Russian asbestos position caught in 1986 time frame

Pretends ignorance about ILO's 2006 Ban Asbestos Resolution
In an astounding exercise of sophistry, Ural Asbestos Mining & Ore Dressing Company with the active support of Russian government (in photo: Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev) is hiding behind International Labour Organisation (ILO)' 'Convention 162 on Safety in the Use of Asbestos that was adopted in 1986. On April 8, 2000 ILO Convention 162 was ratified in Russia by. Federal Act 50-FZ “About the ratification of Convention on Safety in the use of asbestos from 1986” In 1975, Soviet Russia overtook Canada and became the largest producer of asbestos.


Currently, Canada is the second largest producer of asbestos. Canada and Russia are working in tandem to stop the inevitable ban on asbestos of all kinds.
It is noteworthy that past asbestos exposure is causing 10, 000 deaths every year in US that has compelled US Senate to pass Ban Asbestos America Act 2007.

Russian scientific research center – Ekaterinbourg medical center is carrying out research works on the problem (based on «Uralasbest» company). N. F. Izmero, Russian asbestos industry expert who is associated with state run organization Research Institute of Occupational Health of Russian Academy of Medical Sciences says, "According to our studies all detected in Russia cases of asbestosis and lung cancer are the result of long-lasting professional contact in conditions of extremely high levels of asbestos containing dust concentration."

It is 21 years since the ILO’s asbestos guidelines were introduced. By the mid-1980s when Convention 162 was drafted, only the Scandinavian countries had banned asbestos.

In 2006, 40 countries in Europe, the Americas, the Middle East, the Antipodes and Asia have imposed national asbestos bans. Major international bodies including the International Programme on Chemical Safety, the European Union, the Collegium Ramazzini, the Senior Labour Inspectors Committee, the International Social Security Association, the World Trade Organization, the Building and Woodworkers International, the International Metalworkers’ Federation and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions support the pro-ban position. So do the Governments of: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Chile, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, Germany, Greece, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and Uruguay and scores of independent scientists.

Russian position is a manipulation of the true situation. In fact, Convention 162 does call for the prohibition of asbestos. However, this Convention refers principally to the measures required for the prevention of exposure to asbestos which is already installed. This standard is vital for the protection of those involved in renovations and demolition, for example, carpenters, plumbers and other trades.

ILO Convention 139 on Cancer causing substances calls for the substitution of known cancer causing substances, and this is the only logical, health based approach to the use of chrysotile asbestos.

The failure of the ILO to refute these assertions made by the pro-asbestos salesmen is shameful. It is imperative that we have a clear position from the ILO on this matter.

Article 10 of ILO Asbestos Convention No. 162, 1986 states:
“Where necessary to protect the health of workers and technically practicable, national laws or regulations shall provide for one or more of the following measures-

(a) replacement of asbestos or of certain types of asbestos or products containing asbestos by other materials or products of the use of alternative technology, scientifically evaluated by the competent authority as harmless or less harmful, whenever this is possible’

(b) total or partial prohibition of the use of asbestos or of certain types of asbestos or products containing asbestos in certain work processes.”

Occupational Cancer Convention 139, 1974

Article 1

1. Each Member which ratifies this Convention shall periodically determine the carcinogenic substances and agents to which occupational exposure shall be prohibited or made subject to authorisation or control, and those to which other provisions of this Convention shall apply.

2. Exemptions from prohibition may only be granted by issue of a certificate specifying in each case the conditions to be met.

Article 2

1. Each Member which ratifies this Convention shall make every effort to have carcinogenic substances and agents to which workers may be exposed in the course of their work replaced by non-carcinogenic substances or agents or by less harmful substances or agents; in the choice of substitute substances or agents account shall be taken of their carcinogenic, toxic and other properties.

The position of the World Health Organisation is as follows:
"Exposure to chrysotile asbestos poses risks for asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma in a dose-dependent manner. No threshold has been identified for carcinogenic risks" (EHC 203)

The WHO recommendation is to:

“Prohibit and enforce the prohibition of the production and use of chrysotile fibres and products containing them or restrict chrysotile to essential uses in which no safer alternatives are available."

In the face of such recommendations, Russia remains the largest asbestos producer and consumer in the world. In Russia only chrysotile is produced and used. Now 11 deposits of chrysotile are prospected with balance reserve of about 111 mmillion tons. Two big enterprises are working on mining and milling of chrysotile ore: «Uralasbest» and «Orenburgasbest».


N. F. Izmero says," the question about banning chrysotile is usually raised by the countries where pure chrysotile free of more hazardous and justly prohibited amphibole asbestos fibres has never been used."

Among the general risk factors of asbestos related diseases the most significant also are tobacco smoking, chronic bacterial infection, traumatic injuries of organs, genetic predisposition, etc.

The Russian study notes the distinctive features of occupational chrysotile-induced diseases have been established: asbestosis has a long asymptomatic period, slow progression; uncomplicated forms of asbestosis have no acute onset, exudation, including bloody pleural effusion, and other manifestations characteristic of health effects of amphiboles; chronical bronchitis develops gradually, has no acute onset with fever and symptoms of intoxication; over 50 % of cases with asbestos-induced diseases are associated with different congenital malformations and anomalies of bronchi and lungs; biomarkers of susceptibility and resistance to the asbestos induced diseases and malignant neoplasms have been found recently. Our research work
allowed us to bring out a «dose-effect» relationship, to ground «critical» value of dust load in total mass of inhaled dust, which is equal to 100 grams of total dust during all the period of contact.

It claims that its data were confirmed by results of Russian-Finnish-American research project “Health and exposure surveillance of Siberian asbestos miners”. Development of dust-related (and asbestos-related in particular) changes in health status was found only among workers of old asbestos enrichment factories closed now, where dust levels exceeded current thresholds several hundred times.

In Russia, there exists a “Judgment on the problem of total ban of asbestos by the Russian group of governmental experts” (2002). It would be worthwhile to know the source of funding of the agency that came to the judgment that allows use, trade and exposure of asbestos by its won citizens and the people of the developing countries like India.

Russian position on asbestos is caught in a time warp. It is quite outdated. Russian company in question and the Russian government should end the barbarism of exposing mankind to asbestos by taking congnisance of Resolution concerning asbestos
(adopted by the 95th Session of the International Labour Conference, June 2006)

Given below is its text:
The General Conference of the International Labour Organization, Considering that all forms of asbestos, including chrysotile, are classified as known human carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a classification restated by the International Programme on Chemical Safety (a joint Programme of the International Labour Organization, the World Health Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme),

Alarmed that an estimated 100,000 workers die every year from diseases caused by exposure to asbestos,

Deeply concerned that workers continue to face serious risks from asbestos exposure,
particularly in asbestos removal, demolition, building maintenance, ship-breaking and waste handling activities,

Noting that it has taken three decades of efforts and the emergence of suitable alternatives for a comprehensive ban on the manufacturing and use of asbestos and asbestos-containing products to be adopted in a number of countries,

Further noting that the objective of the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention 2006 is to prevent occupational injuries, diseases and deaths,
1. Resolves that:
(a) the elimination of the future use of asbestos and the identification and proper management of asbestos currently in place are the most effective means to protect workers from asbestos exposure and to prevent future asbestos-related diseases and deaths; and
(b) the Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162), should not be used to provide a justification for, or endorsement of, the continued use of asbestos.
2. Requests the Governing Body to direct the International Labour Office to:
(a) continue to encourage member States to ratify and give effect to the provisions of the Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162), and the Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139);
(b) promote the elimination of future use of all forms of asbestos and asbestos containing materials in all member States;
(c) promote the identification and proper management of all forms of asbestos currently in place;
(d) encourage and assist member States to include measures in their national programmes on occupational safety and health to protect workers from exposure to asbestos; and
(e) transmit this resolution to all member States.

NGO warns against lifting ban on asbestos mining

New Delhi, Dec 12 (UNI) Environment NGO Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) has expressed concern over the proposal to lift the ban on mining of asbestos, the cancer causing material used in construction.

It said stories of the toll asbestos takes on people are yet to hit the headlines in India as has been the case in the US, Europe, Australia and Japan. Workers in India work up to their knees in asbestos powder, breaking up asbestos cement roofs and pipes.

