The presence of erionite in North American geologies and the estimated mesothelioma potency by region.

OBJECTIVE: Erionite is a naturally occurring fibrous mineral found in soils in some geographical regions. Known for its potency for causing mesothelioma in the Cappadocia region of Turkey, the erionite fiber has attracted interest in the United States due to its presence in a band of rock that extends from Mexico to Montana. There are few toxicology studies of erionite, but all show it to have unusually high chronic toxicity. Despite its high potency compared to asbestos fibers, erionite has no occupational or environmental exposure limits. This paper takes what has been learned about the chemical and physical characteristics of the various forms of asbestos (chrysotile, amosite, anthophyllite, and crocidolite) and predicts the potency of North American erionite fibers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the fiber potency model in Korchevskiy et al. (2019) and the available published information on erionite, the estimated mesothelioma potency factors (the proportion of mesothelioma mortality per unit cumulative exposure (f/cc-year)) for erionites in the western United States were determined. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The model predicted potency factors ranged from 0.19 to 11.25 (average ∼3.5), depending on the region. For reference, crocidolite (the most potent commercial form of asbestos) is assigned a potency factor ∼0.5. CONCLUSION: The model predicted mesothelioma potency of Turkish erionite (4.53) falls in this same range of potencies as erionite found in North America. Although it can vary by region, a reasonable ratio of average mesothelioma potency based on this model is 3,000:500:100:1 comparing North American erionite, crocidolite, amosite, and chrysotile (from most potent to least potent).

Occupational exposures to asbestos in the steel industry: An analysis of the AISI sampling campaign (1989-1997).

The American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) gathered data between 1989 and 1997 to build an "objective database" to further understand the occupational exposures generated by the few asbestos-containing materials remaining at various steelmaking companies at this time. This paper analyzed the 520 samples from this campaign which occurred at five different steel manufacturers: Georgetown Steel Company, Inland Steel Company, Ling-Temco-Vought (LTV) Corporation, United States Steel Corporation, and Weirton Steel Corporation. This database is believed to have never previously been systematically organized. Samples were grouped based on sampling times to determine whether they should most appropriately be compared to the OSHA short-term excursion limit (EL) or the 8-hr time-weighted average (TWA) permissible exposure limit (PEL). Sampling times of 30 min or less were considered short-term samples, and samples of 180 min or greater were considered representative workday samples. Samples that did not fit into either category, with sampling times between 31 and 179 min, were considered task samples. Overall, the data indicated that the airborne concentrations were quite low in 1989 and they continued to be low through the study period which ended in 1997. Only seven out of 286 (approximately 2.5%) short-term or representative workday samples were in exceedance of the current OSHA OELs that were implemented in 1994 (short-term samples being compared to the 1 f/cc EL and representative workday samples being compared to the 0.1 f/cc 8-hr TWA PEL). Consistent with prior data, analysis of this dataset supports the view that materials containing asbestos were not used in many applications in the steel industry, and measured airborne concentrations of asbestos were almost always below the occupational exposure limits (OELs) in the post-OSHA era (1972-2000).

Occupational exposure to asbestos in the steel industry (1972-2006).

BACKGROUND: Historically, the use of asbestos in steelmaking has been limited to a few applications. Due to its physical and chemical properties, asbestos was not necessary or suitable for most purposes in a steel mill. The few applications where asbestos were used (i.e., certain gaskets, brakes, protective cloth, refractory materials, insulation materials, and hot top products) were replaced by alternative materials as they became available. OBJECTIVE: We discuss historical uses of asbestos in steel manufacturing and the associated airborne asbestos concentrations collected at sixteen U. S. Steel facilities between 1972 and 2006. METHODS: A total of 495 personal airborne asbestos samples from the U. S. Steel industrial hygiene records were analyzed across four time periods corresponding to changes in the OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) for asbestos. 68% of the samples (n = 337) were considered representative of an employee's workday. The remaining samples (n = 158) represented task samples. Samples were grouped by facility, department, and job category within the four time periods. RESULTS: The average fiber concentrations measured for each facility and department over time were below the contemporaneous OSHA PEL. The mean representative workday asbestos air concentration from 1972 and 1975 was 1.09 f/cc. The mean representative workday concentration decreased to 0.13 f/cc between 1976 and 1985, then decreased again to 0.02 f/cc between 1986 and 1993 and 0.03 f/cc between 1994 and 2006. For task samples, the mean air concentration from 1972 to 1975 was 3.29 f/cc. The mean task sample concentration decreased to 0.48 f/cc between 1976 and 1985, then decreased again to 0.01 f/cc between 1986 and 1993 and 0.03 f/cc between 1994 and 2006. Only eleven out of the 495 samples (2.2%), for both task and representative workday samples, were in exceedance of the contemporaneous PEL(as an 8-hour TWA), ten of which occurred prior to 1978. Eight of these eleven PEL exceeding samples were task samples. Of the remaining three representative workday samples, two had unknown sampling times. IMPACT: This paper presents an analysis of all the available personal sampling data for airborne asbestos across 16 facilities of the U. S. Steel Corporation between 1972 and 2006. This dataset has previously never been publicly shared or analyzed. It represents one of the more complete industrial hygiene datasets from a corporation to be presented in a scientific journal and, due to the similarities in the processes at each mill, it should reflect analogous exposures throughout the steelmaking industry in the United States. One of the benefits of presenting these data is that it also provides insight into where asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) were used in the steel making process. This is just one example of a large firm that released information that had previously remained in file cabinets for decades. We believe that another benefit of publishing this paper is that it may encourage the largest firms in industry to assemble and analyze their industrial hygiene data to benefit the occupational hygiene, medical, and epidemiology communities. This can support future epidemiology studies and improve the design of future industrial hygiene programs.

