Many of the visitors to this subject of the sustained attacks on Prof John Bridle of Asbestos Watchdog may be curious as to why he should be targeted with such aggressive harassment.

Thanks to a great deal of evidence sent to us including some no less from the Tory front bench it would seem that what Prof Bridle had stumbled upon is an even bigger wrongdoing by the Labour Government than the allegations in the cash for honours scam.

A very wealthy group of businesses who profit from asbestos matters, led by some well known asbestos claims lawyers, seem to have made large donations to the Labour Party and as soon as the Labour party took power in 1997 their influence was used to promote a health scare over white asbestos. This is the same mineral as talcum powder and a totally different mineral to the already banned Blue and Brown asbestos types. White asbestos products make up 90% of all asbestos materials.

The effect of the Regulations which were then enacted has been to make vast fortunes for companies involved in removing white asbestos products and for lawyers bringing compensation claims on behalf of people that have worked with them, even though the actual health risk is in the Professor's view and the view of many other independent scientists, minimal to zero. In reality there are very few scientists that disagree with this, but backed by the ban asbestos lobbyists and with serious professional marketing the junk science receives much wider coverage.

The opinions of Prof Bridle and supporting scientists over the true risks to health from white asbestos, if accepted, would save the UK taxpayer many £billions per year but at the same time ruin the nationwide fraud and deception that the Labour Party appear to be supporting and promoting.

It is no surprise then that every attempt has been made to discredit him with two BBC Radio You & Yours programmes of ruthless character assassination being produced, one might suspect with the encouragement and connivance of the Labour Party. Ofcom’s astonishing support of the programme has left little recourse than to instigate a challenge via judicial review which amongst other things will give Ofcom the opportunity to explain why ex-colleagues of the BBC programme makers were used in the ruling committee.

If the Professor is shown to be correct and the forthcoming legal challenge to the HSE over its assessment of white asbestos is successful a lot of people (including political parties) will lose a huge amount of future income.

On the plus side these sustained attacks have made it very easy to spot the culprits and whilst much of the harassment is amusing, even sometimes so outrageous it achieves the opposite by promoting the Professor’s campaign, it has been taken very seriously by other supporters of the same opinion. As a result some of the ban asbestos campaigners are currently being sued for libel and related misstatements which is due in court in the autumn.

Professor Bridle and Asbestos Watchdog have continually called for an open, public debate into the science and associated health risks from white asbestos to put an end to the confusion once and for all. Instead the whistleblower is subjected to personal attacks avoiding the argument that they literally cannot afford to lose.

The Great Asbestos Scam

In November 2007 a new book was published in Britain aimed at anyone interested in politics, law or science,particularly anyone concerned for whatever reason with asbestos. Scared To Death: From BSE To Global Warming – Why Scares Are Costing Us The Earth, written by a well-known British newspaper columnist Christopher Booker and his colleague Dr Richard North, immediately raced into the British best-seller list.

Their book’s purpose is to tell the inside story of many of the major ‘scares’ which have been given obsessive media coverage in recent years, from the Millennium Bug to bird flu, from lead in petrol to man-made climate change.

As the authors show, each of these scares has followed a consistent pattern. They centre on some supposed threat to human health or wellbeing based on seemingly plausible scientific claims which eventually turn out to have been vastly exaggerated or wholly mistaken – but which in the meantime have cost Western economies astronomic sums, amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars.

The second longest chapter in the book (exceeded only by its analysis of the panic over global warming) is an unprecedentedly detailed account of the colossal scare whipped up in recent decades over asbestos – a scandal which Christopher Booker has in recent years repeatedly exposed in his column in the London Sunday Telegraph, aided by one of Britain’s leading practical experts on asbestos, John Bridle.

As Booker and North show in their highly readable account, the scare over the dangers posed to human health by asbestos has come about thanks to the promotion of a deliberate confusion between two very different minerals, just because they happen to pass under the same general name ‘asbestos’.

First, it was discovered that the blue and brown forms of asbestos, amphiboles, had caused a major public health disaster, leading to thousands of deaths. But this genuine disaster was then used to demonise a wholly different and much commoner material, white asbestos or chrysotile, which – particularly in its most widespread form, as asbestos cement - has now been definitively shown by leading scientists to pose no measurable risk to human health.
Yet this confusion, now in many countries enshrined in law, has been made the basis for two immense financial scams.

The first, particularly in the United States, has been operated by unscrupulous lawyers, who have won countless billions of dollars in compensation on behalf of ‘asbestos victims’ claiming to have been exposed to asbestos in their work, but who in the majority of cases could show no evidence of injury. This has been described by one leading US academic lawyer as one of the ‘great swindles’ of American legal history.

The second racket is that practised by the new breed of specialist removal contractors, who have exploited the climate of fear and confusion generated around the different forms of asbestos to rip off government authorities, businesses and homeowners for unnecessary removal of asbestos-containing materials, again to the tune of billions of dollars.

When Christopher Booker began to expose this scandal in his newspaper column, he and his adviser Professor Bridle and The Asbestos Watchdog, became the target for a sustained campaign of abuse and disinformation by the powerful ‘anti-asbestos lobby’, supported by all those interests for whom confusion over the science of asbestos is providing such a financial bonanza.