Quoting the recent UN statistics, it said India imported roughly 306,000 MT of asbestos in 2006, out of which 152, 820 MT was imported from Russia, 63, 980 MT from Canada, 48, 807 MT from Kazakhstan and 34, 953 MT from Brazil.

So far, some 45 countries have banned this killer fiber. Asbestos consumption is rising dramatically in India while US Senate passed the Ban Asbestos in America Act on October 4, 2007 unanimously.

Asbestos is banned in Europe since January 1, 2005. But countries like Russia, Canada, Kazakhstan and Brazil continue to produce, trade and promote it in India. The Russian Federation has also been found to be exporting asbestos industry waste to India.

The NGO said research was showing asbestos epidemics across the globe even in countries where it was currently banned, as the consequence of past exposure.

In its report titled 'Asbestos: the iron grip of latency' issued last year, the International Labour Organisation has already said that asbestos was still the No.1 carcinogen in the world and the dumping of asbestos on developing countries will "prove to be a health time bomb in these countries in 20 to 30 years' time." The NGO said it was unfortunate that the Union Ministry of Mines and Minerals had proposed to lift the existing ban on asbestos mining.

''The Ministry was ignoring the views of exposure victims, informed recommendations of public sector medical experts, and mounting evidence of an asbestos disease epidemic emerging in developed countries. The rationale to permit mining is hollow,'' it added.

It said research had found that needle-like crystals permanently penetrate the lung tissue when dust-sized particles of asbestos were inhaled. The crystals can eventually cause scarring of the lungs, called asbestosis, and can cause cancer of the lining of the lung, called mesothelioma. Both diseases were incurable and terminal." In such a situation, BANI said, it was inexplicable as to why discredited and false claims of 'safe use' of asbestos by the industry were being repeated by Namo Narain Meena, the Minister of State for Environment saying, "No complaints have so far been received regarding its carcinogenic content and its hazard to health and environment." This is in stark contrast to the Ministry' own admission in the Supreme Court that 16 per cent of the workers exposed are suffering from asbestos related diseases, it said.

Status of Asbestos use & exposure in India

T. Subbarami Reddy worships the Demon named AS-BES-TOS even as the Chairman of the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, a very religious institution.


Ministry of Health says, asbestos exposure causes lung cancer
Ministry of Mines says, lift the ban on asbestos mining

On November 27, 2007, Union Minister of State for Mines, Dr. T. Subbarami Reddy informed the Lok Sabha that “A study has been conducted by the Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM) regarding the likely effects on the health of the labourers engaged in the mining of asbestos. The Study recommended imposition of safeguards on pollution level in work environment and other remedial measures.” Dr. Reddy in a written reply said, “Recommendations of the Study have been examined in consultation with all stake holders. Some stake holders have suggested that asbestos mining can be permitted with appropriate safeguards. At present the ban on mining of asbestos has not been lifted.”

Unexamined in the media, workers in India work up to their knees in asbestos powder, breaking up asbestos cement roofs and pipes. Stories of the toll asbestos takes on people are yet to hit the headlines in India as been the case in US, Europe, Australia and Japan. Indian homes are often built of asbestos cement roofs, and people cut their own windows and doorways. Research is showing asbestos epidemics across the globe even in countries where it is currently banned, as the consequence of past exposure, with estimated deaths reaching 30 per day.

Stories of the toll asbestos takes on people are yet to hit the headlines in India as has been the case in US, Europe, Australia and Japan. The recent UN statistics indicates that India imported roughly 306,000 MT of asbestos in 2006. Out of which 152, 820 MT was imported from Russia, 63, 980 MT from Canada, 48, 807 MT from Kazakhstan and 34, 953 MT from Brazil.

Asbestos is a proven human carcinogen (a substance that causes cancer). Lack of health surveillance of asbestos exposed workers and consumers is an invitation to disaster from wholesale public exposure, especially babies and infants in India. Some 45 countries have banned this killer fiber. Asbestos consumption is rising dramatically in India even as U.S. Senate passed Ban Asbestos in America Act on October 04, 2007 unanimously. Asbestos is banned in Europe since 1 January 2005. But countries like Russia, Canada, Kazakhstan and Brazil continue to produce, trade and promote this ticking time bomb in India. The Russian Federation has also been found to be exporting asbestos industry waste to India. Research is showing asbestos epidemics across the globe even in countries where it is currently banned, as the consequence
of past exposure.

Union Ministry of Mines and Minerals is all set to lift the existing ban on asbestos mining. It is ignoring the views of exposure victims, informed recommendations of public sector medical experts, and mounting evidence of an asbestos disease epidemic emerging in developed countries. The rationale to permit mining is hollow.
The International Labour Organization said in January 2006 that asbestos is still the No.1 carcinogen in the world in its report titled "Asbestos: the iron grip of latency." It adds, the dumping of asbestos on developing countries will "prove to be a health time bomb in these countries in 20 to 30 years' time." Jukka Takala, Director of the ILO InFocus Programme SafeWork, issued the report.

While white asbestos mining is currently banned in India, its import, export or use in manufacturing is permitted. But recently, the Ministry of Mines has indicated that it may lift the mining ban.

The reality is that the country's most powerful parliamentarians bless the asbestos industry. On 1 January 2006, production began at an asbestos-cement factory in Rae Bareli, Uttar Pradesh, in the constituency of Sonia Gandhi. The factory is of Visaka Industries, one of India's largest asbestos groups. The company also has asbestos-cement factories in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Karnataka. The Chairman of Visaka Industries, G Vivekanand, is the son of the G Venkataswamy, Member of Parliament, Deputy Leader of the Indian Congress Parliamentary Party and a former Union Textile Minister.

Visaka Industries has asbestos plants located even in Midnapore in West Bengal where CPI(M) is the ruling party for more than 25 years. Although Centre of Indian Trade Union and All India Trade Union Congress have called for ban on asbestos and have also written to the Prime Minister, the fact remains, that the CPI (M) has not gotten rid of it from their own backyard.

There are some states, for instance Assam, UP, and Tamil Nadu, where asbestos factory units are run by the state governments. Pulivendala, Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y S Rajasekhara Reddy's constituency, has 14 mines. In September 2004, P Dayasankar, Director, Andhra Pradesh's State Mines and Geology Department was reported in the Business Standard to have predicted that the ban on mining may well be lifted. Taking the line that state and central health agencies were also in favour of lifting the ban, he said: "We have already represented the matter to the government of India for the appropriate decision. To my knowledge, the Centre is on the verge of taking a positive decision."

It is not difficult to notice why the entire political establishment wears blinkers when it comes to acknowledging the fact that currently over 45 countries including Europe have banned all forms of asbestos including chrysotile (white asbestos) due to health hazards. With asbestos firms being owned by politicians or the state itself, the government seems to be following a classic ostrich policy.

"Research has found that needle-like crystals permanently penetrate the lung tissue when dust-sized particles of asbestos are inhaled. The crystals can eventually cause scarring of the lungs, called asbestosis, and can cause cancer of the lining of the lung, called mesothelioma. Both diseases are incurable and terminal." In such a situation it is inexplicable as why discredited and false claims of 'safe use' of asbestos by the industry is being parroted by Namo Narain Meena, the Minister of State for Environment saying, "No complaints have so far been received regarding its carcinogenic content and its hazard to health and environment." This is is stark contrast to Ministry’ own admission in the Supreme Court that 16 % of the workers exposed are suffering from asbestos related diseases.

Dr Barry Castleman’s presentation at the workshop in New Delhi demolished the myth of safe and controlled use of all kinds of asbestos. Dr Castleman is the author of Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects that is in its fifth edition. The book provides accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter. He is well known for his role in global ban asbestos movement and the passage of Ban Asbestos America Act 2007 in the US Senate. His expert opinion is being filed in the Supreme Court of India in December 2007 in the Hazardous waste/Blue Lady case that is still sub judice.

Inhaling microscopic asbestos particles is enough to deposit particles in the lungs. Export of chrysotile asbestos by Russians and Canadians to developing countries is "criminal" and is killing workers in India. Hundreds of thousands of factory workers, construction workers and consumers across India inhale chrysotile asbestos every day. Workers are too poor or uneducated to demand better working conditions and materials. Till date only 11 workers have been compensated for asbestos-related diseases. Canadian government is promoting this killer fiber with some 800 miners working in the industry.
Like Russian government, Canadian government too makes a claim that efforts are made to promote the safe use of chrysotile in the 65 countries that import it. It will have Indian workers, consumers and the governments believe that chrysotile fibres are far less potent or harmful than most traditional forms of asbestos that are no longer mined or used in Canada. At low levels and following proper safety rules, studies have shown chrysotile poses a minimal health risk. Russian and Canadian government are against a general ban on chrysotile asbestos. Dr Castleman said, "It's baffling that Canada would be involved in this activity which, for a nation, it's criminal."

