No fee unless we recover compensation for your family Text size 833-4-ASBESTOS (833-427-2378) Free Case Review

Asbest Und Asbestose Methods of Control and Evaluation in Great Britain

Our plain-English summary of Asbest Und Asbestose Methods of Control and Evaluation in Great Britain, by M.L. Newhouse (1975).

You don't need the product names or old records. No fee unless we recover compensation for your family.

Call 833-4-ASBESTOS Request a review

The study

  • Author: M.L. Newhouse
  • Published: ASBEST UND ASBESTOSE (COLLOQUIUM 21/22-11-1975), BERLIN. P609-612
  • Type of article: Conference paper
  • Our copy: from Johns-Manville's own medical library. The article is still under copyright, so we describe it here rather than post it.

In plain English

This conference paper, given at a 1975 asbestos colloquium in Berlin, described how asbestos hazards were controlled and evaluated in Great Britain. It did not report health outcomes. The author outlined the first UK asbestos regulations of 1931 and new regulations that came into operation in May 1970. These required exhaust ventilation, protective breathing equipment and clothing, and 28 days' notice of any process involving crocidolite. The author quoted the British Occupational Hygiene Society's 1968 chrysotile standard, which aimed to reduce the risk of asbestosis to 1 percent for an accumulated exposure of 100 fibre years per cm3. Amosite and all other amphiboles except crocidolite were held to this standard. Crocidolite work required a respirator unless kept below 0.2 fibres per cc. A voluntary clinical survey had examined nearly 7000 asbestos workers by the end of 1974, alongside a mortality study. Among larger employers, over 90% of air sample results were below the hygiene standard. Among smaller factories, the standard was being met in nearly 80%. The author expected useful information on illness and deaths within the next few years.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

  • Design: Descriptive conference paper outlining UK regulations, the hygiene standard, inspection, and an ongoing worker survey; not a study reporting health outcomes
  • Who was studied: Asbestos workers in the United Kingdom in a survey started in 1971. Nearly 7000 were examined by the end of 1974, over a thousand of them twice, and 5000 more were added during 1975. About 1200 factories and workplaces were subject to the asbestos regulations.
  • Exposure: Airborne asbestos dust at work, measured as fibres per cm3 longer than 5 micrometres. The paper covers a hygiene standard for chrysotile, also applied to amosite and all other amphiboles except crocidolite, and a stricter limit for crocidolite.
  • Main results:
    • Under the 1969 regulations, any process involving crocidolite, including removal of lagging, had to be notified to the factory inspector 28 days in advance.
    • The 1968 BOHS standard aimed to reduce the risk of asbestosis to 1 percent for an accumulated exposure of 100 fibre years per cm3, for example 2 fibres per cm3 for 50 years.
    • Dust categories, averaged over 3 months, were: negligible 0 to 0.4, low 0.5 to 1.9, medium 2.0 to 10.0, and high over 10 fibres per cm3.
    • The chrysotile standard was used for amosite and all asbestos amphiboles except crocidolite.
    • For crocidolite, an approved respirator had to be worn unless the process could be kept below 0.2 fibres per cc, a tenth of the chrysotile standard.
    • By the end of 1974, nearly 7000 workers had been examined in the voluntary clinical survey, and over a thousand of them on two occasions.
    • About 1200 factories and workplaces in the UK were known to the factory inspectorate as subject to the asbestos regulations.
    • Among larger employers, over 90% of air sample analysis results were below the hygiene standard.
    • Among smaller factories, the standard was being achieved in nearly 80%.
  • The authors' conclusion: The author stated that data from matching air sampling to clinical records were accumulating rapidly, and that useful information on morbidity and mortality should be available within the next few years.

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Notice, Crocidolite, Chrysotile, Amosite, Amphibole Group, Respirator.

Browse return to medical research.

How to cite it

Cite the study

M.L. Newhouse. Asbest Und Asbestose Methods of Control and Evaluation in Great Britain. 1975.

Cite our summary

“Asbest Und Asbestose Methods of Control and Evaluation in Great Britain.” AsbestosClaims.Law Library. https://asbestosclaims.law/library/research/asbest-und-asbestose-methods-of-control-and-evaluation-in-great.

ACL Doc numbers and their short links never change. See how to cite the Library.

Talk with an asbestos lawyer

Start with what you remember, and we'll take it from there.

This page is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Every asbestos case turns on its own facts, exposure history, diagnosis, deadlines, available evidence, and applicable law. Reviewing this page does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, call 833-4-ASBESTOS for a free case review.