The California Department of Health has reported that the workers' occupational exposure to lead continues to be a serious public health issue.
Copyright
(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query occupational exposure. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query occupational exposure. Sort by date Show all posts
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Friday, November 23, 2012
Breast cancer risk in relation to occupations with exposure to carcinogens and endocrine disruptors
Breast implant: Mammographs: Normal breast (left) and cancerous breast (right). (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
"A growing body of scientific evidence suggests that mammary carcinogens and/or EDCs contribute to the incidence of breast cancer. Yet there remain gaps and limitations. This exploratory population-based case–control study contributes to one of the neglected areas: occupational risk factors for breast cancer. The identification of several important associations in this mixed industrial and agricultural population highlights the importance of occupational studies in identifying and quantifying environmental risk factors and illustrates the value of taking detailed occupational histories of cancer patients"
Read more: http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2012/11/22/Workplace-chemicals-up-breast-cancer-risk/UPI-51041353641959/#ixzz2D26vN0Ay
More about "Breast Cancer" and occupational exposure
More about "Breast Cancer" and occupational exposure
May 29, 2010
"Odds ratios (ORs) were increased for the usual risk factors for breast cancer and, adjusting for these, risks increased with occupational exposure to several agents, and were highest for exposures occurring before age 36 ...
Mar 18, 2011
Fire fighters in Canada are supporting legislation that would establish a legal presumption that breast cancer is an occupationally related illness. The legislation also creates a presumption that 3 other cancers (skin, prostate ...
Oct 26, 2012
The Danish government has begun to pay compensation benefits to women who develop breast cancer after working night shifts and irregular work hours. So far approximately 40 women have received benefits according to .
Jan 12, 2011
The Nevada Supreme Court has awarded workers' compensation benefits to a firefighter who alleged that her occupational exposure at work to toxic substances caused her breast cancer. The court held that there was ...
Related articles
Friday, July 12, 2013
OSHA Targets Occupational Exposure to Isocyanates
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration today announced a new National Emphasis Program to protect workers from the serious health effects from occupational exposure to isocyanates. OSHA develops national emphasis programs to focus outreach efforts and inspections on specific hazards in an industry for a three-year period. Through this NEP, OSHA will focus on workplaces in general, construction and maritime industries that use isocyanate compounds in an effort to reduce occupational illnesses and deaths.
"Workers exposed to isocyanates can suffer debilitating health problems for months or even years after exposure," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "Through this program, OSHA will strengthen protections for workers exposed to isocyanates."
Isocyanates are chemicals that can cause occupational asthma, irritation of the skin, eyes, nose and throat, and cancer. Deaths have occurred due to both asthma and hypersensitivity pneumonitis from isocyanates exposure. Respiratory illnesses also can be caused by isocyanates exposure to the skin. Isocyanates are used in materials including paints, varnishes, auto body repair, and building insulation. Jobs that involve exposure to isocyanates include spray-on polyurethane manufacturing, products such as mattresses and car seats and protective coatings for truck beds, boats, and decks.
"Workers exposed to isocyanates can suffer debilitating health problems for months or even years after exposure," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "Through this program, OSHA will strengthen protections for workers exposed to isocyanates."
Isocyanates are chemicals that can cause occupational asthma, irritation of the skin, eyes, nose and throat, and cancer. Deaths have occurred due to both asthma and hypersensitivity pneumonitis from isocyanates exposure. Respiratory illnesses also can be caused by isocyanates exposure to the skin. Isocyanates are used in materials including paints, varnishes, auto body repair, and building insulation. Jobs that involve exposure to isocyanates include spray-on polyurethane manufacturing, products such as mattresses and car seats and protective coatings for truck beds, boats, and decks.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Lead Paint Creates A Potential New Wave of Occupational Disease Claims
Occupational lead exposure, especially to lead paint, has been a well known hazard in the workplace you decades. Recent epidemiological studies demonstrate the causal relationship of exposure to impaired brain function, over time, in adults, results in early aging. Employers and insurance carriers should brace themselves for a wave of claims. Occupational exposures over 30 years ago arise from the exposure to lead in paint, that has deteriorated and flaked off through: decomposition, friction, repair replacement or improper encapsulation, may trigger an enormous amount of expensive claims.
"The federal government has, through multiple agencies, extensively reviewed the health effects of lead upon workers. Coordinating their effort through the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) the federal government has alerted both employers and employees to the health hazards of lead and the techniques to be utilized when handling this hazardous substance.
"Lead, a bluish-gray metal, has been used since ancient times because of its unusual properties, such as a low melting point, pliability and resistance to corrosion. Hippocrates reported in 370 B.C. that a worker who had used lead suffered a severe case of colic. Lead is used in older American homes, and lead exposures occur in the workplace because of the widespread use of lead compounds during the past century in paints, gasoline and industry.
"The worker becomes exposed to lead when dust and fumes are inhaled and when lead is ingested through contamination on hands, water, food and clothing. When lead enters the respiratory and digestive tracts of the human body it is released to the blood and distributed throughout the system. More than 90% of the body's lead is accumulated in the bones where it is stored for many years. The bones then release the lead back into the blood stream and re-expose the system long after the original occupational exposure has ceased.