It is noteworthy that the Union Health Ministry has informed the Parliament: "Studies by the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad, have shown that long-term exposure to any type of asbestos can lead to the development of asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma." Dr. Anbumani Ramadoss, Union Health Minister informed the Lok Sabha, "Regarding asbestos, a lot of poor people use it. As regards the issue pertaining to banning of asbestos, as a health issue, the Government certainly has not taken it up. It is an occupational hazard and people working in the asbestos factories are prone to lung cancer, but we are taking the enormity of the usage of asbestos. Mostly, poor people in the villages use it. Hence, I cannot take a decision on this issue." Recently the manner in which chrysotile asbestos industry has been funding research of NIOH to get favourable opinion about the killer fiber was exposed in national media.

Such stances betray the fact that the UPA government supported by left parties have succumbed to pressures from asbestos industry comprising of Visaka Industries, Hyderabad Industries Limited, Ramco Industries Limited, Utkal Industries Ltd, Everest Industries Ltd, New Sahyadri Industries Ltd, U P Asbestos Ltd, Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited, Kerala Asbestos Cement pipe Factory Limited, Sturdy Industries Ltd, Shakti Roofings Ltd, Assam Roofing Ltd, A Infrastructure Ltd. and others who have been lobbying with the help of Chrysotile Asbestos Cement Products Manufacturers’
Association, a corporate NGO and Asbestos Information Centre, a corporate NGO both are affiliated to multinational asbestos producers through International Chrysotile Association.

Brief background to asbestos regulation

Since 1984, environmental monitoring and health surveys have led to in-depth studies in asbestos based industries in India, highlighting an occupationally vulnerable worker population. It was noticed that the workers occupationally exposed to asbestos have a maximum impairment in their pulmonary function test. Besides the consumers, workers employed in the cement-asbestos factories also suffer from the exposure to asbestos. Its incubation period is long, it takes as long as 25 to 30 years for the fibers to make their presence felt in the human body but by then it is incurable. In the developed countries, insurance companies have stopped covering workers employed in asbestos factories and mines.

It was in view of the deleterious effect of asbestos mining on the health of the workers, the central government ordered the state governments in 1986 not to grant any new mining lease for asbestos (including chrysotile variety) in the country. In June 1993, the central government stopped the renewal of existing mining leases of asbestos. The ban was imposed in phases in 1986 and 1993 but not on its use, manufacture, export and import, as noted earlier. But despite the ban on mining, illegal mines are operating in the states of Jharkhand, Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh. Most asbestos-cement is using imported asbestos, some of it is being sourced from the illegal mining though that is a relatively small proportion.

Following a Supreme Court order, the Union Ministry of Labour constituted a Special
Committee under Chairmanship of S K Saxena, Director General, Directorate of General Factory Advice Service and Labour on the issue of medical benefits and compensation to workers affected by handling of hazardous waste, toxic in nature. The Saxena Committee's report mentions lung cancer and mesothelioma caused by asbestos in all work involving exposure to the risk concerned.

Measures now afoot to lift the ban
The Union Ministry of Mines has proposed to lift the existing ban on mining of chrysotile asbestos. The government volte-face signals the culmination of a debate that began in 1998 when the Ministry of Mines and Minerals (MOMM) asked the Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM) to assess the feasibility of lifting the ban on expansion of asbestos mining after assessing pollution levels in asbestos mines and processing plants in Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh.

On 10 March 2006, the Ministry of Mines and Minerals issued a statement saying, "IBM has been asked to work out necessary safeguards/measures in consultation with Central Pollution Control Board subject to which chrysotile asbestos mining can be permitted so as to ensure worker's safety."

The manifest support the asbestos industry appears to enjoy from the ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA) seems illustrative of an unhealthy consensus, overall. In the meantime, research from leading Indian institutes continues to contradict the Ministry's push to lift the ban. In India, the mining and milling of asbestos is done in Cuddapah (Andhra Pradesh) and Devgarh (Rajasthan).

An in-depth study conducted by Industrial Toxicology Research Centre (ITRC), Lucknow in Beawer and Deovgarh Rajasthan observed higher fibre concentrations in the milling units. All the units belong to the unorganised sector where technology is poor and laws and regulations are simply not in force. The ITRC team observed prevalence of asbestosis in less than five years, which is very high and alarming. ITRC is a constituent laboratory of Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), an autonomous body associated with the Union Ministry of Education. It is dedicated to provide health safeguards to industrial and agricultural workers through its rich knowledgebase, created painstakingly over the years.

Dr Qamar Rahman, a senior scientist with ITRC, visiting Professor at Rostock University, Germany and Dean, Research & Development, Integral University, Lucknow says that on the basis of the report and recent studies conducted in the milling units, the ban on asbestos mining should not be lifted. She notes that mining and processing are the part of each other and conditions need to be improved at both the places simultaneously. "In the milling or grinding area fibre concentration is very high, workers do not use gloves, masks and protective clothing. They use primitive manual way for grinding," she says, alarmingly. The housekeeping in the units are also very bad, feels Dr Rahman.

"At the moment unauthorised mining of asbestos is going on in Rajasthan and workers are heavily exposed. If the ban will be lifted conditions will further deteriorate. Keeping in view the above facts the ban on asbestos mining should not be lifted," said Dr Rahman in her comments to the central government on a report regarding lifting the ban on asbestos mining.

The Ministry of Mines chooses to ignore such suggestions in the same way as it has ignored the plight of victims of white asbestos mines in Roro Hills, Chaibasa, Jharkhand abandoned by Hyderabad Asbestos Cement Products Limited (now known as Hyderabad Industries Limited).

The rationale to support the continued use of this killer fiber used in over 3,000 products is barbaric and inhuman. It continues to devastate workers and consumers, but the extent of the tragedy remains largely uncovered in Indian media.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Released by Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) at the Workshop on Occupational Health organized by Centre for Occupational & Environmental Health, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi Web:banasbestosindia.blogspot.com

P.S: A shocking expose on India TV channel on 10th December, 2007 showed how asbestos powder is being mixed in Basmati rice (a very popular and sought after variety of rice in the north and exported) during polishing to give it that extra whiteness.

The expose showed workers mixing dry asbestos powder and talcum powder in rice with bare hands. The bags in which they were being filled had the following printed on them "Mohan Basmati Rice" "Export quality".

Chrysotile Asbestos Under Scientific Scanner in India

Press Invite

Chrysotile Asbestos Under Scientific Scanner

Amid recent discussions in the winter session of parliament and in the backdrop of the controversial statements of Union Minister of Health and Minister of State for Mines, the Workshop on Occupational Health at India Habitat Centre, New Delhi is discussing global asbestos struggle.

Renowned scientists and experts of asbestos, occupational health and nanotechnology like Dr Barry Castleman among others are scheduled to address the workshop.

Date: December 11, 2007
Time: 11 AM–12 AM.
Venue: Magnolia Hall, India Habitat Centre, New Delhi

Dr Castleman would also address the issue of Threshold Limit Value (TLV), a chemical substance defines the reasonable level to which a worker can be exposed without adverse health effects. TLV for particulates (such as dust etc) are constantly under excessive corporate influence. As part of an ongoing international effort is needed to develop scientifically based guidelines to replace the TLVs in a climate of openness and without manipulation by vested interests, the workshop would dwell on the role of Russian and Canadian chrysotile asbestos producers and Indian chrysotile asbestos product manufacturers.

Dr Castleman’s magnum opus Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects which is in its fifth edition provides accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter. He is well known for his role in global ban asbestos movement and the passage of Ban Asbestos America Act 21007 in the US Senate. His expert opinion is being filed in the Supreme Court of India in December 2007 in the Hazardous waste/Blue Lady case that is still sub judice.

The workshop is being organized by Centre for Occupational & Environmental Health, Maulana Azad Medical College.

