Attorney And Lawyer

It is a well known fact that asbestos exposure is the principal inciting factor in the pathogenesis of mesothelioma, causing about 80% of the occurrence of malignant mesothelioma. Asbestos was extensively used in the 1930s as a component in a variety of household parts and commercial products. Ever since the discovery of its potential role in the development of malignant mesothelioma in the late 1960s, a lot of effort sanctioned by the U.S. federal government has been put into replacing asbestos with safer synthetic minerals and products, especially in those products that are used in building houses and accessorizing homes. Since 1975, asbestos has been largely replaced by fiberglass or slag wool, in an effort to help minimize unnecessary exposure to this carcinogen.

In 1988, the Asbestos Information Act was passed in the USA. This law stipulated that there be an early identification of the manufacturer or processor of a particular type of asbestos or any material that contains asbestos. This law was passed in the hopes of cutting down the time and reducing the costs involved in naming the involved parties that would possibly stand as defendants in asbestos litigation in cases where in their respective products would be involved in a lawsuit. With this law in place, manufacturers of asbestos producing products were now also required to submit a list of the different types of products they carry, any characteristic markings on these products, and the year these were manufactured to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA is then responsible and required for publishing these for the consumer’s consumption and benefit.

Despite these efforts by the federal government to mandatorily make companies disclose the presence of asbestos in certain products and have these companies realize the possible repercussions of continuing to incorporate asbestos in their products such as large payouts to aggrieved parties, 30 million pounds of asbestos each year is still reportedly being used in the U.S. today. More than 1 million workers are still being exposed to this carcinogen. A reported 3,000 new cases of malignant mesothelioma is still diagnosed in the U.S. each year.
It follows that a number of costly and damaging lawsuits have been filed by these aggrieved parties against these companies. A report out of the RAND Institute for Civil Justice in August of 2001 cited about 41 corporations and as many as 500,000 claimants have declared bankruptcy due to the accumulated costs from asbestos related litigations. A September 2001 Best’s Review article estimated the total cost of these lawsuits and claims to be around $275 billion.

Claimants may receive as much as $200 million as a reward for any compensatory and punitive damages that was aggrieved them. This would be able to take care of any medical bills that plaintiffs may have had incurred in the past as well as those that they have in the present and will incur in the future. This is also deemed more than sufficient by most courts to pay for whatever pain, anxiety, and emotional turmoil that plaintiffs may have been forced to endure as a result of undisclosed exposure to asbestos. A certain Rhoda Evans was one to be fortunately awarded by a Los Angeles court exactly just this amount as a reward for having been diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma due to secondary exposure to asbestos. Ms. Rhoda Evans was the wife of a pipe worker who cut asbestos pipes for the Department of Water and Power for 20 some years.

It should be made extra clear to claimants however that compensations vary depending on certain facts of their cases. These include the extent of their injuries, length of time of asbestos exposure , conduct of the defendants, and other factors that the judge may deem significant to include in the calculation of the final settlement.

Seomul Evans is a senior copywriter for Mesothelioma daily writing about Asbestos Attorneys.

Most people have been exposed to asbestos at some point in their lives. Asbestos is found almost everywhere in the environment. Asbestos fibers also come off as sloughs from deteriorating asbestos containing products. Only a few people however actually get sick as a consequence of the exposure. Most of the people who have been diagnosed with asbestos related disease have been the ones that worked in professions that allowed an exposure to asbestos for a significant period of time. Some family members of these workers also came to be diagnosed with asbestos related illnesses. Asbestos that clung to the worker’s clothes, skin and hair as they entered their homes was the nidus for the exposure.

Since the late 1800s, the commercial use of asbestos in North America has been steadily increasing. During the World War II, the world saw a dramatic increase in asbestos use as shipyards increased their efforts to produce an enormous number of ships as part of the war effort. The construction, automotive, and manufacturing industries followed suit later on in their extensive use of asbestos.

For the next ensuing years, the use of asbestos in various industries remained unregulated. It wasn’t until the late 1970s that the first regulatory law on asbestos use was passed by the Consumer Products Safety Commission of the USA. This law stipulated a ban on the use of asbestos in all compounds used for wallboard patching as well as in the manufacturing of artificial ash for gas fireplaces. These two products were specifically targeted due to the immense amount of asbestos fiber that these release during their respective usages. Yet another asbestos ban was issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1989. This particular ban stipulated that all new uses of asbestos be forbidden. One loophole in this ban was that all asbestos uses established prior to 1989 were still allowed. Thus, until the present time, asbestos is still being used, are still being incorporated into a variety of products, and as a result people are continually being exposed to it.

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) of the National Cancer Institute pegged the total number of cases of mesothelioma among American males to be approximately 71,000. The September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York City was not included in this projected number however.

