Archive for July, 2008

The Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation (Meso Foundation) has established a grant program to help newly diagnosed mesothelioma patients travel outside of their local area to consult with an expert on their asbestos-related cancer. The Mary and Bob Cosentino Travel Grant Program was named for Mary Cosentino, who served on the Board of Directors of The Meso Foundation and lost her own battle to peritoneal mesothelioma on January 26, 2008. Mary and her husband, Bob, have both been longtime supporters of The Meso Foundation.

Mesothelioma is a malignant tumor that aggressively and painfully invades the lining of the lungs, heart or stomach until it destroys the vital organs. Due to the rarity and complex nature of the disease, research to understand mesothelioma and develop effective treatments has lagged far behind that of other cancers. As a result, most available treatments are experimental and only available at one of the handful of medical centers that specialize in mesothelioma.

In addition to struggling with their deteriorating health, mesothelioma patients and their families typically face huge financial hurdles. The loss of employment income due to disability and the need for a caregiver to stay at home with the patient present enormous financial losses. In addition, accessing treatment is expensive because most patients do not live in close proximity to centers with mesothelioma expertise. To make matters worse, treatments are often not covered by medical insurance, nor are the costly travel and lodging expenses to reach them.

Mary and Bob Cosentino recognized that many patients suffering from mesothelioma are without the financial means to travel to specialized treatment centers. “There are some patients unable to consult with experts at major mesothelioma centers because they cannot afford travel expenses,” explained Bob Cosentino. “Those concerns are what prompted us to contribute to the Travel Grant Program established by The Meso Foundation.”

In addition to giving patients new opportunities for access to better mesothelioma treatment, Mary provides hope to those who look to new methods of healing and treatment. Mary sought out and benefited from several clinical trials and experimental protocols offered by specialists across the country. Statistically, the life expectancy of those diagnosed with mesothelioma is only about a year, but when Mary Cosentino passed away earlier this year, it had been more than five years since her diagnosis.

July 31, 2008 – Nearly seven years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks destroyed the Twin Towers many New Yorkers continue to suffer from mental and physical health problems. In response, the Centers for Disease Control recently announced it would contribute a grant of $30 million toward treatment for people who have experienced health problems after the event.

The collapse of the World Trade Center towers created and dispersed an enormous cloud of dust that was full of toxins and harsh chemicals, including asbestos dust, lead dust, glass fibers, and toxic gases. A very toxic mineral, asbestos is known to cause a range of terminal diseases. These illnesses include, but are not limited to, asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma.

Many people who breathed in the dust, including local residents, office workers, firefighters, and volunteer rescue workers, have since developed serious health problems such as severe lung disease and certain types of cancer. Exposure to the traumatic events of the day and the days after has also caused many people to suffer from anxiety, depression, and signs of trauma.

Area hospitals, including Bellevue and Gouverneur hospitals in Manhattan and Elmhurst Hospital in Queens, continue to provide treatment and monitoring for people with health problems related to the events of 9/11. These services are provided at no cost for the people who need them, but the money must come from somewhere, and some hospitals have been feeling the pinch. As time passes, treatment of asbestos-related diseases may cause an increase in costs. Illnesses caused by asbestos usually take 15 or more years to develop, and can be very expensive to treat. For example, mesothelioma treatment is very expensive since the cancer is quite aggressive and treatments require intensive medical attention and equipment.

Chris Constantino, Executive Director of Elmhurst Hospital says the grant “would be a welcome infusion of money that would allow Elmhurst Hospital Center to continue treating patients with WTC-related illnesses. Our doctors began seeing patients involved in the cleanup shortly after it began; and have been operating since September 2007 as part of the expansion of Bellevue Hospital’s World Trade Center Environmental Health Center.”

According to Dario Centrocelli, Elmhurst Hospital’s associate executive director for External Affairs, the full effects of the Twin Towers’ collapse are not yet known, as those who were present at the site continue to develop various and often rare types of cancer and other diseases as a result of exposure to heavy dust, smoke, and toxins.

Centrocelli says Elmhurst is currently treating around 150 people with WTC-related illnesses and says hospitals in the area encourage people to visit their doctor or another health professional for the treatment of such illnesses, including mental disorders as well as physical ailments.