"Lead damages the blood-brain barrier and subsequently damages brain tissue. Workers exposed to lead may experience fatigue, irritability, insomnia, headaches and other subtle effects of mental and intellectual decline. Prolonged exposure to lead may present symptoms such as anemia. Lead inhibits the synthesis of heme and damages the ion transport system in the red blood cell membranes. Chronic high exposure to lead may result in chronic nephropathy and in some extreme cases, kidney failure. Gelman, Jon, Workers' Compensation Law 3rd ed., 38 NJPRAC 9.24 (West-Thomson 2008)
It has recently been reported in the scientific literature, that lead, absorbed into the blood stream over decades, may result in poor performance in a wide variety of mental functions. In a recent study, Dr. Brian Schwartz of Johns Hopkins University, remarked that lengthy exposure to lead, cumulative over years, may cause an aging brain to function at a level that is 5 years older that it really is. The Studies at Johns Hopkins objectively measured lead absorbed over a lifetime in human bodies. Dr. Brian Schwartz remarked, "We're trying to offer a caution that a portion of what has been called normal aging might in fact be due ubiquitous environmental exposures like lead."
Like asbestos and tobacco, lead exposure may cause a latent disease which causes the brain to deteriorate at an accelerated rate. Those who worked with lead, and those who were bystanders to lead exposures on the workplace, may have a workers' compensation benefits for the mental condition related to the lead exposure.
This significant new research relating lead exposure to aging puts insurance carriers and employers at risk for both direct claims under workers compensation systems and for claims against potential third parties, ie. property owners and paint manufacturers. Unlike tobacco and asbestos, these claims may be significantly more costly since because of the long potential long payment period of benefits under workers' compensation acts and the potential legions of workers who have been exposed in directly or indirectly.
"The federal government has, through multiple agencies, extensively reviewed the health effects of lead upon workers. Coordinating their effort through the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) the federal government has alerted both employers and employees to the health hazards of lead and the techniques to be utilized when handling this hazardous substance.
"Lead, a bluish-gray metal, has been used since ancient times because of its unusual properties, such as a low melting point, pliability and resistance to corrosion. Hippocrates reported in 370 B.C. that a worker who had used lead suffered a severe case of colic. Lead is used in older American homes, and lead exposures occur in the workplace because of the widespread use of lead compounds during the past century in paints, gasoline and industry.
"The worker becomes exposed to lead when dust and fumes are inhaled and when lead is ingested through contamination on hands, water, food and clothing. When lead enters the respiratory and digestive tracts of the human body it is released to the blood and distributed throughout the system. More than 90% of the body's lead is accumulated in the bones where it is stored for many years. The bones then release the lead back into the blood stream and re-expose the system long after the original occupational exposure has ceased.
"Lead damages the blood-brain barrier and subsequently damages brain tissue. Workers exposed to lead may experience fatigue, irritability, insomnia, headaches and other subtle effects of mental and intellectual decline. Prolonged exposure to lead may present symptoms such as anemia. Lead inhibits the synthesis of heme and damages the ion transport system in the red blood cell membranes. Chronic high exposure to lead may result in chronic nephropathy and in some extreme cases, kidney failure. Gelman, Jon, Workers' Compensation Law 3rd ed., 38 NJPRAC 9.24 (West-Thomson 2008)
It has recently been reported in the scientific literature, that lead, absorbed into the blood stream over decades, may result in poor performance in a wide variety of mental functions. In a recent study, Dr. Brian Schwartz of Johns Hopkins University, remarked that lengthy exposure to lead, cumulative over years, may cause an aging brain to function at a level that is 5 years older that it really is. The Studies at Johns Hopkins objectively measured lead absorbed over a lifetime in human bodies. Dr. Brian Schwartz remarked, "We're trying to offer a caution that a portion of what has been called normal aging might in fact be due ubiquitous environmental exposures like lead."
Like asbestos and tobacco, lead exposure may cause a latent disease which causes the brain to deteriorate at an accelerated rate. Those who worked with lead, and those who were bystanders to lead exposures on the workplace, may have a workers' compensation benefits for the mental condition related to the lead exposure.
This significant new research relating lead exposure to aging puts insurance carriers and employers at risk for both direct claims under workers compensation systems and for claims against potential third parties, ie. property owners and paint manufacturers. Unlike tobacco and asbestos, these claims may be significantly more costly since because of the long potential long payment period of benefits under workers' compensation acts and the potential legions of workers who have been exposed in directly or indirectly.
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Scientific Study Linking Breast Cancer and Work Wins APHA Award
The scientific study linking the causal relationship of breast cancer to the occupational exposure of endocrine disruptors has been awarded the American Public Health Association Scientific Award. It is anticipated that this sentinel study will provide additional scientific evidence in the courtroom to support the compensability of breast cancer as an occupational illness. Today's post is shared from biomedcentral.com .
Every year the American Public Health Association honours the achievements of scientific researchers for efforts towards improving public health. This year the winners of the APHA Scientific Award, announced today in Boston, USA, are James Brophy and Andrew Watterson from the University of Stirling, UK, and colleagues, for two outstanding research articles on environmental factors contributing to breast cancer risk. Both articles were published last year; one in New Solutions and one in Environmental Health, the latter titled ‘Breast cancer risk in relation to occupations with exposure to carcinogens and endocrine disruptors: a Canadian case control study’.
“As researchers and public health advocates we are delighted with this recognition from what is the oldest and most noteworthy public health association in the world”, said Brophy. “This Award will encourage a closer examination of the breast cancer risks faced by countless women employed in a host of chemical-laden industries and will advance the development of precautionary strategies.”
In their study in Environmental Health, Brophy and colleagues analysed over 1000 cases of breast cancer and over 1000 controls in Southern Ontario, Canada, each with detailed occupational and reproductive histories. Their findings revealed that across all occupational sectors, from farming and plastics manufacturing to food canning and gambling/bars, women with potentially high exposures to endocrine disrupters and carcinogens for a period of ten years showed an increased risk for breast cancer.