Exposure to asbestos does not always result in a diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma later on in a person’s life. In fact only about 10% of those people who have had moderate to severe exposure to asbestos in the past were shown to have developed this disease. However, among those who were diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, 80% did have a history of asbestos exposure. Still, there is no controversy surrounding the notion as to whether asbestos fibers pose considerable health hazards. The controversy only lies in the magnitude of asbestos dosage needed to effect a diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma as well as how much risk to health hazard is really carried by these asbestos fibers that naturally occur in the environment.

Needless to say, it is highly relevant that any known exposure to asbestos be disclosed by patients to their respective physicians. This disclosure may spell the difference between a prompt or delayed diagnosis.

Seomul Evans is a senior copywriter for Asbestos daily writing about Mesothelioma Attorneys.

Malignant mesotheliomas are neoplastic growth of the mesothelial cells in the body. Mesothelial cells are found in the lining of various body cavities. To name, the pleura, peritoneum, pericardium and the testes are lined by these cells. The majority of malignant mesothelioma occurs in the pleura, accounting for almost 90% of all cases.

In the United States, the incidence of malignant mesothelioma is pegged at 0.1-0.2 in 100,000 which is higher than the international incidence of 0.9 per 100,000 for both sexes. A two to 10-fold increase in risk is seen among populations that are exposed to asbestos. Around 2500 to 3000 cases are diagnosed each year in the country. Peak incidence of the disease occurs in the 3rd and 4th decade of life, with two thirds of cases occurring in the 5th and 6th decades.

Malignant mesothelioma is more commonly seen among men with a male to female ratio of 3:1. Among men, 53% reported an occupational exposure to asbestos. The most commonly cited job descriptions were explosives workers, naval mechanics, construction workers, miners, automotive mechanics and even bakers. Around 46% of the men reported a prior non-occupational exposure to asbestos. Among women, 75% were reported to have prior exposure to asbestos, half of which were secondary household contact. Epitheloid was the most common histologic subtype found among women, and the mesothelioma most commonly affected the pleura.

Epitheloid, sarcomatous and biphasic (mixed) are the three major histologic subtypes of malignant mesothelioma. Sixty to seventy (60-70%) of mesothelioma are epitheloid. These transformed cells start off as individual nodules and plaques which then later on come together to form sheets. The plaques start at the lower portions of the chest, and slowly progresses upwards to encroach on the upper parts of the chest and interlobar fissures. Tumor growth, in most cases also encases the diaphragm, chest tube and various drainage tracts. If left untreated, the disease can quickly invade the parenchyma of the lungs, the esophagus, and may even reach the great vessels of the heart, as well as the surrounding bony structures such as the chest wall, ribs and vertebrae.

Exposure to asbestos is the principal and commonly cited trigger in the pathogenesis of malignant mesothelioma. Different forms of asbestos, such as chrysotile, amphibole, erionite, crocidolite, and amosite are all cited to cause the formation of more than 80% of mesotheliomas. Crocidolite asbestos is commonly the cause for mesotheliomas found among miners, asbestos manufacturers, construction and heat workers. The amphiboles are found to be more carcinogenic than its chrysotile counterparts.

Exposure to radiation using silicates such as zeolite and thorium dioxide has also been linked to the pathogenesis of malignant mesothelioma. Although as of yet controversial, Simian virus 40 has also been touted to have an etiological role in mesothelioma formation. Chromosomal changes most frequently found in malignant mesothelioma include a loss of a single copy of chromosome 22, modifications to the p16 (CDKN2A) and p14 (ARF) of the tumor suppressor gene, as well as a functional loss of neurofibromin 2 (NF2). Interleukin 8 has also been shown to have a direct effect on the growth potential of mesothelial cells and thus also contributes to the sustained growth of malignant mesothelial cells.

In essence, exposure to asbestos still remains to be the most common instigator in the pathogenesis of malignant mesothelioma. Exposure to asbestos by itself has also been touted to cause the majority of mesotheliomas.

Seomul Evans is a senior copywriter for Mesothelioma daily writing about Asbestos Lawyers.

U.S. studies have shown that deaths from asbestosis have been on the rise. This is in stark contrast from the mortality trends pegged by the other forms of pneumoconioses, which have been on a steady decline. Worse, these mortality numbers are expected to further increase in the coming years. In the four – year period (from 2001 to 2005), U.S. studies have pegged the estimated life years lost before the age of 65 that is attributable to asbestosis to be 7,267. With the aforementioned dismal figures, the prompt recognition of asbestosis symptoms and subsequent institution of treatment is highly desirable.

Investigation into a possible exposure to asbestos in the patient’s past is pertinent. Symptoms of asbestosis usually appear after a latency period of 20 or so years. Dyspnea upon exertion is the most common and prominent symptom exhibited by patients. Patients may also report a non-productive cough, wheezing, and nonspecific chest pain. Fatigue and weight loss are also common complaints. As the disease progresses, the dyspnea worsens as well.