Counseling and treatment is available for people suffering depression and other disorders related to the attacks. Monitoring and treatment for physical illnesses is also available. People who were present but have not developed symptoms of disease should also be aware that the long-term effects are unknown. These people are highly advised to have regular checkups to screen for signs of WTC-related diseases.

July 31, 2008 – Rosetta Genomics, the medical research company currently developing a new diagnostic test for mesothelioma, has announced its official acquisition of Parkway Clinical Laboratories, a privately-owned CLIA-certified lab.

The company announced its intentions to acquire the facility around six weeks ago, and this week issued a press release stating the completion of the transaction. Rosetta Genomics purchased the facilities for $2.9 million, as well as an additional $300,000 to be paid “upon the achievement of certain milestones.”

Located in Rehovot, Israel, Rosetta Genomics hopes the acquisition of the Bensalem, Pennsylvania laboratory will facilitate the development and validation of its new diagnostic tests, both in the United States and in the rest of the world.

According to a press release issued by the company, the new mesothelioma test will be able to differentiate between mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma, as well as squamous versus non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. The test can be performed on a small sample of a patient’s tumor. This is the first diagnostic test which makes use of a highly specific and sensitive form of diagnostic testing the company has dubbed “microRNA.”

The microRNA research is a collaborative effort between Rosetta Genomics Ltd. and the Columbia University Medical Center. Working together, the two groups have already developed a test that can distinguish between two common types of lung cancer.

The company now plans to develop and validate the microRNA-based tests at the Parkway facilities. If the New York State Department of Health approves the new diagnostic test, it will be made available nationwide.

Mesothelioma is an aggressive form of cancer that develops as a result of asbestos exposure. Malignant mesothelioma cancers are difficult to diagnose for a number of reasons, one being these cancers have certain similarities to other types lung cancers.

This can be a serious problem due to the enormous difference in prognosis and treatment between mesothelioma, lung cancer, and other types of cancer. More than half of patients diagnosed with mesothelioma die within two years, and a misdiagnosis can waste time that patients cannot afford to lose. The new diagnostic test may therefore be an important step in improving the effectiveness of mesothelioma treatment.

Schenectady, New York – The Thomas O’Brien Academy of Science and Technology was last week forced to close for the upcoming school year due to asbestos-related problems. The Albany District school must undergo considerable asbestos remediation before it can open again.

Parents were later informed of the school’s problems at a meeting on Friday July 25. Parents learned that the school’s five hundred students, in pre-kindergarten to grade six, will be relocated to other schools while the Academy is closed. According to school district spokesperson Ron Lesko students will be relocated to the former Philip Schuyler Elementary School for the duration of the work on the school.

Work began on the Academy and it’s ‘parent’ school Giffen Elementary School when the school year ended in June, as part of a general improvement project. The Academy was shut down at that time to complete a small asbestos remediation project.

However, when the crews began their work, they discovered that there was much more asbestos in the Academy building than was previously thought. According to Ron Lesko, asbestos was found in places from which it was thought it had been removed in the late 1980s.

Some parents were worried at the news that asbestos was a problem at the school, but most are pleased at how the issue has been handled. The Academy, they say, has done the best it could in a bad situation, and has handled the problems promptly. A few parents are angry, however, because the first they heard of the asbestos problem and the closure of the school was on the evening news.

Asbestos issues are increasingly prevalent in schools across the country. The substance was once heavily used in construction materials of many different types, but is now becoming a serious problem. As these buildings age the risk of asbestos exposure increases, and removal is a costly procedure.

Federal law requires that all schools adhere to Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) guidelines which require schools to create and maintain asbestos management plans. In addition, schools must be inspected every three years, and asbestos management plans must be available for public review by staff and parents.

After the discovery of the extra asbestos at the Thomas O’Brien Academy, air samples were taken in school buildings, but showed there were no elevated asbestos levels present.

School officials estimate that the Academy will reopen for the 2009-2010 school year. Officials will meet with parents again this week to discuss more issues relating to the asbestos and the closure of the school.

West Virginia – A Colorado woman who was diagnosed with mesothelioma has filed an asbestos-related lawsuit in Madison County Circuit Court in West Virginia.