Never before has this disturbing chapter in the social and political history of our time been set out in such comprehensive detail, fully supported at every stage by the citing of relevant scientific and other sources.
That is why the Chrysotile Institute of Canada has arranged with the book’s publishers for the right to reprint the section of the book covering the asbestos story.

____________________

Asbestos Watchdog has secured a number of free copies of "One Fibre Kills"- The Great Asbestos Scam which we are distributing for FREE for a limited time only.

If you wish to have your own copy of this valuable publication, simply send us a cheque for £3.65 (p&p) along with your address to:

J&S Bridle Associates Ltd
Breynton

Twyncyn

Dinas Powys

CF64 4AS

You can also purchase the book in full from Amazon

We hope you will find it not only illuminating and useful but a shocking instance of how science can be systematically perverted to serve commercial ends.

'Asbestos' is not actually just one mineral. It is a generic group name (based on similar fire resistant properties) covering 6 very different minerals. The 3 minerals used most commercially are amosite (brown asbestos), crocidolite (blue asbestos) and chrysotile (white asbestos).

Brown and brown asbestos belong to a group of minerals called 'the amphiboles'. They have short sharp fibres that are capable of staying in the lungs for a very long time. They can be toxic if inhaled in quanitites above a certain threshold and can cause a range of diseases including mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis and pleural plaques.

White asbestos, however, belongs to a very different group of minerals called 'the serpentines'. White asbestos has long silky fibres, that are cleared from the lungs in approximately 15 days and there has never been a proven case of white asbestos alone causing an asbestos related death.

What is also interesting is that over 90% of all asbestos containing materials still found in the UK contain white asbestos alone. Only 10% ever contained the dangerous amphibole types, and it was this 10% that accounted for nearly all the asbestos related deaths.

When making judgements on asbestos containing products, it is important not to fall into the trap of thinking that 'asbestos = bad'. Take aspirins for example. One aspirin can cure a headache, a whole bottle will kill you. Similarly, alcohol is actually legally classified as a class one carcinogen (as is white asbestos), but millions of people will drink it every day.

There is no question that the amphibole (blue and brown) forms of asbestos are hazardous to human health, but just sharing a generic group name with these does not qualify the serpentine white asbestos in the same risk bracket. Independent scientific research shows white asbestos is not even toxic at levels of up to 5000 times the US threshold allowed (Bernstein, et. al, 2006).

Should you require any work on asbestos work on your property, please do not let any companies scare you into thinking that the product in question will 'kill you' or 'damage the safety of your children' (2 common scare tactics). 90% of products will probably only contain white asbestos (chrysotile) and as such are of no measurable risk to your health. If you are told otherwise, the company may be out to make money by conducting the work themselves or gaining commission for passing it to other, licensed, companies.

If anyone has ANY concerns about asbestos related matters, either health related, or to do with the asbestos abatement industry, I really do suggest getting in touch with Asbestos Watchdog UK (http://www.asbestoswatchdog.co.uk) (link on side of this page). They are very helpful and can boast a truly independent perspective.

It has been estimated that asbestos fibres have been used in over 3000 products, ranging from insulation lagging to brake linings. Below is a selection of applications that may contain asbestos fibres.

Please do not worry unduly about exposure to these items. Since asbestos product manufacture has been banned, it is important to remember that modern versions of the items below will NOT contain asbestos.

Adhesives and thermal taping compounds
Cement products (pipes, roofing, walls, siding, sheets)
Chalkboards
Construction Mastics (floor, tile, carpet, ceiling tile, etc.)
Cooling towers
Electrical equipment (ducts, panel partitions, cloth, insulations)
Fire doors, curtains, blankets and other fireproofing materials
High temperature gaskets
Household heat resistant items (ironing board covers, oven gloves, etc)
Insulation (spray-applied, blown-in; electrical wiring, boiler, breaching, pipe, HVAC duct, etc insulations)
Laboratory equipment (hoods, table tops, gloves, etc)
Lift equipment (panels, brake shoes)
Packing materials
Plaster (acoustical, decorative)
Roofing material (shingles, felt, cement)
Textured paints / coatings
Tiles (floor, ceiling, panels, sheet flooring, flooring backing)
Thermal paper products
Vehicular break pads

It is important to remember that even if your property contains asbestos containing materials, their mere presence is NOT hazardous. The danger occurs if they become damaged and release their potentially harmful (ie. blue or brown asbestos) fibres. The best course of action is often to leave asbestos materials that are in good order untouched; indeed, the HSE are very clear on this point.

Should you have cause to think you are being exposed to asbestos fibres, however, Asbestos Watchdog UK (http://www.asbestoswatchdog.co.uk) will allay any concerns and give you all the advice you need to manage the asbestos containing materials in question.

Asbestos Watchdog's UK research consultants, under Professor F. Pooley, have produced a series of research papers that seem to prove that white asbestos in cement (and probably plaster) undergoes a chemical and structural alteration that makes the fibre significantly different to the white asbestos formula defined in the Governments implementation of the EU asbestos regulations. This being the case then 90% of all asbestos materials should be excluded from the HSE's asbestos regulations and the EA's Hazardous Waste Directives.