Since the publication of their articles, further studies have continued to explore how breast cancer risk is impacted by a variety of factors, as Watterson recounts: “The research has been followed in the last year with scientific papers discussing breast cancer and shift/night work, and breast cancer and its links with cadmium exposures, endocrine disruptors and pesticide applications. Additional research on chemicals used in the plastics industry linked to breast cancer has revolved around endocrine disruptors and there is much going on with regard to risk assessments, for example, of BPA.”
Click here to read the entire article.
Every year the American Public Health Association honours the achievements of scientific researchers for efforts towards improving public health. This year the winners of the APHA Scientific Award, announced today in Boston, USA, are James Brophy and Andrew Watterson from the University of Stirling, UK, and colleagues, for two outstanding research articles on environmental factors contributing to breast cancer risk. Both articles were published last year; one in New Solutions and one in Environmental Health, the latter titled ‘Breast cancer risk in relation to occupations with exposure to carcinogens and endocrine disruptors: a Canadian case control study’.
“As researchers and public health advocates we are delighted with this recognition from what is the oldest and most noteworthy public health association in the world”, said Brophy. “This Award will encourage a closer examination of the breast cancer risks faced by countless women employed in a host of chemical-laden industries and will advance the development of precautionary strategies.”
In their study in Environmental Health, Brophy and colleagues analysed over 1000 cases of breast cancer and over 1000 controls in Southern Ontario, Canada, each with detailed occupational and reproductive histories. Their findings revealed that across all occupational sectors, from farming and plastics manufacturing to food canning and gambling/bars, women with potentially high exposures to endocrine disrupters and carcinogens for a period of ten years showed an increased risk for breast cancer.
Since the publication of their articles, further studies have continued to explore how breast cancer risk is impacted by a variety of factors, as Watterson recounts: “The research has been followed in the last year with scientific papers discussing breast cancer and shift/night work, and breast cancer and its links with cadmium exposures, endocrine disruptors and pesticide applications. Additional research on chemicals used in the plastics industry linked to breast cancer has revolved around endocrine disruptors and there is much going on with regard to risk assessments, for example, of BPA.”
Click here to read the entire article.
Related articles
- Night Shift Work Causally Linked to an Increase in Breast Cancer (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Breast Cancer Risk Doubles With Overnight Shift Work (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- A very particular crime - Hazards magazine (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Outdoor air pollution: a leading environmental cause of cancer deaths (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Health Law Adds New Expense For Farmers: Insurance For Field Workers (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Mesothelioma, Other Cancers Higher Among Firefighters (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- More than 1,100 have cancer after 9/11 (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
More on Breast Cancer as a Occupational Illness
Dec 15, 2012
"Endocrine disrupting chemicals and carcinogens, some of which may not yet have been classified as such, are present in many occupational environments and could increase breast cancer risk. Prior research has identified ...
Dec 05, 2012
Susan G. Komen for the Cure® asked the IOM to review the current evidence on breast cancer and the environment, consider gene–environment interactions, review the research challenges, explore evidence-based actions ...
Jan 12, 2011
The Nevada Supreme Court has awarded workers' compensation benefits to a firefighter who alleged that her occupational exposure at work to toxic substances caused her breast cancer. The court held that there was ...
Mar 18, 2011
Fire fighters in Canada are supporting legislation that would establish a legal presumption that breast cancer is an occupationally related illness. The legislation also creates a presumption that 3 other cancers (skin, prostate ...
Nov 23, 2012
"A growing body of scientific evidence suggests that mammary carcinogens and/or EDCs contribute to the incidence of breast cancer. Yet there remain gaps and limitations. This exploratory population-based case–control ...
May 29, 2010
"Odds ratios (ORs) were increased for the usual risk factors for breast cancer and, adjusting for these, risks increased with occupational exposure to several agents, and were highest for exposures occurring before age 36 ...
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
It is Time To Do The Right Thing
A recent decision by the NJ Courts illustrates the weaknesses of the present workers' compensation system when dealing with occupational exposures. The social remedial system called workers' compensation was designed before recognition of the compensability occupational illnesses.
The initial system was to furnish benefits without fault and in a summary and remedial fashion to injured workers. For the most part, that system worked from 1911 until the 1950's when the legacy of asbestos, used in World War II to insulate ships, came back to haunt the American worker by the manifestation of latent asbestos diseases including mesothelioma, a rare and fatal cancer.
Recently a NJ court denied the compensability of an asbestos related condition based upon the claimant's own knowledge of the causal relationship of an asbestos related medical condition and his own occupational exposure. Additional the court held that medical expert testimony was not required to support a motion to dismiss for the failure to meet the requirement of the statute of limitations.
In the 1970's the US Department of Labor was concerned with the same weaknesses and unavailability of benefits. The US DOL commissioned the Environmental Sciences Center at the Mt. Sinai School of Medicine under the leadership of the late Irving J. Selikoff, MD to study and analyze the problem. The weaknesses of the system, even though less dramatic than present, led to the conclusion that the workers' compensation systems just didn't work for occupational disease conditions. Additionally, costs for medical treatment of asbestos related conditions were being shifted at an estimated $10 Billion dollars, at that time, to the Medicare system.
