Also in 1960, Keal (56) reviewed the records and found the English Hospital 23 women with asbestosis. Four of them were without known primary peritoneal carcinomatosis, an ovarian cancer and four
others had a peritoneal malignancy, possibly of ovarian origin. Along with asbestosis outrageous, but the relationship between asbestos exposure and peritoneal malignant diseases were urged to 4 years. Winslow Taylor and (57) published a series of 12 cases of peritoneal mesothelioma in 1960 and reviewed 13 cases previously reported in the literature. No association with exposure to asbestos has been mentioned in his work. However, the relationship between asbestos exposure and diffuse abdominal tumor was established in the English literature paper and Enticknap Smither (58) in 1964. And in this case the Germans a link between exposure to asbestos, and this is a rare tumor before other researchers. Despite attempts to define tumor mesothelioma have been made by earlier investigators, as Klemperer and Rabin (23) in 1931, there was general agreement among pathologists that an organization really existed. In 1957, Godwin (44) published strict criteria for the diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma, which places a pathological identification on a firm scientific basis. It was not until 1960 that Winslow Taylor and did the same for tumors of peritoneal mesothelioma. After the opening of the association of Wagner, from Cabo de blue crocidolite
asbestos and an increased risk of mesothelioma in South Africa, the question arose whether this was the only problem is limited to South Africa, or if it was a problem that has arisen in the United States
States. The American Medical Association Council on Occupational Health (59) published an article in the Archives of Environmental Health of pneumoconiosis in 1963, which has a section on asbestosis.
The expert panel concluded that:
The relationship between lung cancer and asbestosis is a highly topical issue. There is no doubt that the two diseases appear in the same light. No matter what the event is a coincidence,
or a cause-effect relationship can not be resolved on the basis of a case. The bulk of the evidence supports the relationship, especially when it includes certain types of asbestos, and possibly only those that contain certain chemicals have the ability to cause cancer. Attention is drawn to the experience of the Union of South Africa, where they have pleural mesothelioma in a significant number of people exposed to crocidolite amosite asbestos inhalation. Of course, clinical and experimental epidemiological studies needed for the final solution.
[P. 37]
In 1962, Wagner (60) was capable of producing tumors of the pleura mesothelial direct implantation of asbestos dust in laboratory animals. In 1963, Wagner said that in the 14 International Congress on Occupational Health in 120 cases of mesothelioma, but, interestingly, less than half of the patients worked directly with asbestos, which only live in an area where there is no environmental impact. So the question was whether it was a localized group of patients with mesothelioma, or a precursor to the international epidemic. This question has been answered at the International Meeting on the biological effects of asbestos took place at the Academy of Sciences of New York in New York in October 1964 but not published until December 31, 1965 (61). Reports of a meeting in New York with Newhouse and Thompson, in London, Ireland Elmes and Wade, James, and Anspach in Germany, Hammond, Selikoff and Churg in the United States and Viliani and colleagues in Italy confirmed the overall size of problem.
Selikoff and others (62) reported their experience with the relationship between asbestos exposure and mesothelioma in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1965, further cementing the relationship between asbestos exposure and mesothelioma and the question of whether other types Asbestos can cause mesothelioma. The authors do not believe that American workers had significant exposure to crocidolite. They thought that the occurrence of mesothelioma in a cohort of asbestos insulation are chrysotile and amosite, mainly. All patients had a severe exposure and asbestosis. This article was then an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine March 18, 1965 (63). Editorial says that the amosite, a third type of asbestos used commercially, has not yet been charged, but no definitive studies to date, to confirm or refute an association.
Sluis-Cremer (64) of the Medical Office of the miner in Johannesburg, South Africa, spoke at the Academy of Sciences of New York in 1965. Sluis-Cremer in his discussion of mesothelioma, said that epidemiological studies have shown that mesothelioma only in the northwest Cape of South Africa. Transvaal amosite deposits have been actively developing more time passes, said that in 1940 amosite was carried out at three times the amount of crocidolite northwest, but no mesotheliomas were observed in the northwest associated with exposure to amosite.
Of particular interest was the study of cases and controls in the Newhouse and Thompson (65). We diagnosed 83 patients, 41 men and 43 women with mesothelioma due to asbestos-point plant blue, which opened in London in 1913. There were 27 peritoneal and 56 pleural tumors, tumors. The plant uses crocidolite out exclusively until 1926, when a small amount of amosite and chrysotile were added. Eighteen patients were employed at the factory, and eight of asbestos as insulation
and laggards. Another nine patients had a house with asbestos workers. Particularly worrisome was the discovery of 36 patients with no known work or exposure to asbestos at home. Eleven of these patients live a half mile from the factory of asbestos exposure in the event area. This case-control study and Elmes et al (66) were the first two case-control studies to confirm the previous report of Wagner from South Africa. Concerns about the impact of the neighborhood and was seconded by Lieben Pistawka (67) of the Pennsylvania Department of Health, which reported that of 42 patients with mesothelioma, 20 had occupational exposure only eight living in the vicinity of the asbestos factory, exposure and three were relatives.
The medical society as a whole believes that if asbestosis could be avoided by reducing exposure to friable asbestos, malignant asbestos should also be avoided. The first cases of mesothelioma are generally very susceptible to early 1900 before taking action to combat dust. Selikoff (68) stated in 1969: "I have not seen the mesothelioma in man, who began working after 1930, or the case of lung cancer in asbestos workers who worked in the industry, less than twenty years . " However, the data of Wagner, Newhouse and Thompson, Lieben and others challenged. Thompson (69.70) reported in 1963 by organs of asbestos in the lungs of people who do not work with asbestos and called him a danger to the modern city.
In 1968 Utidjian et al (71) reported that almost 100% of urban residents had asbestos bodies in their lungs. In 1970, the original observations were confirmed Thompson extensively in Montreal, Milan, London, Newcastle, Glasgow, Belfast, Dresden, Pittsburgh, Miami and New York (68). Paradigm has occurred, in 1970 it was generally agreed that low-level exposure in northwestern Cape blue crocidolite was capable of causing mesothelioma. In 1966, imports of crocidolite asbestos was voluntarily abandoned in England, and the adoption of new rules for the relationship between asbestos and mesothelioma asbestos were adopted in 1969. For exposure to asbestos in the United Kingdom was set at 0.2f/mL (F is the degree of fineness of the abrasive particles) to crocidolite or a tenth of an acceptable level of exposure to other forms of commercial asbestos 2f / mL (72). The question remains, how much impact too. The next 30 years focused on the role of other types of commercial
asbestos and asbestiform materials. Wagner and Berry (73) to 1969 have been improved in animal models, which will help answer many of these issues. Stanton and the key (74) showed in 1972 that the carcinogenicity of asbestos has been linked to
diameter and length.
In 1965, Sir Bradford Hill (75) proposes criteria for assessing the causality of chronic diseases. His seminal work presented at the Royal Society of Medicine, provides a systematic approach to assess the relationship between asbestos exposure and mesothelioma. The main requirements were the strength of association, consistency of association, dose-response relationship and biological plausibility. The adoption of new ideas is slow. Biological plausibility of carcinogenesis is mainly intended to rely on animal models and tissue cells or by analogy to other types of human cancer. Unfortunately, the biological plausibility for many in the 1960's and early 1970 meant that if I can not understand, I do not think so.
