To the Editor: Park and colleagues’ important scientific contribution draws attention to the risk of exposure to asbestos in home renovation, a risk often unrecognised by those doing such work.1 However, by stating that the risk of disease from chrysotile asbestos “is still controversial”, the authors promote unproven and unsubstantiated claims that chrysotile asbestos can be used safely, and cast doubt on the findings of multiple international health organisations that conclude otherwise.2,3 In stating this, Park et al refer to Bernstein and colleagues’ work,4 which is funded by the very trade lobbies promoting the use of chrysotile.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
All authors have been retained and/or testified as expert witnesses in asbestos personal injury compensation claims, usually at the request of plaintiffs. Remuneration for such work is donated by Arthur Frank to his employing institution.