Dr. Selikoff studied two major cohorts in analyzing the inadequacies of the workers' compensation system. One group were insulators, and another group were 933 former plant workers at The Union Asbestos and Rubber Company of Paterson NJ who worked in war production between 1942 and 1944. Strikingly, the dormant medical conditions caused by the occupational exposure to asbestos fiber, and the latent condition of the disease for decades, caused major problems in filing claims. Those included the statute of limitation and diagnosis by medical professionals. Some professional were Grade B readers certified by The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and even those experts in the field were challenged in Court.
The report, that was submitted to the US Congress, concluded that the failure of the workers' compensation system to provide benefits to many who were exposed to asbestos, and the inadequate benefits to others. Their low rates were based on extremely low wages at the time of exposure. For these and other reasons, the report concluded, that the workers' compensation had failed to adequately provide treatment and other benefits. Since workers' compensation was not meeting the needs, claimants flocked to the tort system in epidemic proportion resulting in "the longest running tort" in American judicial history, "asbestos litigation." That litigation continues to this day. Even scores of companies that have reorganized under bankruptcy to avoid liability exposure are now providing benefits under a claims procedure.
While the NJ Court's decision may have been on point with regard to the Rules adopted to govern workers' compensation cases, it is time to revisit whether the Rules are too strict and defeat the social and remedial goals of the system that was envisioned by the creators in 1911. On a global scale, the failure of the workers' compensation to provide benefits results in the inequitable shift of responsibility to the general taxpayer.
To meet the needs of those exposed occupationally, Congress needs to act now upon a global and unified solution. One path to the goal of correcting inequities of the system is to advance a system of universal medical care. The US government must do the right thing. The medical delivery system for occupational diseases must come under a national universal medical care program. Additionally Congress must meet its moral and social responsibility and finally ban asbestos use in the US once and for all.
Read the decision: Russo v. Hoboken Board of Education, A-1861-10T4 (App. Div. November 29, 2011)
"...the WCJ found that he knew asbestos could cause lung disease and other medical problems as early as "the 70s." She noted that Russo "made complaints about the exposures to harmful substances . . . while still teaching." The WCJ further found that Russo "was well aware of the potential harmful effects of asbestos exposure," and she rejected his claim that the petition was not time-barred "because he was never informed by any of his treating physicians that his cancer was related to this exposure."
...
For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
Related articles
- Changing the Fundamental Rules of Workers Compensation (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Dr. Yasunosuke Suzuki, A Pioneer of Mesothelioma Medical Research (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Why is the US Still in the Asbestos Business? (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- The Gingrich Revival and The Future of Workers' Compensation (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Fallout From The Failure of Super Committee May Cascade Into Workers Compensation Medical Delivery (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Gingrich: Workers' Compensation is History (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Friday, September 30, 2011
How To Determine If A Substance Causes Cancer at Work
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is seeking public input to determine what substances cause cancer and at what level of occupational exposure.
"The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) intends to review its approach to classifying carcinogens and establishing recommended exposure limits (RELs) for occupational exposures to hazards associated with cancer. As part of this effort, NIOSH is requesting initial input on these issues (including answers to the 5 questions in the following section), to be submitted to the NIOSH Docket number 240, for a comment period lasting through September 22, 2011. This information will be taken under consideration and used to inform NIOSH efforts to assess and document its carcinogen policy and REL policy regarding occupational hazards associated with cancer. NIOSH has also created a new NIOSH Cancer and REL Policy Web Topic Page [see http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/cancer/policy.html] to provide additional details about this effort and progress updates."
"NIOSH is announcing a Request for Information on key issues identified and associated with the NIOSH Carcinogen and REL policies. Special emphasis will be placed on consideration of technical and scientific issues with the current NIOSH Cancer and REL Policies that require further examination including the following:Show citation box
(1) Should there explicitly be a carcinogen policy as opposed to a broader policy on toxicant identification and classification (e.g.carcinogens, reproductive hazards, neurotoxic agents)?Show citation box
(2) What evidence should form the basis for determining that substances are carcinogens? How should these criteria correspond to nomenclature and categorizations (e.g., known, reasonably anticipated,etc.)?Show citation box
(3) Should 1 in 1,000 working lifetime risk (for persons occupationally exposed) be the target level for a recommended exposure limit (REL) for carcinogens or should lower targets be considered?Show citation box
(4) In establishing NIOSH RELs, how should the phrase “to the extent feasible” (defined in the 1995 NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limit Policy) be interpreted and applied?Show citation box
(5) In the absence of data, what uncertainties or assumptions areappropriate for use in the development of RELs? What is the utility of a standard ”action level” (i.e., an exposure limit set below the REL typically used to trigger risk management actions) and how should it be set? How should NIOSH address worker exposure to complex mixtures?
Public Comment Period: Comments must be received by September 22, 2011.
The concept of a compensable industrial disease has developed only recently and its acceptance has lagged far behind that of industrial accidents. The original Workers' Compensation Acts, as promulgated from the year 1911 forward by many of the states, did not provide for the recognition of occupational illness and disease as compensable events. As demands have been placed upon the medical system to treat and to prevent occupational illness, the legal system, under social, economic, and political pressure, has sought to provide a remedy for the thousands of injured workers who have suffered and who are continuing to suffer from occupational illness and disease.
"The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) intends to review its approach to classifying carcinogens and establishing recommended exposure limits (RELs) for occupational exposures to hazards associated with cancer. As part of this effort, NIOSH is requesting initial input on these issues (including answers to the 5 questions in the following section), to be submitted to the NIOSH Docket number 240, for a comment period lasting through September 22, 2011. This information will be taken under consideration and used to inform NIOSH efforts to assess and document its carcinogen policy and REL policy regarding occupational hazards associated with cancer. NIOSH has also created a new NIOSH Cancer and REL Policy Web Topic Page [see http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/cancer/policy.html] to provide additional details about this effort and progress updates."