A critical review of the 2020 EPA risk assessment for chrysotile and its many shortcomings.

From 2018 to 2020, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) performed a risk evaluation of chrysotile asbestos to evaluate the hazards of asbestos-containing products (e.g. encapsulated products), including brakes and gaskets, allegedly currently sold in the United States. During the public review period, the EPA received more than 100 letters commenting on the proposed risk evaluation. The Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC), which peer reviewed the document, asked approximately 100 questions of the EPA that they expected to be addressed prior to publication of the final version of the risk assessment on 30 December 2020. After careful analysis, the authors of this manuscript found many significant scientific shortcomings in both the EPA's draft and final versions of the chrysotile risk evaluation. First, the EPA provided insufficient evidence regarding the current number of chrysotile-containing brakes and gaskets being sold in the United States, which influences the need for regulatory oversight. Second, the Agency did not give adequate consideration to the more than 200 air samples detailed in the published literature of auto mechanics who changed brakes in the 1970-1989 era. Third, the Agency did not consider more than 15 epidemiology studies indicating that exposures to encapsulated chrysotile asbestos in brakes and gaskets, which were generally in commerce from approximately 1950-1985, did not increase the incidence of any asbestos-related disease. Fourth, the concern about chrysotile asbestos being a mesothelioma hazard was based on populations in two facilities where mixed exposure to chrysotile and commercial amphibole asbestos (amosite and crocidolite) occurred. All 8 cases of pleural cancer and mesothelioma in the examined populations arose in facilities where amphiboles were present. It was therefore inappropriate to rely on these cohorts to predict the health risks of exposure to short fiber chrysotile, especially of those fibers filled with phenolic resins. Fifth, the suggested inhalation unit risk (IUR) for chrysotile asbestos was far too high since it was not markedly different than for amosite, despite the fact that the amphiboles are a far more potent carcinogen. Sixth, the approach to low dose modeling was not the most appropriate one in several respects, but, without question, it should have accounted for the background rate of mesothelioma in the general population. Just one month after this assessment was published, the National Academies of Science notified the EPA that the Agency's systematic review process was flawed. The result of the EPA's chrysotile asbestos risk evaluation is that society can expect dozens of years of scientifically unwarranted litigation. Due to an aging population and because some fraction of the population is naturally predisposed to mesothelioma given the presence of various genetic mutations in DNA repair mechanisms (e.g. BAP1 and others), the vast majority of mesotheliomas in the post-2035 era are expected to be spontaneous and unrelated in any way to exposure to asbestos. Due to the EPA's analysis, it is our belief that those who handled brakes and gaskets in the post-1985 era may now believe that those exposures were the cause of their mesothelioma, when a risk assessment based on the scientific weight of evidence would indicate otherwise.

Metabolomic Investigations of the Temporal Effects of Exposure to Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products and Their Mixture in the Eastern Oyster (Crassostrea virginica).

The eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) supports a large aquaculture industry and is a keystone species along the Atlantic seaboard. Native oysters are routinely exposed to a complex mixture of contaminants that increasingly includes pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs). Unfortunately, the biological effects of chemical mixtures on oysters are poorly understood. Untargeted gas chromatography-mass spectrometry metabolomics was utilized to quantify the response of oysters exposed to fluoxetine, N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide, 17α-ethynylestradiol, diphenhydramine, and their mixture. Oysters were exposed to 1 µg/L of each chemical or mixture for 10 d, followed by an 8-d depuration period. Adductor muscle (n = 14/treatment) was sampled at days 0, 1, 5, 10, and 18. Trajectory analysis illustrated that metabolic effects and class separation of the treatments varied at each time point and that, overall, the oysters were only able to partially recover from these exposures post-depuration. Altered metabolites were associated with cellular energetics (i.e., Krebs cycle intermediates), as well as amino acid metabolism and fatty acids. Exposure to these PPCPs also affected metabolic pathways associated with anaerobic metabolism, osmotic stress, and oxidative stress, in addition to the physiological effects of each chemical's postulated mechanism of action. Following depuration, fewer metabolites were altered, but none of the treatments returned them to their initial control values, indicating that metabolic disruptions were long-lasting. Interestingly, the mixture did not directly cluster with individual treatments in the scores plot from partial least squares discriminant analysis, and many of its affected metabolic pathways were not well predicted from the individual treatments. The present study highlights the utility of untargeted metabolomics in developing exposure biomarkers for compounds with different modes of action in bivalves. Environ Toxicol Chem 2020;39:419-436. © 2019 SETAC.