For Details:Gopal Krishna, Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI), Mb: 9818089660
Note: Investigations into the historical development of specific Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) for many substances have revealed that unpublished corporate communications were important in developing TLVs for 104 substances. Out of these 104 substances, for 15 substances, the TLV documentation was based solely on such information. Efforts to obtain written copies of this unpublished material have been mostly unsuccessful. Corporate representatives listed officially as "consultants" since 1970 were given primary responsibility for developing TLVs on proprietary chemicals of the companies that employed them.

Stop promotion of asbestos epidemic

Global Ban on Asbestos containing products only answer

"Research has found that needle-like crystals permanently penetrate the lung tissue when dust-sized particles of asbestos are inhaled. The crystals can eventually cause scarring of the lungs, called asbestosis, and can cause cancer of the lining of the lung, called mesothelioma. Both diseases are incurable and terminal."

Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) appreciates the statement of Pat Martin and Libby Davies, Members of Parliament, Canada who have taken Canadian Government to task saying, "We are exporting human misery at a staggering rate.



Canada should be joining the international community to stop the production of asbestos and its export." New Democratic Party (NDP), Canada has called on their government to shut down Canada's asbestos industry and scrap "horrifying" regulations that allow the use of the cancer-causing mineral in children's toys and other products. New Democratic MPs Pat Martin and Libby Davies released test results on December 1, 2007 showing that asbestos is present in a popular new children's toy made in China (CSI Fingerprint Examination Kit). BANI supports the call to ban Chinese asbestos laden toys in particular and all kinds of asbestos in general.

Quite like its Indian counterpart, the Canadian government has fallen prey to "aggressive industry lobbyists" and is keeping its head in the sand about the dangers of asbestos. Ms. Davies said.

"There is no safe level of asbestos," she said. "There's no question that it's a carcinogen. Canada, which exports more than 200,000 tonnes of asbestos each year, should develop a relief program for workers and shut down the industry, she added. Globe and Mail, the Canadian newspaper published has published the results.

In such a context the statement of Dr Anbumani Ramadoss, Union Health Minister is unpardonable. He informed the Lok Sabha saying, "…regarding asbestos, a lot of poor people use it. As regards the issue pertaining to banning of asbestos, as a health issue, the Government certainly has not taken it up. It is an occupational hazard and people working in the asbestos factories are prone to lung cancer, but we are taking the enormity of the usage of asbestos. Mostly, poor people in the villages use it. Hence, I cannot take a decision on this issue." He has succumbed to pressures from asbestos industry comprising of Visaka Industries, Hyderabad Industries Limited, Ramco Industries Limited, Utkal Industries Ltd, Everest Industries Ltd, New Sahyadri Industries Ltd, U P Asbestos Ltd, Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited, Kerala Asbestos Cement pipe Factory Limited, Sturdy Industries Ltd, Shakti Roofings Ltd, Assam Roofing Ltd, A Infrastructure Ltd. and others who have been lobbying with the help of Chrysotile Asbestos Cement Products Manufacturers’ Association, a corporate body and Asbestos Information Centre, a corporate NGO both are affiliated to multinational asbestos producers through International Chrysotile Association. Dr Ramadoss was responding to a question by

"Asbestos is the greatest industrial killer the world has ever known and you would have to be insane to put asbestos in children's toys," Martin said. "It would be like putting razor blades in Halloween apples. So what does that say about a government that would allow it?" Martin said new regulations under Canada's Hazardous Materials Act allow asbestos-laden products "used by a child in education or play."

BANI has written to Canadian Tony Clement, the Canadian Health Minister and Canadian newspapers like Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, the Montreal Gazette, the Winnipeg Free Press, the Ottawa Citizen and the Vancouver Sun to ensure that a ban on the use and export of asbestos is announced at the earliest. BANI is one of the co-founders of Ban Asbestos Canada that has been part of ban asbestos campaign in Canada.

It has been argued by CSI kit manufacturers that its product meets all U.S. safety standards, but interestingly it noted that U.S. agencies "don't require asbestos testing and therefore we have never been apprised of any unacceptable levels of asbestos."

The Chinese toys have flooded Indian market. Most recently the fact of toxic Lead in these toys have been proven. This shows that these toys are not tested for any chemical health hazards including asbestos. In any case Indian Commerce and Environment Ministry has been promoting the use of killer asbestos fiber under the guidance of Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA. The new asbestos plants in Jaunpur and Raebarely, Uttar Pradesh and at other places shows that CCEA has refused to take cognisance of the incontrovertible evidence of the toll asbestos epidemic is taking across the globe due to past exposure despite its ban in some 45 countries.

Earlier a conference on Canadian Asbestos: A Global Concern in Ottawa on September 12, 13 and 14 2003 culminated in the passing of a resolution seeking ban on all forms of asbestos and the formation of Ban Asbestos Canada.

The Asbestos Institute now renamed as The Chrysotile Institute in Montreal received a total of $54 million from the Federal Government, the Quebec Government and the asbestos industry to promote "the safe use of chrysotile asbestos in Canada and throughout the world between 1984-2001. The conference also called on the Canadian government to withdraw its funding to this institute.

The conference was organised by the Canadian Union of Public Employees OHCOW Clinic, the Sierra Club of Canada, Mining Watch Canada, the New Democratic Party, the White Lung Association (USA) the Society of Occupational and Environmental Health (USA), the International Ban Asbestos Secretariat and the Global Ban Asbestos Movement

Some of the trade unions expressed the hope that if Paul Martin who is likely to become the next Prime Minister of Canada will play a constructive role in getting white asbestos banned. Martin belongs to the Liberal Party. Martin is the Member of Parliament in Montreal, Quebec. He has been a business executive Power Corporation of Canada, in Montreal, and as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Canada Steamship Lines.

After the conference Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) submitted a petition to Joe Comartin, member, Parliamentary Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development expressing its appreciation of the conference on Canadian Asbestos: A Global Concern in Ottawa on September 12, 13 and 14 2003 organized with him as the President. The petition sought immediate ban on white asbestos. Some of the Canadian trade unions are quite well informed about the hazards of white asbestos. Those trade unionists who attended the conference endorsed the call for the ban on white asbestos.

BANI endorsed the call given by the conference to the Canadian government to withdraw its funding to The Asbestos Institute which is now renamed as The Chrysotile Institute. This institute has been supporting the Asbestos Information Centre in India and has been very active in promoting asbestos in India.

The myth of so-called ¡°safe use¡± has been shattered by none other than Martin Barratt, Second Secretary (Commercial), Canadian High Commission in India when he admitted that even the Asbestos Information Centre agrees that there are problems with the ¡°safe use¡± of asbestos in the unorganised sector. Mr. Barratt is concerned that if a ruling is passed which states that subjecting a worker to asbestos is a violation of human rights it could have far reaching consequences whether or not it is binding¡±.

In India, workers slice open the bags of Canadian asbestos with knives, then shake the bags into troughs and mix it with cement to make piping. The unprotected workers are completely covered in asbestos dust, and there are absolutely no precautions in place.

Most of the Canadian asbestos is used in the rural India where there is no health infrastructure in place. Each passing day is taking more than hundreds of thousands of workers towards death.

Human biology is the same everywhere, if asbestos of all kinds including white asbestos is cancer causing in over 30 countries how can it be non-hazardous and safe in India. How can asbestos be allowed to cause havoc while waiting for another 30-40 years for more studies to conclude that white asbestos is a carcinogen, says Dr T K Joshi, a fellow of the Collegium Ramazzini, an international body of occupational health experts.

BANI appealed to the Canadian House of Commons through Mr Comartin to eliminate the burden of disease and death and save the India from yet another disaster.

The conference passed a the following resolution which was adopted on September 13, 2003 in Ottawa, Canada:

Canadian Asbestos: A Global Concern

Preamble:

The international epidemic of ill-health and death caused by exposure to asbestos has been raging for decades. As Western countries have sought to control harmful exposures by implementing national prohibitions on the use of asbestos (including amosite, crocidolite and chrysotile), global asbestos producers have targeted consumers in developing countries.

Canada is currently the world’s second biggest chrysotile (white asbestos) exporter, sending this class 1 carcinogen to countries with few, if any, safeguards, where it is used by poorly trained and uninformed workers with little access to medical care or sickness benefits. Although Canadian asbestos stakeholders maintain that chrysotile can be used safely under controlled conditions. Canada exports more than 95% of all the asbestos it produces; critics suggest that the Canadian principle of controlled use is a hypocritical ploy to profit from the export of a substance too hazardous to be used at home. By advocating this double standard, Canadian interests are promoting occupational and environmental racism in consuming countries.