"NIOSH is announcing a Request for Information on key issues identified and associated with the NIOSH Carcinogen and REL policies. Special emphasis will be placed on consideration of technical and scientific issues with the current NIOSH Cancer and REL Policies that require further examination including the following:Show citation box
(1) Should there explicitly be a carcinogen policy as opposed to a broader policy on toxicant identification and classification (e.g.carcinogens, reproductive hazards, neurotoxic agents)?Show citation box
(2) What evidence should form the basis for determining that substances are carcinogens? How should these criteria correspond to nomenclature and categorizations (e.g., known, reasonably anticipated,etc.)?Show citation box
(3) Should 1 in 1,000 working lifetime risk (for persons occupationally exposed) be the target level for a recommended exposure limit (REL) for carcinogens or should lower targets be considered?Show citation box
(4) In establishing NIOSH RELs, how should the phrase “to the extent feasible” (defined in the 1995 NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limit Policy) be interpreted and applied?Show citation box
(5) In the absence of data, what uncertainties or assumptions areappropriate for use in the development of RELs? What is the utility of a standard ”action level” (i.e., an exposure limit set below the REL typically used to trigger risk management actions) and how should it be set? How should NIOSH address worker exposure to complex mixtures?
Public Comment Period: Comments must be received by September 22, 2011.
The concept of a compensable industrial disease has developed only recently and its acceptance has lagged far behind that of industrial accidents. The original Workers' Compensation Acts, as promulgated from the year 1911 forward by many of the states, did not provide for the recognition of occupational illness and disease as compensable events. As demands have been placed upon the medical system to treat and to prevent occupational illness, the legal system, under social, economic, and political pressure, has sought to provide a remedy for the thousands of injured workers who have suffered and who are continuing to suffer from occupational illness and disease.
For over 4 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
Related articles
- NIOSH Fails to Link Cancer as Zadroga Fund Compensable (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- OSHA Cites Manufacturers and Distributors of Formaldehyde Hair Products (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Cell Phones and Cancer: The Static in the Debate (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Industrial Disease: The Quest for Recognition - The Need for Adequate Benefits (gelmans.com)
Sunday, January 3, 2010
OSHA Moving to Finalize Crystalline Silica Exposure Standard
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is moving forward on implementing the standard for occupational exposure to silica. Silica has long been considered an occupational hazard.
Silicosis was one of the enumerated occupational diseases that were universally included into workers' compensation statutes about 40 years after the enactment of the initial model acts were adopted, at the behest of Industry, to avoid civil liability actions. Occupational disease claims continue to be problematic for State compensation systems.
"Crystalline silica is a significant component of the earth's crust, and many workers in a wide range of industries are exposed to it, usually in the form of respirable quartz or, less frequently, cristobalite. Chronic silicosis is a uniquely occupational disease resulting from exposure of employees over long periods of time (10 years or more). Exposure to high levels of respirable crystalline silica causes acute or accelerated forms of silicosis that are ultimately fatal. The current OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) for general industry is based on a formula recommended by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) in 1971 (PEL=10mg/cubic meter/(% silica + 2), as respirable dust). The current PEL for construction and maritime (derived from ACGIH's 1962 Threshold Limit Value) is based on particle counting technology, which is considered obsolete. NIOSH and ACGIH recommend 50µg/m3 and 25µg/m3 exposure limits, respectively, for respirable crystalline silica. Both industry and worker groups have recognized that a comprehensive standard for crystalline silica is needed to provide for exposure monitoring, medical surveillance, and worker training. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) has published a recommended standard for addressing the hazards of crystalline silica. The Building Construction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO has also developed a recommended comprehensive program standard. These standards include provisions for methods of compliance, exposure monitoring, training, and medical surveillance. "
It is anticipated that the Peer Review phase will be completed in January 2010 and that NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ) will be completed in July 2010.
The proposed Rules, 29 CFR 1915; 29 CFR 1917; 29 CFR 1918; 29 CFR 1926 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
Silicosis was one of the enumerated occupational diseases that were universally included into workers' compensation statutes about 40 years after the enactment of the initial model acts were adopted, at the behest of Industry, to avoid civil liability actions. Occupational disease claims continue to be problematic for State compensation systems.
"Crystalline silica is a significant component of the earth's crust, and many workers in a wide range of industries are exposed to it, usually in the form of respirable quartz or, less frequently, cristobalite. Chronic silicosis is a uniquely occupational disease resulting from exposure of employees over long periods of time (10 years or more). Exposure to high levels of respirable crystalline silica causes acute or accelerated forms of silicosis that are ultimately fatal. The current OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) for general industry is based on a formula recommended by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) in 1971 (PEL=10mg/cubic meter/(% silica + 2), as respirable dust). The current PEL for construction and maritime (derived from ACGIH's 1962 Threshold Limit Value) is based on particle counting technology, which is considered obsolete. NIOSH and ACGIH recommend 50µg/m3 and 25µg/m3 exposure limits, respectively, for respirable crystalline silica. Both industry and worker groups have recognized that a comprehensive standard for crystalline silica is needed to provide for exposure monitoring, medical surveillance, and worker training. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) has published a recommended standard for addressing the hazards of crystalline silica. The Building Construction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO has also developed a recommended comprehensive program standard. These standards include provisions for methods of compliance, exposure monitoring, training, and medical surveillance. "
It is anticipated that the Peer Review phase will be completed in January 2010 and that NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ) will be completed in July 2010.
