4.1 Review

The health risk of chrysotile asbestos

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN PULMONARY MEDICINE
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 366-370

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MCP.0000000000000064

关键词

amphibole asbestos; biopersistence; chrysotile; epidemiology; inhalation toxicology; lung; pleura

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose of review The word asbestos is a poorly attributed term, as it refers to two very different minerals with very different characteristics. One is the serpentine mineral of which the white asbestos, chrysotile, is the most common. The other is the amphibole asbestos, which includes the blue asbestos crocidolite and the brown asbestos amosite. Although today chrysotile is the only type used commercially, the legacy of past use of amphibole asbestos remains. This review clarifies the differences between the two mineral families referred to as asbestos and summarizes the scientific basis for understanding the important differences in the toxicology and epidemiology of these two minerals. Recent findings Biopersistence and sub-chronic inhalation toxicology studies have shown that exposure to chrysotile at up to 5000 times the current threshold limit value (0.1 fibers/cm(3)) produces no pathological response. These studies demonstrate as well that following short-term exposure the longer chrysotile fibers rapidly clear from the lung and are not observed in the pleural cavity. In contrast, short-term exposure to amphibole asbestos results quickly in the initiation of a pathological response in the lung and the pleural cavity. Summary Significant progress has been made in understanding the factors that influence inhalation toxicology studies of fibers and epidemiological studies of workers. Evaluation of the toxicology and epidemiology studies of chrysotile indicates that it can be used safely under controlled use. In contrast, even short-term exposure to amphibole asbestos can result in disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据