Resolved:

In view of the rising asbestos death toll, delegates to the conference: Canadian Asbestos: A Global Concern urge Canadian Federal and Regional Governments to renounce their backing of the asbestos industry and withdraw financial and political support from the Asbestos Institute, the Montreal-based body which has been orchestrating global pro-chrysotile support since the mid-1980s. Further be it resolved that the Canadian government immediately join in the global ban on the use and importation of asbestos. Be it further resolved that since the Canadian government has played a direct role in maintaining the asbestos industry globally that it must assume responsibility for harm done to workers, their families and their communities where Canadian asbestos has been used. This liability includes providing the necessary financial resources for the health and compensation of asbestos victims and for assisting in the just transition for workers who are employed in industries that utilize Canadian asbestos. Be it further resolved the conference start the process of negotiating for a United Nations agreement for the worldwide ban of asbestos. This agreement would be negotiated in the framework of the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP).

Recommendations:

We wish to make the following recommendations to the International Labour Organisation, the World Health Organisation, the United Nations, the European Union and all national governments:

ASBESTOS BAN: The use of all forms of asbestos should be banned in developed and developing countries; objective information about safer alternatives is needed to counter industry propaganda such as that being spread in India about the virtues of chrysotile by the Asbestos Cement Products Manufacturers Association. No virtues of chrysotile can excuse the continuing use of such a hazardous substance. The influence of Canada has been applied to oppose efforts in other countries to ban asbestos. Some authorities in Canada are encouraging the use of asbestos in asphalt mixtures for road repairs to generate sales for the ailing local asbestos industry. In the name of occupational health and public safety, these practices must cease.

MINIMISATION OF RISK: Labelling of asbestos products contained throughout national infrastructures should be mandatory.
National groups of experts and workers with expertise in minimizing exposure to asbestos during maintenance, reconstruction and demolition work should be convened in order to identify approved protocols; these protocols must be enforced.
Research into procedures for disposing of asbestos-contaminated waste is needed. All nations should ratify the Basel Convention which classifies asbestos as dangerous waste.
The ILO and WHO must adopt the recommendations of chrysotile (International Programme on Chemical Safety - Environmental Health Criteria Document 203: Chrysotile Asbestos, 1998) in line with the decision by many countries to ban asbestos.
; be encouraged to update asbestos-related measures such as ILO convention 162 (adopted 1986!) and Chrysotile Criteria 203 in line with the adoption by many countries of asbestos prohibitions.

RAISING AWARENESS: Campaigns for raising awareness of the hazards of asbestos must be carried out amongst the public and exposed sectors of the workforce. Trade unions and NGOs have a pivotal part to play in the education process; medical professionals have an ethical obligation to spread knowledge about these problems.

INFORMATION: Information on safer alternatives and national experiences of implementing non-asbestos technologies should be shared. As asbestos-cement products account for 90% of all the asbestos used, it is of paramount importance to disseminate accurate and independent information on substitute materials. The ILO and WHO should produce and distribute literature on these subjects.

RESEARCH: Funding is urgently needed for the development and implementation of diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to asbestos-related diseases.
Commitments to monitor the current burden of asbestos-related diseases, update epidemiological predictions and conduct medical surveillance of exposed populations are urgently needed; the establishment of national mesothelioma registers should be a priority.

COMPENSATION: Laws or procedures for compensating victims, including bystander victims, of asbestos-related diseases must be approved. Governments must take a positive role in providing medical surveillance if this is not done by employers.

JUST TRANSITION: Where the implementation of an asbestos ban displaces workers, a policy of just Transition (in line with the Canadian Labour Congress policy on just transition) should be adopted to safeguard the income, employment and welfare of affected workers and their communities. Plans should be put in place to guarantee a pension to all workers displaced from the Canadian asbestos industry; health care should be provided for them and their families. Former asbestos workers should be permitted to work, should they choose to, while receiving their pensions; their expertise could be put to good effect in decontaminating affected buildings and areas.

CORPORATE RESPONSIBILTY/OPERATIONS OF ASBESTOS MULTINATIONALS: Corporations that engage in the use of asbestos should be liable under both civil and criminal law. The application by multinational companies of double standards in the treatment of workers, consumers and the public in developed and developing countries must be exposed and terminated; multinationals involved in the mining of asbestos and the marketing and use of asbestos products should accept responsibility for compensating asbestos victims and cleaning up contaminated areas.

In many developing countries, multinationals are selling off asbestos interests to ruthless and powerful local entrepreneurs; the ILO and WHO should take up asbestos problems directly with national governments.

The Powder That Chokes

In November, 2007 PLANNING DEPARTMENT of GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN prepared a COMPENDIUM OF ISSUES PENDING WITH GOVERNMENT OF INDIA which listed Prohibition on Asbestos Mining as one of the pending issues.

The compendium reads: "Government of India has prohibited renewal of and grant of fresh asbestos mining leases in the country, keeping in view the adverse effects on the health of those working in such mines. The Indian Bureau of Mines has carried out detailed studies and has prepared a report which has been submitted to the Government of India. In this report, it is mentioned that the mining operations do not affect the health of a worker exposed to these operations and by taking precautionary measures, it can be checked. Based on this Report, GOI may be requested to lift the ban on renewal of existing and grant of fresh asbestos mining leases in the country.
A meeting was held on 21.9.2004 whereas decision was taken to continue ban on new leasing and renewal of asbestos mining in Rajasthan."

"Rajasthan State has largest deposits of low grade asbestos and having largest production also. Looking to this, ban on asbestos shall not continue. In this regard, GOI has been again requested on 10.11.2004. The Govt. of India has been recently reminded on 25.7.06 to lift the ban on asbestos mining."

It refers to Action required:-Government of India may be requested to lift ban on grant and renewal of Asbestos mining.

It has prepared Possible Question for the Government of India to respond:-
1. Is it true that Indian Bureau of Mines have conducted study on the health hazards of asbestos mine workers of Rajasthan ?
2. If yes, what are the recommendations ? Is study recommends for lifting of ban on asbestos leasing ?
3. Is Govt. of India have intension to implement these suggestions and lift ban on leasing and renewal of leases asbestos ?
4. If so, when ?

It also gives the Name & Telephone No. of concerned Minister/Officer in Government of India who should be approach. Their names are as under:-
Joint Secretary, Ministry of Mines, Telephone No. 23384886
Name & Telephone No. of concerned officer in Government of Rajasthan: -
Shri N. P. Sharma, Dy. Secretary, Mines Department, Jaipur. Telephone No. 2227217(O), 2703036(R).

Note: Asbestos mines in India is taking its toll but there is criminal negligence towards the asbestos victims. In India, asbestos occurs in the states of Andra Pradesh, Rajashtan, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Tamilnadu and Manipur. (Most of the Indian asbestos deposits belong to the tremolite-actinolite variety. It occurs in tremolite-actinolite schists, amphibolites and metamorphosed basic and ultra
basic rocks. Jharkhand and Rajasthan were mainly enriched with tremolite followed by small amount of chrysotile.

In Andra Pradesh and Tamilnadu the amphibole variety is more abundant than the chrysotile variety. In Jharkhand, chrysotile asbestos occurs in Singhbhum districts associated with serpentinised dunites and peridodites and is usually between 3.1 to 6.2 mm long. Chrysotile asbestos fibers are short between 9.4 to 15.75 mm in length. Lakshmana mines in Cuddapah district in Andra Pradesh chrysotile fibers are between 0.076 to 0.152 mm in length2, 4–7).countries.













All forms of asbestos cause asbestosis, a progressive fiberotic disease of the lungs. All can cause lung cancer and malignant mesothelioma. In new developing industrial
nations like India the exposure are much higher and the potential for epidemics of asbestos diseases is great.



Singbhumi Ekta, a weekly from Chaibasa, published between January and August 1981, carried a press release from the late P. Mazumdar, the leader of the United Mine Workers Union (AITUC), which says that 30 workers from Roro mines had died of asbestosis. Sundaraw, a asbestos worker(PICTURE ABOVE) and others like him will also meet the same fate who are engaged in the mines at Pulivendala, Andhra Pradesh.