Rales or crackles heard during the end-inspiratory phase on physical examination are telltale signs of asbestosis. Rales may sound as fine as hair rubbing against each other, or coarse like snapping a Velcro open. Using a stethoscope, these rales are best heard over the bases of the lungs, in the postero-lateral chest wall. Physicians should maintain a high level of suspicion once rales are documented on physical examination, as these usually precede the characteristic pleural plaques seen on chest radiographs and abnormalities in pulmonary function tests. About a third of patients with asbestosis however do not manifest with rales. As the disease progresses, finger clubbing as well as restricted chest expansion are also evident. As asbestosis worsens, rales can now be heard all throughout the entire inspiratory phase.

Typical findings of asbestosis seen on chest radiographs include diffuse reticulonodular infiltrates seen in the bases of the lungs that obscure the heart border. Pleural thickening can also be seen, usually along the middle lung fields. Calcified pleural plaques are also found and are commonly located at the bases of the lungs, including the diaphragmatic pleura. Linear interstitial markings are commonly seen in the early stages of asbestosis. During its more advanced stages, honeycombing, which consists of cystic spaces surrounded by lung fields and interstitial infiltrates, is the more characteristic finding. In cases where in chest radiographic findings are not diagnostic, a high resolution computed tomography scan maybe used to help detect structural abnormalities consistent with asbestosis. Typical CT scan findings include subpleural linear opacities that are parallel to the pleura and fibrosis.

The patient’s pulmonary function tests should also be investigated. The earliest abnormality seen with asbestosis is exertional hypoxemia. The lung’s diffusing capacity reduces. A reduction of the lung’s total capacity and vital capacity are also seen, which are consistent with other restrictive lung disease patterns. The FEV1/FVC ratio however remains unchanged. Monitoring of the patient’s oxygenation status should also be done employing pulse oximetry readings during cardiopulmonary stress tests and arterial blood gas analysis from timely arterial blood punctures. Invasive procedures such as broncheoalveolar lavage and biopsy are not necessary for diagnosing asbestosis.
The diagnosis of asbestosis is mainly clinical. A heightened index of suspicion armed with the knowledge of characteristic findings from physical, laboratory examinations and imaging studies on the part of physicians go a long way in helping to save people’s lives.

Seomul Evans is a senior copywriter for Mesothelioma daily writing about Asbestos Attorneys.

People of the modern world are still being exposed to trace amount of asbestos even to this day. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission had banned the use of asbestos in gas fireplaces as well as in wallboard patching supplies since the 1970s. These products were found to release excessive amounts of asbestos into the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also put out a ban on all new uses of asbestos in 1989. However, all asbestos uses that had already been established prior to this date are still legally allowed. Therefore, people today are still being exposed to asbestos, albeit not as extensively as the people living during the earlier centuries were.

The U.S. EPA has stipulated that there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos. In keeping with its regulatory laws against the use of asbestos, the EPA has set forth an asbestos concentration limit of 7M fibers per Liter of drinking water. This holds true for fibers with at least 5 um in length. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has also put out their own limit, which is lower than the one set by the EPA. For an 8 hour shift in any workplace within a 40 hour per week timeframe, OSHA set the asbestos exposure limit at 100,000 fibers per cubic meter. Although exposure to asbestos cannot be totally eliminated, these limits that have been set by authorities help ensure that exposure to such are at its minimum.

The best screening tools to use to determine whether a person has been exposed to asbestos are a thorough and directed physical exam and a simple chest radiograph. Levels of asbestos fibers can be detected in the urine, stools, saliva and mouth washings. Tissue biopsy can reveal high levels of asbestos fibers and can confirm exposure. These procedures however cannot determine who among the individuals who screened positively for exposure to asbestos will develop asbestosis, malignant mesothelioma and other asbestos related diseases. The long latency period between exposure and the earliest manifestations of symptoms makes matters worse. Studies have shown that the average latency period between exposure to asbestos and the development of lung cancer is about 15 years. For both malignant mesothelioma and asbestosis, it has been shown that the latency period is even longer. This may even reach up to 40 years.

Smoking in combination with asbestos exposure has been shown to significantly increase the likelihood of a person developing cancer of the lung. A smoker who has history of asbestos exposure is as much as 90 times more likely to develop lung cancer as compared to individuals who have not been exposed and who are non-smokers. Studies further show that individuals who have been exposed to asbestos and who have quit smoking for more than 5 years effectively decreased their likelihood of developing lung cancer by as much as half. Individuals who work in professions that have the highest risk for asbestos exposure should be made aware of this fact and should therefore be warned not to smoke.

People are still being exposed to asbestos today. Even with the regulatory laws in place to keep exposure at its minimum, people should take it upon themselves to follow precautionary measures to ensure that they are safe from the hazardous effects of asbestos.

Seomul Evans is a senior copywriter for Asbestos daily writing about Mesothelioma Lawyers.