiators of the anti-asbestos campaign to force it out of the market, to reduce its share in the international trade and make substitutes occupy its place. They try hard to eliminate chrysotile in the international trade by means of a chrysotile ban because substitutes can never compete with this natural fiber in both technical and environmental parameters.

The anti-asbestos campaign is a complex of discriminatory measures, unfounded and taken in violation of the current world trade regulations. It is the method of a hard competition used to support the negative attitude to chrysotile to the benefit of other fibers which safety is not yet proven. The anti-asbestos campaign is the best example of obtaining economic and political dividends under the “environmental banner”.

Chrysotile is a natural fiber possessing a unique set of physical and chemical properties which have not been reproduced in its substitutes for many decades. Besides, chrysotile is inexpensive and chrysotile-containing products are durable.

The cynicism of “Ban Asbestos” leaders in this background has no limits. They are enraged not only by scientists but also by governments of the states supporting a controlled use of chrysotile. They are happy about the fact that a worker has committed a suicide being persuaded that pleural plaques were a mortal threat whereas doctors think that their presence does not affect human health. Don’t you think that the advertisement of asbestos lawsuits that provoke healthy but poor people to have a real or imagined asbestos-related disease to quickly get rich is a crime?

According to data of the United Nations Organization over a billion people on the Earth suffer from starvation unable to buy food due to the rise in prices. Isn’t it a crime to fight for the global ban of affordable chrysotile-containing building materials to deprive those hungry people of shelter?

Promoting the asbestos scare is a crime against the mankind, and it should be given an adequate assessment of the public. “Ban Asbestos” advocates should bear responsibility for moral and material damages to people who have taken their mercenary lie for the truth. Whose interests, you think, but their personal ones do they defend? Do you really think that they are truly concerned about your health? Please think about that!

previous page next article