HEALTH: ASBESTOS MINING


Shuchi Srivastava

Health norms be damned. India may lift the ban on asbestos mining.


Matter That Kills


• WHO estimates 90,000 people die annually due to asbestos-related occupational cancer.
• Experts aver that there are no safe levels of asbestos exposure.
• Not many aware that even normal wear and tear of asbestos carry health and environment hazards.
***
Around 40 countries the world over may have banned or set in motion steps to phase out the use of asbestos, a deadly carcinogenic mineral, yet India blithely moves in reverse gear.

The move to lift the asbestos mining ban defies global practices. The US has banned its use recently.

Unmindful of the health and environment concerns, the Centre is working overtime to lift a 20-year-old ban on asbestos mining. In 1986, it had directed all states to stop granting new mining leases for asbestos (including chrysotile) in view of the deleterious effect on the health of mine workers. In 1993, the government also stopped renewing existing mining leases.

Now it is set to do an about turn. "A gazette notification outlining our recommendations towards lifting the ban on mining chrysolite asbestos is currently under formulation. We expect it to go for cabinet approval early next year," says Kaushik Sarkar, deputy-director, Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS).

For the layman, asbestos is a generic term applied to certain naturally occurring fibrous minerals that came into use in over 3,000 products for their thermal resistance and immense tensile strength. Chrysotile, amosite and crocidolite are the most commonly used forms of asbestos. Chrysotile, deemed the safest, has 90 per cent market share. Asbestos's global reputation of being a proven human carcinogen has led to experts calling for a total cessation of its use. who estimates show that asbestos kills at least 90,000 people annually—about half of all occupational cancer deaths. Classified by EU as a category one carcinogen, experts aver there is no safe level of asbestos exposure. Once inhaled, the fibres get enmeshed in lung tissues, causing lung cancer, asbestosis and mesothelioma, which is a painful cancer of the chest wall lining.

The government volte-face signals the culmination of a debate that began in 1998 when the Ministry of Mines and Minerals (MOMM) asked the Indian Bureau of Mines (IBM) to assess the feasibility of lifting the ban on expansion of asbestos mining after assessing pollution levels in asbestos mines and processing plants in Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh.

Based on the IBM report, the MOMM in March 2006 issued an advisory stating, "IBM has been asked to work out necessary safeguards in consultation with the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), subject to which chrysotile asbestos mining can be permitted, so as to ensure workers' safety." Defending the decision, S.R. Roy, deputy controller of mines, IBM, says: "IBM is playing a facilitator's role between the DGMS and the CPCB, both of which have decided to reduce occupational exposure limits to all kinds of asbestos in the work environment from the earlier 2 fibre per cubic centimeter (f/cc) to 0.5 f/cc, although we believe the instrumentation required to measure this is quite expensive and could be difficult to implement." Adds Sarkar, "We feel the ban on chrysotile asbestos mining is illogical, especially as we allow large-scale asbestos imports from Canada and Russia for processing and manufacture into various products. So, if these units can be allowed to function under stringent safety rules, why can't we do the same while allowing local asbestos mining?"

Naturally, CPCB holds a different view. Says an official: "In principle, we have agreed with the DGMS to reduce exposure of the asbestos workers' to the global norm of 0.5 f/cc to 0.1 f/cc, but still have reservations about lifting the ban."

Qamar Rahman, senior scientist at the Lucknow-based Industrial Toxicology Research Centre, says: "On the basis of my own study and others conducted at the asbestos milling units, the ban on asbestos mining should not be lifted. Mining and processing are interrelated, and conditions need to be improved at both places simultaneously."

Rahman says that in the milling or grinding areas, fibre concentrations were high and workers didn't use gloves, masks or protective clothing. The primitive manual ways of grinding and housekeeping in the units was also very bad.

Local activists say the move to lift the mining ban is a blatant defiance of global benchmarks. Last month, the US Senate passed the Ban Asbestos in America Act. India, on the contrary, has slashed import duty from 78 per cent in 1995-96 to 25 per cent in 1999-2000.

As a result, the use of asbestos products for manufacture of pipes for water supply, sewage, irrigation and drainage system, textiles, laminated products, brake lining and jointing for automobiles, heavy equipment, fertilisers and thermal power plants continues unabated.

Global trade data reveals that in 2006, India imported around 3,06,000 metric tonnes (MT) of asbestos of which 1,52,820 MT was from Russia, 63,980 MT from Canada, 48,807 MT from Kazakhstan and 34,953 MT from Brazil. Ironically, while Canada doesn't allow domestic asbestos use, it is a major supplier.

Giving an industry perspective, Vivek Chandra Rao, GM, occupational health, Hyderabad Industries Ltd (HIL), a Birla group company, says: "The lifting of the ban does not mean that the industry will start using the indigenously mined asbestos, as we will first check the grade and quality versus the imported Canadian and Russian asbestos. Then there is the question of the volume available in our mines for our daily usage." HIL manufactures the 'Charminar' brand of corrugated asbestos cement sheets and has a marketshare of 22 per cent. Similarly, Everest Industries, with a 17 per cent marketshare in asbestos cement roofing, feels checking the quality is essential, as indigenous asbestos could also have high levels of adulteration.

With the asbestos industry employing about 8,000 workers, the main concerns are about health. "The health and safety legislation does not cover 93 per cent of workers in the unorganised sector, where asbestos exposures are very high," says Gopal Krishna, a veteran anti-asbestos activist. Not many are aware that even asbestos products like water pipes and roofing carry health risk as wind erosion besides normal wear and tear leads to disintegration of fibres, which can get lodged in the nose, mouth, throat, larynx or lungs. Says Rahman: "As these fibres are bio-persistent (stay in the body for years without changing) they can cause irreparable damage and cancer."

The government support of asbestos as a poor man's building material does not bode well, particularly when polyvinyl alcohol (PVA)—a man-made fibre—is available as a cheaper and less hazardous alternative. Activists allege that PVA import duties, now at around 71 per cent, hinder its acceptability as a replacement for asbestos in construction.

What the government hopes to achieve by going against the global tide remains unclear, but given asbestos's hazard potential, it should be ready to face the consequences.


Dec 03, 2007, Outlook
Source: http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20071203&fname=Asbestos+%28F%29&sid=1&pn=2

Use of Russian & Canadian asbestos rising in India

Asbestos is a proven human carcinogen (a substance that causes cancer). Lack of health surveillance of asbestos exposed workers and consumers is an invitation to disaster from wholesale public exposure, especially babies and infants in India. Some 45 countries have banned this killer fiber. Asbestos consumption is rising dramatically in India even as U.S. Senate passed Ban Asbestos in America Act on October 04, 2007 unanimously. Asbestos is banned in Europe since 1 January 2005. Indian politicians of all ilk seem to be hand in glove with both the Indian and global asbestos traders. The ruling Indian National Congress led United Progressive Alliance government and left supporters in their states too are guilty of subjecting Indian workers and consumers to asbestos hazards.




But countries like Russia, Canada, Kazakhstan and Brazil continue to produce, trade and promote this ticking time bomb in India. Instead of protecting the interest of their citizens,leaders like Sonia Gandhi and Kamal Nath(Congress leaders in the picture) remain callous towards asbestos victims. The Russian Federation has also been found to be exporting asbestos industry waste to India. Research is showing asbestos epidemics across the globe even in countries where it is currently banned, as the consequence of past exposure.











Stories of the toll asbestos takes on people are yet to hit the headlines in India as has been the case in US, Europe, Australia and Japan. The recent UN statistics indicates that India imported roughly 306,000 MT of asbestos in 2006. Out of which 152, 820 MT was imported from Russia, 63, 980 MT from Canada, 48, 807 MT from Kazakhstan and 34, 953 MT from Brazil.

It is noteworthy that International Conference on trade unions & chrysotile asbestos in Moscow (25-27 April, 2007) issued an appeal to World Health Organisation opposing the “WHO Policy on elimination of asbestos-related diseases” in favour of controlled use of chrysotile asbestos. The appeal concluded saying, “We are sure that chrysotile must not be banned for the sake of health and social welfare of hundreds of millions of people in the world (especially in developing countries), who suffer and prematurely die from having no shelter and clean water. A wide use of low-cost chrysotile-cement products is necessary to resolve this problem” ignoring the WHO finding that no safe level can be proposed for asbestos use because a threshold is not known to exist.