Joann Dennett filed the lawsuit on July 23. Dennett says she was employed a number of different positions in several different locations throughout the country between 1958 and 2008, and at some point was exposed to asbestos.

Dennett was diagnosed with mesothelioma on August 12, 2007. She has filed suit against a total of 73 defendant companies, claiming her disease was wrongfully caused.

Among the 73 defendants are Bondex International, CBS, Chrysler, Federal-Mogul Asbestos Personal Trust, Ford Motor Company, General Electric, General Motors, Goodyear, Honeywell International, Ingersoll-Rand, International Paper, John Crane, MetLife, Monsanto, Pfizer, Philips Electronics and Trane US.

Joan Dennett claims that at some point during her employment history, and during home or automotive repairs, she was exposed to airborne asbestos fibers being emitted by products she was working with or around. Inhalation of the fibers caused her to develop mesothelioma decades after the exposure.

According to Dennett’s lawsuit the defendants either knew or should have known of the dangers associated with asbestos exposure. The suit claims that her exposure was foreseeable and should have been anticipated by the defendants.

In addition, Joan Dennett’s lawsuit claims that the defendants continued to use asbestos in their products even though adequate substitutes for asbestos could be used. The lawsuit also claims that the defendants failed to provide warnings about asbestos exposure, or any instructions on how to work safely with their asbestos-containing products to prevent exposure from occurring.

As a result, Dennett alleges, she unknowingly continued to work with and around asbestos unaware she was being exposed to a dangerous substance, and without taking any safety precautions.

Due to the alleged negligence of the named defendants, Dennett claims she developed mesothelioma as a direct result of the asbestos exposure.

Dennett is seeking damages to help pay for mesothelioma treatment, as well as compensation for physical and mental pain and suffering, lost income, and lost earning capacity. She asks for at least $200,000 in compensatory damages. In addition her lawsuit seeks punitive damages to punish the defendants for “willful, wanton, intentional and reckless” behavior.

Cherry Creek, New York – July 28, 2008 – A former code enforcement officer, Frank Watson, who claims to have been fired for refusing to sign permits for a demolition, has filed a lawsuit against his former employer, the village of Cherry Creek in Chautauqua County. Watson worked for the village part-time until he was fired over an asbestos-related incident.

The trouble began in February, when demolition of the Cherry Creek schoolhouse was initiated. At the time, code enforcement had not issued any permits, and there were questions about whether an asbestos inspection had been carried out prior to demolition.

Watson was asked to sign papers that would have allowed demolition of the building to proceed, but he refused, saying his refusal was on the grounds that proper asbestos abatement procedures were not being followed.

On April 5, 2008, Cherry Creek officials voted to terminate Watson’s employment.

At a meeting held on March 12, the state Department of Labor’s Asbestos Control Division confirmed that notice of asbestos code violations in relation to the Cherry Creek school building had been issued to the village.

Department spokesperson Chris Perham confirmed that “The violations ha[d] stipulations attached that state the village must correct whatever the specific issue was.”

Edward Krasinski, a Labor Department industrial hygienist, said the village hired a non-licensed contractor, and the contractor was using non-certified workers to carry out the work on the old school building. These practices can be very dangerous for workers and the public when the building in question contains asbestos.

It has been long established that exposure to asbestos can cause asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma. Diagnosis of these diseases can be very difficult, as it may take decades for symptoms to appear. For example, mesothelioma can take 15 to 40 years or more to develop. This severely complicates mesothelioma treatment efforts, as the cancer is usually detected in late stages of development.

Watson claims that after the demolition already began, Cherry Creek’s mayor asked him to sign off on the demolition, but Watson refused because of his concerns about asbestos.

Watson further claimed he was fired for purely political reasons related to his refusal to illegally sign the permit, calling the incident “small-town politics at its worst.”

Cherry Creek Mayor Dean Mount claimed that budget constraints were a more significant contribution to Watson’s being fired, and that the incident “probably” had something to do with Watson being fired, but only “a very small part of it.”

The village subsequently defended its actions in a letter sent to residents, but now Watson has filed a lawsuit, alleging defamation of character by the village in the letter that was sent out.