The proposed Rules, 29 CFR 1915; 29 CFR 1917; 29 CFR 1918; 29 CFR 1926 (To search for a specific CFR, visit the Code of Federal Regulations.)
Friday, November 1, 2013
OSHA releases new resources to better protect workers from hazardous chemicals
Each year in the United States, tens of thousands of workers are made sick or die from occupational exposures to the thousands of hazardous chemicals that are used in workplaces every day. The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration today launched two new web resources to assist companies with keeping their workers safe.
While many chemicals are suspected of being harmful, OSHA's exposure standards are out-of-date and inadequately protective for the small number of chemicals that are regulated in the workplace. The first resource OSHA has created is a toolkit to identify safer chemicals that can be used in place of more hazardous ones. This toolkit walks employers and workers step-by-step through information, methods,
tools and guidance to either eliminate hazardous chemicals or make informed substitution decisions in the workplace by finding a safer chemical, material, product or process. The toolkit is available at http://www.osha.gov/dsg/safer_chemicals/index.html.
"We know that the most efficient and effective way to protect workers from hazardous chemicals is by eliminating or replacing those chemicals with safer alternatives whenever possible," said Dr. David Michaels, assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health.
While many chemicals are suspected of being harmful, OSHA's exposure standards are out-of-date and inadequately protective for the small number of chemicals that are regulated in the workplace. The first resource OSHA has created is a toolkit to identify safer chemicals that can be used in place of more hazardous ones. This toolkit walks employers and workers step-by-step through information, methods,
tools and guidance to either eliminate hazardous chemicals or make informed substitution decisions in the workplace by finding a safer chemical, material, product or process. The toolkit is available at http://www.osha.gov/dsg/safer_chemicals/index.html.
"We know that the most efficient and effective way to protect workers from hazardous chemicals is by eliminating or replacing those chemicals with safer alternatives whenever possible," said Dr. David Michaels, assistant secretary of labor for occupational safety and health.
Sunday, September 1, 2013
American Thoracic Society Welcomes OSHA’s Proposed Lower Silica Exposure Standard
The American Thoracic Society welcomes today’s release by the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA) of a proposed lower standard for crystalline silica exposure.
“This needed adjustment is long overdue,” said Tee L. Guidotti, MD, MPH, chair of the Department of
Environmental and Occupational Health at the School of Public Health and Health Services of the George
Washington University Medical Center in Washington DC and a member of the American Thoracic
Society’s Environmental Health Policy Committee involved in the Society’s efforts to establish a lower
exposure standard. “The current OSHA standard of for respirable crystalline silica of 0.10 mg/m3 8 hour
time weighted average has remained the same for 40 years and has been shown in numerous studies not to be
protective.”
“We support the proposed lower standard of 0.05 mg/m3 time-weighted average for up to 10 hours during a
40 hour work week, which will protect hundreds and possibly thousands of workers from silica-related
health effects at almost no cost, as silica exposure can be easily prevented with simple and inexpensive
technology.”
Crystalline silica has long been recognized as a serious occupational health hazard, affecting workers in
industries such as granite workers, industrial sand workers and gold miners. Overexposure to respirable
crystalline silica can cause irreversible, progressive lung disease, known as silicosis, and is also associated
with lung cancer, chronic renal disease, and autoimmune disorders. It is estimated that 1.7 million U.S.
workers are regularly exposed to this serious health hazard and that about 200 workers die each year from
silicosis. As many as 7,300 new cases of silicosis occur annually among U.S. workers.
Exposure levels and death rates from silica-related diseases in the U.S. far exceed those of comparable
developed economies around the world. Silicosis has been virtually eliminated in the European Union with
the use of simple and inexpensive measures such as adequate ventilation, wetting rock before it is cut, and
banning sandblasting with silica sand in favor of readily available alternatives.
OSHA first submitted a draft revised standard on respirable crystalline silica to the Office of Management
and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs on February 14, 2011, but a review was not
completed until recently.
“The proposed revised standard should be implemented in conjunction with a mandated periodic surveillance
program to ensure that the measures taken to control exposure are adequate and to identify and mitigate
disease in those workers who are exposed,” said Dr. Guidotti. “Silicosis and the other diseases caused by
crystalline silica exposure are entirely preventable and this new lower standard is an important step toward
this goal.”
and Health Administration (OSHA) of a proposed lower standard for crystalline silica exposure.
“This needed adjustment is long overdue,” said Tee L. Guidotti, MD, MPH, chair of the Department of
Environmental and Occupational Health at the School of Public Health and Health Services of the George
Washington University Medical Center in Washington DC and a member of the American Thoracic
Society’s Environmental Health Policy Committee involved in the Society’s efforts to establish a lower
exposure standard. “The current OSHA standard of for respirable crystalline silica of 0.10 mg/m3 8 hour
time weighted average has remained the same for 40 years and has been shown in numerous studies not to be
protective.”
“We support the proposed lower standard of 0.05 mg/m3 time-weighted average for up to 10 hours during a
40 hour work week, which will protect hundreds and possibly thousands of workers from silica-related
health effects at almost no cost, as silica exposure can be easily prevented with simple and inexpensive
technology.”
Crystalline silica has long been recognized as a serious occupational health hazard, affecting workers in
industries such as granite workers, industrial sand workers and gold miners. Overexposure to respirable
crystalline silica can cause irreversible, progressive lung disease, known as silicosis, and is also associated
with lung cancer, chronic renal disease, and autoimmune disorders. It is estimated that 1.7 million U.S.
workers are regularly exposed to this serious health hazard and that about 200 workers die each year from
silicosis. As many as 7,300 new cases of silicosis occur annually among U.S. workers.