Asbestos production and marketing started in the Urals at the start of the 19th century. By the onset of World War I, Russia was the world’s second biggest asbestos producer, although well behind Canada. In 1975, Soviet Russia overtook Canada as the world’s leading asbestos producer. Russia remains the leading world asbestos producer. The country’s principal asbestos mine (Uralasbest) was privatized and was owned by new Russian capitalists. It was even declared bankrupt in 1997 but it resumed its activities afterwards.

There has virtually been no debate on asbestos either under the Soviet regime or since. Following the banning of asbestos in the European Union, the Vladimir Putin government did set up a panel of experts to give an opinion on a possible Russian asbestos ban.

The panel’s report is an impassioned defence of asbestos use. The pro-Russian asbestos lobby like their counterparts in Canada, Zimbabwe and Brazil too claim that it holds relatively little danger for health. The Russian authorities continue to deny the health havoc wrought by asbestos. Russian media, civil society and academia must sensitize the Russian citizens to desist from exporting asbestos to gullible Indians.

Currently mining of all kinds of asbestos (Blue, Brown and White [chrysotile] Asbestos) is banned in India. Trade in asbestos waste is also banned. Besides all other forms of asbestos other than chrysotile asbestos (White Asbestos) is prohibited in India. While white asbestos mining is currently banned in India, its import, export or use in manufacturing is permitted.

In September 2007, Independent Peoples Tribunal (IPT) on the World Bank Group (WBG) was presented with evidence of Bank officials suggesting how it finances huge infrastructure projects all over the world including India despite this there is no formal restrictions on the use of asbestos-cement (A-C) sheets and pipes in these projects. Over 90 percent of all asbestos used today is in A-C sheets and pipes, and this production is concentrated in poor countries. Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI) called for urgent action in India and elsewhere to end the needless slaughter caused by this environmental and occupational health catastrophe. The 4-day IPT was held from 21 –24 September at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

It was demanded, “The World Bank should adopt a formal policy of forbidding asbestos in all of its projects and require the use of safer substitute construction materials. Such substitution is feasible as shown by the bans in more than 40 countries.. The World Bank should also adopt best practice guidelines for the minimization of asbestos exposures in projects where in-place asbestos materials are disturbed by renovation or demolition activities.” It has called upon the World Bank to support the asbestos action program just started by the WHO and use its influence and leverage to press for cessation of asbestos use all over world.

The report of World Bank environmental official Robert Goodland, "Sustainable Development Sourcebook for the World Bank Group's Extractive Industries Review: Examining the Social and Environmental Impacts of Oil, Gas, and Mining" (3 December, 2003). Policy options for asbestos (p. 141) included, "5. The WBG should work with the rest of the UN system to foster a global ban on asbestos."

The voice of asbestos victims has been totally disregarded by Indian political parties of all hues both in the states and at national level unlike US and Europe. Indian homes are often built of asbestos cement roofs, and people cut their own windows and doorways. The occurrence of asbestos-related diseases, including mesothelioma, lung cancer and asbestosis, is growing out of control. Studies estimate that during the next decade, in India victims will die of an asbestos related disease at the rate of 30 deaths per day.













Sixty-seven-year old Mangabhai Patel, a retired workers of Ahmedabad based Torrent Power Ahmedabad Electric Company (AEC)Limited is battling asbestosis. Patel has been diagnosed with asbestosis by the National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH).
He got exposed while working at Torrent Power AEC where he had to pound asbestos and paste it along pipes as an insulator. Workers were given no protective gear while working and the result is showing on their body now.

Narayanprasad Mehra, another retired AEC worker worked for 25 years at the AEC power plant and he was diagnosed with asbestosis long before he retired.

A petition with the Gujarat High Court and the Supreme Court is pending. Following the directions of the High Court, NIOH was to examine the workers suspected to be suffering from asbestos related disease but even before the NIOH could start its work
Motiram and Manaji Rathod () died on 5 January 1996 and 2 February 1996 respectively. NIOH submitted its report to the Court on 22 June 1996. The High Court passed an interim order but Kishan Gopalani, died soon after the order. There are numerous such people who are suffering from both the disease and apathy of the government and the companies.

Indian government should disassociate itself from the Russian and Canadian asbestos lobby and take lessons from the nations that have banned this fiber to safeguard its workers and citizens.

P.S: Pascal Lamy, Director-General, WTO in a speech at the Yale University on 24 October 2007, said that the WTO has surprised critics by showing itself to be “capable of delivering not only trade justice, but some measure of environmental justice too,” citing as examples the dispute cases about asbestos and sea turtles.

Given below are the Press Releases of Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India prior to the WTO order on asbestos. These Releases make its position on asbestos quite clear. So far there has been no change in the Indian government's stance in the matter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INDIA PROTESTS AT WTO APPELLATE BODY MOVE INVITING AMICUS BRIEFS

Date : 23 Nov 2000
Location : New Delhi

At a special meeting of the General Council of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) held in Geneva, on 22nd November, India joined a vast majority of WTO members in protesting against the Appellate Body’s decision to invite amicus curiae (literally meaning "friends of the court") briefs* in the case relating to "European Communities -- Measures affecting Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos ".

India's statement at the meeting by India's Ambassador to the WTO, Shri S Narayanan, made it clear that India did not regard this issue as a procedural one, as viewed by the Appellate Body, but a substantive matter in which the Appellate Body's approach was totally unjustified. In his statement Shri Narayanan dwelt at length on how the Appellate Body's approach to accept unsolicited briefs as well as to invite submissions from any source on the most sensitive of all issues in the WTO, namely dispute cases, amounts to changing the inter-governmental character of the WTO.

For one thing, the ultimate compliance is to be done by Governments, not by others. Furthermore, Governmental position in disputes are arrived after consultations with all domestic stake holders. If Governments know that their non-governmental agencies have a further chance to influence the dispute settlement mechanism, then, they would pay less attention to finalising their positions and even worse, there may be implications for compliance by the Governments themselves, he said.

Shri Narayanan also said that the Appellate Body's approach would also have the implication of putting the developing countries at an even greater disadvantage in view of the relative unpreparedness of their own non-governmental agencies who have much less resources and wherewithal either to send briefs without being asked for or to respond to invitations for sending such briefs. Looking at the record of the WTO Appellate Body, Shri Narayanan said that the Appellate Body was at its best when it confined itself to its mandate i.e. deal with issues of law and legal interpretation.

When it went beyond its mandate and started making rules or amending rules and thus encroached into what was admittedly Members' territory, it created a problem for itself and the entire membership. In conclusion, Shri Narayanan said that the Appellate Body should show deference to the conviction of almost the entire Membership that in accepting unsolicited amicus curiae briefs and seeking amicus curiae briefs, the Appellate Body was acting without mandate and to take appropriate measures to remedy the situation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Canada promotes Asbestos use in India

"The Government of Canada recognizes that all forms of asbestos fibres are carcinogenic." Canada’s failure to ban asbestos and the continuing promotion of its mined asbestos to the developing world–particularly India, Canada’s largest market, where asbestos cannot be legally mined but is used extensively in the production of cement.

It is high time Stephen Harper, Prime Minister, Canada desisted from the practicing active promotion of the export of asbestos in India and banned asbestos. The deafening silence of Stephen Harper and Canadian House of Commons is killing the workers and consumers in India.

Government of Canada should introduce legislation to ban the use and export of asbestos, support the listing of chrysotile asbestos under the Rotterdam Convention and stop funding the Asbestos Institute (renamed the Chrysotile Institute).

The frozen passivity of Canadian Ministers like Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources and legislators like Stéphane Dion, Leader of the Liberal Party, Jack Layton, Leader of the New Democratic Party, Gilles Duceppe, Leader of the Bloc Quebecois and
Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party is taking its toll. To refer to their acts of omission and commission as barbaric is an understatement.

Inhaling asbestos fibers, which easily become airborne when a product is worn or disturbed, can cause mesothelioma–a painful cancer that attacks the lining of the lungs, abdomen or heart–as well as asbestosis, lung cancer and various other cancers.

According to World Health Organization estimates, asbestos is responsible for approximately half of all occupationally-related deaths from cancer, or at least 90,000 deaths every year. While 40 countries have banned the use of asbestos in response to this health crisis, Canada has not.