So important are the implications of these findings that the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) instructed the Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL) to duplicate Professor Pooley's investigation. However, rather than use the standard scientific approach of repeating Professor Pooley's work, for reasons best known to themselves, the HSL composed tests of their own. Their experiments were apparently designed to refute the findings and their scientific worth is questionable. The results, which we believe had no external peer review, are published on their web site. The findings are dubious to say the least but the reason for them is perhaps understandable when you consider the costs to the HSE & the EA of redrafting their regulations and the political unacceptability of admitting error.

Read the "Casitile" Report here : http://www.asbestoswatchdog.co.uk/Science/casitile_intro.html

If you have tried to search 'asbestos' or anything related on the internet, you are already aware of the heavily conflicting advice there is out there. Asbestos is dangerous, asbestos is safe, asbestos is one mineral, asbestos is many, to give you jsut two examples.

Much myth has been propogated by respectable organisations, perpetuating erroneous information they believe to be true. Both the ‘ban asbestos’ and ‘pro asbestos’ campaigns are equally to blame for the amount of incorrect information in the public domain.

Much of the confusion is due to the interchangeability of the term ‘asbestos’ for both the amphibole types of asbestos (blue and brown) and the serpentine type of asbestos (white).

Common myths and misconceptions:

1. “90% of asbestos deaths are from chrysotile (white asbestos)”:
Lobby groups have persuaded the European and UK authorities that if 90% of all asbestos is the white type (chrysotile) then 90% of all deaths are from this material. However, there is no evidence to support that chrysotile fibres have contributed to an asbestos related disease in anyone born after 1940.

2. “3500 people die each year from asbestos”:
This figure came from a flawed study into the effects of asbestos. Asbestos deaths were calculated using amphibole fibres (toxic brown asbestos, which makes up less than 10% of all asbestos use). The figures, however, were then used as representative for deaths caused by chrysotile (mild white asbestos, which makes up 90% of all asbestos use) resulting in a greatly inflated estimte of deaths.

3. “Chrysotile (white) asbestos is 100% safe”:
Despite no evidence to support a chrysotile asbestos related disease in the latter half of the century, there is also no such thing as a ‘zero risk material’. All materials if abused at significantly high levels can pose a threat to human health. However, the concentrations of asbestos fibres do not reach these significant levels in present applications, and it can be said that there is 'no measurable risk to health' from present day chrysotile.

4. “Serpentine asbestos is as dangerous as amphibole asbestos”:
Although there is no such thing as a ‘zero risk material’, there is also no evidence (apart from flawed research) to support that the only commercially used serpentine, chrysotile (white asbestos), is as dangerous as the sharp, lethal fibres of amphibole asbestos (blue and brown types).

5. “Use of chrysotile is detrimental to the environment”:
Much information was circulated in the late 1990s about the environmental impacts of chrysotile mining, use and disposal. It has since been shown that chrysotile is often more environmentally friendly that alternative materials. It is produced by low consuming energy procedures, has a long service life, and is a low pollution risk during manufacture as well as during storage and transportation. During its disposal, being a natural mineral it can also be returned to the environment.

6. “Chrysotile is being forced onto developing countries”:
White asbestos is one of the few materials that is affordable to developing governments and the benefits are enormous. It can be used for roofing material, water pipes, and construction products to radically help a country’s infrastructure. When compared to the death rates associated with contaminated drinking water and poor hygiene, potential risk (if any really exists) from white asbestos use are significantly dwarfed.

7. “Any replcement for asbestos has got to be better than asbestos itself”:
Asbestos materials have been banned without due care and consideration to their successors. Several of the replacement materials have subsequently been found to be associated with their own health risks. For example, both cellulose and wool dusts can induce pulmonary fibrosis.

These are just a few of the more common myths around. It is worth checking any information you are given about asbestos with an independent source if you are unsure of the actual facts; some companies may be wanting to exploit your ignorance. Having the correct facts at your disposal will make it easier to cope with the minefield that is surveys, asbestos removal quotes, legislation, or other similar circumstances.

It has been reported in Montreal today that the number of new cases associated with mesothelioma, a cancer related to asbestos, has started to fall in the United States and should also start to go down in Europe and Australia.

Dr. Hans Weill of the U.S. said the incidence of mesothelioma in men has gone down slightly in recent years in the United States after peaking in the 1990s. Other researchers are seeing signs of the cancer slowing in Britain.

Dr. Weill said the lower rates in mesothelioma are likely due to changes in how asbestos has been used since the second half of the 20th century.

Asbestos Watchdog (www.asbestoswatchdog.co.uk) has been concerned that the mesothelioma statistics have become over inflated by vested interest groups recently, and these comments support their hope that mesothelioma statistics will start to fall sooner than previously predicted. This can only be good news.

If anyone is concerned about activities that they feel may have exposed them to the risk of an asbestos related disease, however, please contact mail@asbestoswatchdog.co.uk for free and impartial advice.