Exposure levels and death rates from silica-related diseases in the U.S. far exceed those of comparable
developed economies around the world. Silicosis has been virtually eliminated in the European Union with
the use of simple and inexpensive measures such as adequate ventilation, wetting rock before it is cut, and
banning sandblasting with silica sand in favor of readily available alternatives.
OSHA first submitted a draft revised standard on respirable crystalline silica to the Office of Management
and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs on February 14, 2011, but a review was not
completed until recently.
“The proposed revised standard should be implemented in conjunction with a mandated periodic surveillance
program to ensure that the measures taken to control exposure are adequate and to identify and mitigate
disease in those workers who are exposed,” said Dr. Guidotti. “Silicosis and the other diseases caused by
crystalline silica exposure are entirely preventable and this new lower standard is an important step toward
this goal.”
Related articles
- Respirators Are Not Enough: New Study Examines Worker Exposure to Silica in Hydraulic Fracturing Operations (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- OSHA Targets Occupational Exposure to Isocyanates (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Jersey City, NJ, theatrical equipment company cited by OSHA for exposing workers to workplace safety and health hazards (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Parents and Educators Can Keep Young Workers Safe (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Safety and Health Topics: Heat Stress (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- OSHA and NIOSH issue hazard alert on 1-bromopropane (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
Hearing Loss Remains a Significant Problem at Work
Today's post is shared from the cdc.gov:
"Noise-induced hearing loss is a significant, often unrecognized health problem among U.S. adults. Discussions between patients and personal health care providers about hearing loss symptoms, tests, and ways to protect hearing might help with early diagnosis of hearing loss and provide opportunities to prevent harmful noise exposures. Avoiding prolonged exposure to loud environments and using personal hearing protection devices can prevent noise-induced hearing loss."
Thursday, February 6, 2020
The New OSHA Silica Standard - Not Strong Enough
Silica exposure was the catalyst that brought occupational diseases in the state workers’ compensation acts in the 1950’s. In an effort to shield employers from civil liability, silicosis was incorporated as a compensable condition under the capped damage system of state workers’ compensation programs. Silica exposures continue today, especially in counter-top workers, The new silica exposure standard announced by OSHA has still fallen short to protect workers from this deadly occupational exposure.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Exposure to Noise and Lead at Firing Ranges
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) continues to report on safety measures for excessive noise and lead exposure at firing ranges. Exposure to excessive noise in the workplace has been recognized as a major health hazard, one that can impair not only a person's hearing, but also his physical and mental well-being. In general noise in the workplace first affects the ability to hear high-frequency or high-pitched sounds. Workers suffering from noise-induced hearing loss may also experience continual ringing in the ears, called "tinnitus". In addition, workers who are exposed to noise sometimes complain of nervousness, sleeplessness and fatigue.
Lead exposure continues to be problematic in the workplace. The worker becomes exposed to lead when dust and fumes are inhaled and when lead is ingested through contamination on hands, water, food and clothing. When lead enters the respiratory and digestive tracts of the human body it is released to the blood and distributed throughout the system. More than 90% of the body's lead is accumulated in the bones where it is stored for many years. The bones then release the lead back into the blood stream and re-expose the system long after the original occupational exposure has ceased.
NIOSH now reports in a new publication, that "...Workers and users of indoor firing ranges may be exposed to hazardous levels of lead and noise. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommends steps for workers and employers to reduce exposures."
"According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, more than 1 million Federal, State, and local law enforcement officers work in the United States [DOJ 2004]. They are required to train regularly in the use of firearms. Indoor firing ranges are often used because of their controlled conditions (see Figure 1). In addition to workers, more than 20 million active target shooters practice at indoor firing ranges. Law enforcement officers may be exposed to high levels of lead and noise at indoor firing ranges. NIOSH estimates that 16,000 to 18,000 firing ranges operate in the United States."
"Several studies of firing ranges have shown that exposure to lead and noise can cause health problems associated with lead exposure and hearing loss, particularly among employees and instructors. Lead exposure occurs mainly through inhalation of lead fumes or ingestion (e.g., eating or drinking with contaminated hands)."
Click here to read more about occupational exposures and claims for workers' compensation benefits. For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered from occupational and bystander exposures.
Thursday, January 14, 2016
OSHA schedules public hearing on proposed rule on occupational exposure to beryllium
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has scheduled a public hearing on the agency's proposed rule to amend its existing exposure limits for occupational exposure in general industry to beryllium and beryllium compounds. The hearing will be held Feb. 29, 2016, in Washington, D.C.
The proposed rule, published on Aug. 7, 2015, would dramatically lower workplace exposure to beryllium, a widely used material that can cause devastating lung disease. This hearing will provide the public an opportunity to testify or provide evidence on issues raised by the proposal.
The hearing will begin at 2 p.m. ET in Room N-4437 A-D, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, DC. If necessary, the hearing will continue from 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET on subsequent days in Washington, D.C.
Individuals who intend to present testimony or question witnesses must submit the full text of their testimony and all documentary evidence by Jan. 29, 2016. Submissions may be sent electronically to www.regulations.gov, the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Additionally, submissions may be mailed or delivered; see the Federal Register notice for details.