Canada, through its two active asbestos mines in Quebec, remains one of the world’s biggest providers of raw asbestos, a $93 million per year business. And the Canadian government spends large sums of money to promote the use of asbestos in its remaining markets, even calling on diplomatic staff to guard against asbestos bans in the approximately 70 countries that still buy asbestos from Canada.

The Canadian government says that the asbestos industry has agreed to sell only to countries that use the same safety measures that Canada uses to protect workers, but in India, which takes about one fourth of Canada’s asbestos, workers can be found handling asbestos with no protection at all, wearing only shorts, T-shirts and flip-flops.

One published study in India estimated that about 100,000 workers there are exposed to asbestos, and a study of asbestos-exposed factory workers found that 22 percent has asbestosis–which signals significant exposure over an extended period.

India started using asbestos extensively in the 1980s, as usage in the United States and other Western countries began to decline. Because of the latency period between exposure and the appearance of disease, India has an asbestos-related cancer epidemic in its future, one that it is certainly not prepared for. Martin Mittelstaedt who writes for The Globe and Mail says, Canada must bear some responsibility for the coming epidemic.

Given below is the excerpts of the full story by him in The Globe and Mail:


Asbestos shame

Yesterday's miracle mineral, asbestos is now so well understood to be dangerous that Canadians run from it. Yet the federal and Quebec governments still promote it aggressively to the developing world. It was published on October 27, 2007

Before asbestos became feared as one of the most powerful cancer-causing agents ever used, it was heralded as the "magic mineral." In an age of impermanence, asbestos offered durability. While it had the texture of wool, it didn't burn and was incredibly resistant to decay. That is why it was once used in thousands of products, everything from car brake pads to insulation on some of the giant steel girders holding up the World Trade Center.

But asbestos has a big problem. When used, it promiscuously sheds tiny dust fibres. Once inhaled, the fibres become tangled in lung tissues, where they wreak havoc — typically lung cancer, asbestosis and mesothelioma, a rare, painful and almost always fatal cancer of the lining of the chest wall.

The unfortunate drawback of killing large numbers of people has led more than 40 countries, a who's who of advanced industrialized nations, to outlaw asbestos use. But Canada isn't among them.
While the federal government projects an image of being a helpful, international Boy Scout on issues ranging from peacekeeping to nuclear proliferation, Canada has a peculiar relationship to asbestos.
Since it's a carcinogen, Canadians don't use much of it any more. Even the asbestos in the Parliament Buildings is being removed. But the country remains one of the world's biggest purveyors of the deadly mineral, selling abroad 95 per cent of the output from the country's two remaining mines, both in Quebec, a business worth about $93-million a year.
Most asbestos used in developing countries is added to cement (at a rate of one part asbestos to about 10 parts of cement) to add durability to water pipes and the ubiquitous corrugated roofing that is a familiar sight in shantytowns around the Third World.
India alone has about 50 plants making asbestos cement destined for homes and other buildings. Asbestos cannot be mined legally in India, so it imports what it uses from countries such as Canada. Cement is the end use of practically all Canadian exports — more than 93 per cent, according to the federal government.
It's not just that Canada is home to companies that sell asbestos abroad. The federal and Quebec governments actively promote it, spending tens of millions since 1984 to encourage the remaining markets, mainly in developing countries. Ottawa has even mobilized Canadian diplomatic staff, from Jakarta to Washington, as recently as last summer, to stand on guard against asbestos bans in the roughly 70 countries that still buy it from Canada.

Natural Resources Canada is the lead federal department dealing with asbestos. It declined a request from The Globe and Mail to interview officials about Canada's asbestos policy, but agreed to answer written questions.

"Canada has long advocated, at home and abroad, a responsible, controlled use approach for chrysotile asbestos," the department said, although it added that "the implementation of domestic measures to ensure workplace health and safety is a sovereign responsibility of importing countries."
The response sidestepped questions about whether promoting asbestos abroad is a good use of taxpayers' money and whether it is done to protect federalism in Quebec.

The government insists that foreigners can and do use asbestos safely, because Canadian companies would sell it only to those that implement Canadian-style safeguards: "The Canadian chrysotile industry has agreed not to export to companies that do not use chrysotile in a manner that is consistent with Canada's controlled-use approach."

The biggest purchaser, taking about a quarter of Canada's output, is India, where it's easy to find workers using one of the most dangerous materials in the world clad only in T-shirts, shorts and flip-flops.

Animal experiments conducted in the mid-1970s, when the material was still widely used in Canada, found that as little as one day's exposure was enough to induce cancer in the laboratory.

Even though the federal government says today's Canadian asbestos doesn't pack the same killing punch of other varieties, the World Health Organization says all types — including chrysotile asbestos, the only type now mined in Canada and worldwide — cause cancer.
The WHO says thousands of other people die each year after unknowingly come into contact with asbestos dust. The dust is such an efficient inducer of cancer, no known safe exposure level exists: "Bearing in mind that there is no evidence for a threshold for the carcinogenic effects of asbestos … the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos-related diseases is to stop using all types of asbestos."
The United Nations agency cites as a particular concern the continued use of asbestos cement in the construction industry because "the work force is large, it is difficult to control exposure, and in-place materials have the potential to deteriorate and pose a risk to those carrying out alterations, maintenance and demolition."
It isn't often that Canada is totally at odds with a UN agency, but it is on asbestos.
"The Government of Canada is of the view that the health risks of chrysotile can be managed if regulations, programs and practices equivalent to Canada's are in place to limit exposures to airborne fibres and that the risks would be no greater than posed by other occupational activities," the government said earlier this year in a statement issued by Peter MacKay, then foreign affairs minister.
It was a response to a petition filed with the office of the federal Environment Commissioner by David Boyd, a University of British Columbia researcher, seeking an explanation for Canada's promotion of asbestos. (The government has a legal obligation to answer questions posed in petitions to the commissioner.)
In an interview, Mr. Boyd said he feels that Canada's continuing export of "a deadly substance with profound public health impacts" is "unethical and immoral," but based on a desire of governments to win votes in Quebec.
"It's the old conundrum where we've got an industry that's centred in Quebec and the federal government is always walking on pins and needles when it comes to dealing with issues that threaten the loss of votes or seats in Quebec," he said.
In the statement, Ottawa said it doesn't verify whether buyers follow Canadian-style rules when using asbestos, arguing that seeking such information would violate foreign sovereignty. About 75 per cent of Canadian asbestos is shipped to Asia, where, along with India, the biggest customers are Indonesia, South Korea, Sri Lanka and Thailand.
Many health experts consider it laughable to say that workers in poor countries use asbestos with the same care that is taken in Canada. Ontario's asbestos regulations run seven pages, and their requirement for sophisticated dust-control equipment — and decades of medical monitoring including chest X-rays for those exposed — are unlikely to be followed in poor countries.
"Anyone who says there's controlled use of asbestos in the Third World is either a liar or a fool," says Barry Castleman, a consultant who helped to advise Europeans in 2000 on Canada's unsuccessful attempt to overturn a French ban on Canadian asbestos.
According to a published estimate in India, about 100,000 workers are exposed to asbestos. Fewer than 30 people have ever been formally compensated for asbestos-related diseases, a figure that is unlikely to reflect the true extent of the illness burden. A 2005 study of a group of exposed factory workers found that 22 per cent had asbestosis, although the industry has published figures claiming that none of its workers have developed the disease from the mineral.

In July, the Canadian embassy in Washington sent a letter to the U.S. Senate, which was considering an asbestos ban. The letter conceded that "all forms of asbestos fibres, including chrysotile, are carcinogenic," but it maintained that its use can be safe if proper precautions are followed. The Senate ignored the advice and voted unanimously this month to ban asbestos.

Last year, Canada was more successful, scuttling an effort by the UN's Rotterdam Convention to have chrysotile added to the list of materials that are so dangerous that countries need to approve imports in advance, as a sign that they know what they are getting into. Canada allied itself with pariahs such as Iran and Zimbabwe to defeat the listing.
Despite these occasional successes, the federal government's aid probably will not avert the eventual death of the Canadian asbestos-mining industry. With the fall of communism, Russia and Kazakhstan have emerged as low-cost producers, taking away business from Canada. And because of health worries, the Canadian industry's output is about one-third of what it was in the 1980s. This summer, one of Quebec's producers, LAB Chrysotile Inc., filed a notice advising that it would seek bankruptcy protection.