The Pennsylvania Department of Health has issued a health consultation document stating that the BoRit asbestos site is not dangerous, saying the site poses “no apparent public health hazard to the community for cancer effects or no cancer effects.” Asbestos fibers have been found in soil, surface water, sediment, and air samples at the BoRit site over the years.

The document was released on July 14 by the Pennsylvania Department of Health and the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. The document was prepared at the request of the Region 3 Environmental Protection Agency, but the organizations also hope that the document will alleviate some of the public’s concerns about the safety of the BoRit site.

The document includes details of a study carried out to “determine if levels of asbestos detected in the EPA’s 2006-2007 on-site and off-site ambient air sampling at the BoRit site in Ambler were at levels of public health concern.”

According to the study, the site is not harmful to the public, but “exposures to asbestos fibers when on-site soils and asbestos-containing material are disturbed are a public health hazard to area residents.” Essentially, the site is safe for now, but could become a hazard once the clean-up begins.

In addition, activities such as on-site sampling, which the EPA carries out to determine the extent of contamination at such sites, may disturb soil and materials to the extent that they may become hazardous to the public.

The document also states that in dry weather conditions such as those seen in the area in September 2007 might cause an increase in airborne asbestos levels at the site and potentially create a public health hazard.

This month, the EPA issued a fact sheet to be distributed to area residents, to let locals know that EPA contractors will soon begin preparing the BoRit site for clean-up. This work involved clearing vegetation, repairing fencing, and building access roads so that the site can be cleaned efficiently and safely. An EPA on-scene coordinator estimates that these preparatory activities will take around 45 days to complete.

The public can read the Pennsylvania Department of Health health consultation document online at www.epaosc.net/borit, under the “Documents” heading. There is a 45-day comment period, which ends on August 31. Comments must be mailed to the following address: Pennsylvania Department of Health, Bureau of Epidemiology, Health Assessment Program, ATTN: Christine Lloyd, Health Assessor, Room 933, Health and Welfare Building, 7th and Forster Streets, Harrisburg, PA, 17120

The federal Environmental Protection Agency continues to come under heavy fire over its proposed changes to asbestos regulations. This time, experts are accusing the EPA of watering down the regulations in an attempt to placate big industry.

Last week, the Environmental Protection Agency announced plans to hold a public meeting to discuss the method of assessing asbestos-related carcinogenic risks as outlined by the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER). Many public health experts have subsequently spoken about their concerns with the EPA’s plans.

The meeting, held on the 21st and 22nd of July, was attended by asbestos and asbestos disease experts, including Richard A. Lemen, a pioneering asbestos researcher and former Assistant Surgeon General, and Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization director Linda Reinstein.

Currently the EPA uses methods which were developed in the 1980s, based on phase contrast microscopy as a measure of numbers of asbestos particles in samples being tested. This method was developed using existing data from cohorts of workers previously exposed to asbestos in various industrial settings.

However, the EPA methodology currently in use does not account for differences between different types of asbestos, and varying sizes and shapes of asbestos fibers. OSWER is proposing that an interim method be developed which accounts for these and other factors when assessing asbestos exposure risks.

The problem, some public health experts say, is that this may lead to some types of asbestos being considered “safer” than others—and that this is a dangerous way to regulate a highly toxic substance. Many high respected asbestos experts believe that all asbestos should be considered dangerous, and that there is no safe level of exposure.

After the EPA’s meeting this week many of the attendees have denounced the plans, but according to recent reports the EPA may end up making the changes regardless.

Another concern for experts is that the EPA’s proposal seems to be being rushed through the approval process—many physicians and scientists in federal organizations who would normally have a chance to review such plans haven’t had so much as a quick glance at the EPA’s proposal.

Even worse are the rumors that the EPA is rushing its proposal through in an effort to appease complaints from the automotive, mining, construction and chemical industries, all of which are feeling the sting of lawsuits from people who have developed asbestos-related diseases due to exposure over the past several decades.

The EPA appointed twenty scientists to its Scientific Advisory Board asbestos panel, asking them to evaluate the agency’s plan to change the way chrysotile asbestos—the most common type—is assessed in terms of the risks of exposure. Decades worth of research confirming that chrysotile is deadly were ignored by the EPA in favor of other studies claiming it does not cause mesothelioma.