Currently, OSHA's eight-hour permissible exposure limit for beryllium is 2.0 micrograms per cubic meter of air. Above that level, employers must take steps to reduce the airborne concentration of beryllium. That standard was originally established in 1948 by the Atomic Energy Commission and adopted by OSHA in 1971. OSHA's proposed standard would reduce the eight-hour permissible exposure limit to 0.2 micrograms per cubic meter. The proposed rule would also require additional protections, including personal protective equipment, medical exams, and training.
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA's role is to ensure these conditions for America's working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit www.osha.gov.
The proposed rule, published on Aug. 7, 2015, would dramatically lower workplace exposure to beryllium, a widely used material that can cause devastating lung disease. This hearing will provide the public an opportunity to testify or provide evidence on issues raised by the proposal.
The hearing will begin at 2 p.m. ET in Room N-4437 A-D, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, DC. If necessary, the hearing will continue from 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET on subsequent days in Washington, D.C.
Individuals who intend to present testimony or question witnesses must submit the full text of their testimony and all documentary evidence by Jan. 29, 2016. Submissions may be sent electronically to www.regulations.gov, the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Additionally, submissions may be mailed or delivered; see the Federal Register notice for details.
Currently, OSHA's eight-hour permissible exposure limit for beryllium is 2.0 micrograms per cubic meter of air. Above that level, employers must take steps to reduce the airborne concentration of beryllium. That standard was originally established in 1948 by the Atomic Energy Commission and adopted by OSHA in 1971. OSHA's proposed standard would reduce the eight-hour permissible exposure limit to 0.2 micrograms per cubic meter. The proposed rule would also require additional protections, including personal protective equipment, medical exams, and training.
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing safe and healthful workplaces for their employees. OSHA's role is to ensure these conditions for America's working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, education and assistance. For more information, visit www.osha.gov.
Related articles
- Electronics recycler over-exposes workers to lead, fined more than $56K (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Judge upholds citations issued for bloodborne pathogen and lead exposure hazards at West Caldwell, New Jersey, company (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- OSHA continues extensive public engagement on silica proposal Public hearings held March 18 - April 4 (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- OSHA's Top 10 Violations for 2014 announced at National Safety Council Congress & Expo (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Diesel Exhaust Linked to Cancer
After a week-long meeting of international experts, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which is part of the World Health Organization (WHO), today classified diesel engine exhaust as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1), based on sufficient evidence that exposure is associated with an increased risk for lung cancer.
Background
In 1988, IARC classified diesel exhaust as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A). An Advisory Group which reviews and recommends future priorities for the IARC Monographs Program had recommended diesel exhaust as a high priority for re-evaluation since 1998.
There has been mounting concern about the cancer-causing potential of diesel exhaust, particularly based on findings in epidemiological studies of workers exposed in various settings. This was re-emphasized by the publication in March 2012 of the results of a large US National Cancer Institute/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health study of occupational exposure to such emissions in underground miners, which showed an increased risk of death from lung cancer in exposed workers..
Evaluation
The scientific evidence was reviewed thoroughly by the Working Group and overall it was concluded that here was sufficient evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of diesel exhaust. The Working Group found that diesel exhaust is a cause of lung cancer (sufficient evidence) and also noted a positive association (limited evidence) with an increased risk of bladder cancer (Group 1). The Working Group concluded that gasoline exhaust was possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), a finding unchanged from the previous evaluation in 1989.
Public health
Large populations are exposed to diesel exhaust in everyday life, whether through their occupation or through the ambient air. People are exposed not only to motor vehicle exhausts but also to exhausts from other diesel engines, including from other modes of transport (e.g. diesel trains and ships) and from power generators.
Given the Working Group’s rigorous, independent assessment of the science, governments and other decision-makers have a valuable evidence-base on which to consider environmental standards for diesel exhaust emissions and to continue to work with the engine and fuel manufacturers towards those goals. Increasing environmental concerns over the past two decades have resulted in regulatory action in North America, Europe and elsewhere with successively tighter emission standards for both diesel and gasoline engines. There is a strong interplay between standards and technology – standards drive technology and new technology enables more stringent standards. For diesel engines, this required changes in the fuel such as marked decreases in sulfur content, changes in engine design to burn diesel fuel more efficiently and reductions in emissions through exhaust control technology.
However, while the amount of particulates and chemicals are reduced with these changes, it is not yet clear how the quantitative and qualitative changes may translate into altered health effects; research into this question is needed. In addition, existing fuels and vehicles without these modifications will take many years to be replaced, particularly in less developed countries, where regulatory measures are currently also less stringent. It is notable that many parts of the developing world lack regulatory standards, and data on the occurrence and impact of diesel exhaust are limited.
Conclusions
Dr Christopher Portier, Chairman of the IARC working Group, stated that “The scientific evidence was compelling and the Working Group’s conclusion was unanimous: diesel engine exhaust causes lung cancer in humans.” Dr Portier continued: “Given the additional health impacts from diesel particulates, exposure to this mixture of chemicals should be reduced worldwide.“ Dr Kurt Straif, Head of the IARC Monographs Program, indicated that “The main studies that led to this conclusion were in highly exposed workers. However, we have learned from other carcinogens, such as radon, that initial studies showing a risk in heavily exposed occupational groups were followed by positive findings for the general population. Therefore actions to reduce exposures should encompass workers and the general population.”
Dr Christopher Wild, Director, IARC, said that “while IARC’s remit is to establish the evidence-base for regulatory decisions at national and international level, today’s conclusion sends a strong signal that public health action is warranted. This emphasis is needed globally, including among the more vulnerable populations in developing countries where new technology and protective measures may otherwise take
many years to be adopted.”
For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered work related accident and injuries.
Related articles
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)