Yevgeny Kovalevsky, a forum delegate from the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, said: "For the general population, there aren't significant risks... I haven't seen a single scientific study that shows the need for a ban."

This issue is a commentary by Russian Chrysotile Association to the XVIII World Congress on Safety and Health at Work and the International Safety and Health Exhibition (KISS-2008) held in Seoul, South Korea, on June 29 – July 02, 2008.

Dear ladies and gentlemen!
The chrysotile industry continues the information campaign “A Big Lie of “Ban Asbestos”, which goal is to inform the public about true reasons of the anti-asbestos campaign, about the falsity of objectives of its promoters.
The information campaign is usually in the form of answers to your questions, but this issue is a commentary to the XVIII World Congress on Safety and Health at Work and the International Safety and Health Exhibition (KISS-2008) held in Seoul, South Korea, on June 29 – July 02, 2008.

Organizers of the Congress are the International Labor Organization, the International Social Security Association, and the Korean Occupational Safety and Health Agency. The Congress was attended by delegates from many countries of Europe, Asia, America, and Africa.
The main topics of reports and presentations of scientists, officials, trade unionists, and representatives of other public organizations were occupational safety, protection of workers from adverse effects of occupational environment.
A delegation of the International Alliance of Trade Unions “Chrysotile” and non-profit organization “Chrysotile Association” took part in the Congress and the exhibition.

The decision to attend the Congress was not made by chance: its program included a separate topic of safety in the production and use of chrysotile asbestos and chrysotile-containing materials and products. In the opinion of our delegation and representatives of other countries, who supported the position of safety of a controlled chrysotile production and use of chrysotile-containing products for workers and the environment, this problem is not more urgent than the problem of occupational safety in the metallurgic, chemical, woodworking, shoe, or any other industries. Yet, the discussion of chrysotile was on the top emotional level set by “Ban Asbestos”.

Scientists from different countries delivering a speech at a number of Congress meetings (symposiums, round-table discussions, etc.) gave a convincing substantiation of the feasibility of a safe use of chrysotile and chrysotile-containing products considering the current level of knowledge on the topic. This annoyed “Ban Asbestos” leaders a lot. The thing is that for the first time they failed to solo at the Congress of such a level. Accustomed to set the anti-asbestos tune at events of the kind, they did not expect opposition from our delegation and supporters of the controlled use of chrysotile from other countries. They failed to hide their concern since they suddenly sensed a real threat to their business: after all, the anti-asbestos campaign for “Ban Asbestos” is the “hen that lays golden eggs”. The report containing facts of swindle and fraud of the anti-asbestos lobby published in mass media of the United States, the U.K. and other countries made them hysterical. American law companies have been many a time accused of “unfair play”. Federal authorities have recently cancelled the decision made on tens of thousands of asbestos cases based on false reading of X-rays of would-be asbestosis cases.

A vivid example to that are the activities of some law firms headed by Steven Kazan, making fortune on asbestos cases filed by these firms under the guise of struggle for workers’ rights. The American businessman proudly alleges that the Foundation created by him and his partners is the only large sponsor of the International Ban Asbestos Secretariat headed by his sister. The only thing we can say in this connection is that their activities are a family business built on a lie. And it looks pretty profitable since trips to different countries of all continents of the Secretarial leaders and their accomplices are costly.

It has become a tradition of the anti-asbestos lobby to fabricate negative news about chrysotile in order to create a background noise for their actions. In Seoul “Ban Asbestos” members also substantiated the necessity of the chrysotile ban by a very emotional story about a single cancer case in a locksmith, who used to repair asbestos-containing brakes when he was young and developed a “deadly” disease in the older age.

We think that the use of non-parliamentary techniques widely practiced by Ban Asbestos representatives (citizens of the countries with the “exemplary level of democracy”) in their loud and demagogical vituperation is unacceptable. At the World Congress in Seoul chrysotile opponents were furious with the position of Russian delegates from the Urals and started direct provocation. At one of the symposiums our delegates were deprived of the opportunity to speak under the farfetched pretext of a lack of time. Yet, three speakers reporting about single asbestosis cases in their countries were each given 15 minutes. But there was no time for us to tell the audience about thousands of workers who have worked in the chrysotile industry of the CIS for decades and preserved their health by following simple safety rules. The attempt of the Russian delegation to express its opinion using the “Trade unions are for chrysotile!” sign was harshly (physically) stopped, obviously by a special person from the above group.

continuation
next article