According to one report, lawyers who routinely defend corporations against asbestos claims say passage of the EPA’s proposed regulation concerning chrysotile would vastly increase their chances of winning lawsuits relating to diseases caused by exposure to this type of asbestos.

As many schools across the country take advantage of the summer vacation to complete repairs and renovation projects, the Assumption School in West Grove, Philadelphia is continuing with an asbestos removal project thanks in part to grants received from several different organizations.

The school was built in 1959, during a period in which asbestos use in construction materials was peaking in the United States. Asbestos is an increasingly prevalent problem in schools across the country due to heavy use between the 1940s and 1980s.

Asbestos was once heavily used in construction materials of many different types, but due to its toxicity the asbestos is now becoming a serious problem, particularly as these buildings age and the asbestos they contain becomes more exposed and begins degrading.

In the Assumption School, the asbestos removal project is currently in the second phase of a three phase project planned for this summer. Currently asbestos is being removed from ceilings, hallway insulation, and from four classrooms.

All schools are required by federal law to adhere to Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) guidelines, which require schools to create and maintain asbestos management plans. The plans must include details of the location of any asbestos, as well as all measures taken to prevent exposure risks.

In addition, schools must be inspected every three years, and asbestos management plans must be available for public review by staff and parents.

According to Assumption School’s Home and School Association President Helen Leinhauser, the school is checked annually to ensure the asbestos it contains is safely sealed, and that students and staff are not at risk of exposure.

Over the past two years the school has raised around $260,000 for the asbestos removal and renovations. In addition the school has received grants from several different organizations, including a $37,000 grant in June from the Connelly Foundation of West Conshohocken, and a $20,000 grant in December 2007 from the Raskob Foundation of Wilmington.

The school also received $13,535 from funds raised by MesoWalk 2008, a charity walk held in Philadelphia in April. The Mesothelioma and Asbestos Disease Society contributed $6,000, while the other $7,535 was raised Assumption School walkers.

Fund-raising isn’t over yet, however. To complete phase three of the project, the school must still raise $32,000 to replace doors which were erected using asbestos caulking.

The Delaware Bankruptcy Court which has been overseeing the W.R. Grace & Company case has set a bar date for claims related to Zonolite attic insulation which are to be filed in the W.R Grace case.

In order to preserve their case against the company, anyone who wishes to make a claim relating to Zonolite attic insulation must file that claim on or before the bar date, which has been set at October 31, 2008.

For the purpose of the bar date, Zonolite claims are property-related claims. These may include the costs of asbestos abatement, and any reduction in property value or other economic loss which results from the presence of W.R. Grace-manufactured Zonolite in a home.

Zonolite is a type of loose-fill, non-roll vermiculite insulation produced and sold by W.R. Grace & Co. The company mined the vermiculite from a mine located in Libby, Montana. The mine, the vermiculite, and all the insulation sold under the brand name Zonolite is contaminated with tremolite asbestos.

The contamination of the mine where the substance was obtained is so severe that the entire town of Libby has been declared an EPA superfund site for almost a decade, with hundreds of millions spent on clean-up. More than 1,000 residents of Libby have been diagnosed with asbestos-related diseases as a consequence of working in or living near the mine. At the end of this year, the criminal trial against W.R. Grace and several of its top executives finally get under way.

The consequences of the production and use of contaminated vermiculite are even more far-reaching than appears at first glance. Many more people than those residing in Libby may eventually be affected, as Zonolite is present in millions of American homes.

Zonolite was sold from the 1920s up until the 1980s under several brand names, including Attic Fill, Attic Plus, Cashway Attic Insulation, Econofil, House Fill, Wickes Attic Insulation, Zonolite Insulating Fill, Sears Micro Fill, Quiselle Insulating Fill, Mica Pellets Attic Insulation, Unifil, and Ward’s Mineral Fill.

Zonolite insulation may appear as a glittery granular substance. Granules may be silvery, gold, or brown in color, and their color may have darkened after being present in an attic for several years. Even homes with newer insulation may still contain Zonolite, as the substance may be found underneath newer rolled insulation.

For more information about filing claims, interested parties can visit www.graceclaims.com, call 1-877-465-4817, or write to Claims Processing Agent, W. R. Grace & Co. Bankruptcy, P.O. Box 1620, Faribault, MN 55021-1620.