RESUMO
The summary contains a consensus opinion regarding the current state of the science about the dimensions of Elongate Mineral Particles (EMPs) as a factor impacting their carcinogenicity.
Assuntos
Poluentes Ocupacionais do Ar , Mesotelioma , Exposição Ocupacional , Humanos , Exposição Ocupacional/análise , Minerais , Mesotelioma/induzido quimicamenteRESUMO
The length distributions of single fibrils of Coalinga, UICC-B and wet dispersed chrysotile were measured by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). It was found that the distributions significantly diverged above approximately 10⯵m (µm) in length, corresponding to differences in published results of animal experiments. This result is in contrast to published data in which counting of an insufficient number of fibers resulted in an erroneous conclusion that the length distribution of Coalinga chrysotile fibrils was indistinguishable from those of other sources of chrysotile. The size distributions of the respirable particle size fractions from acknowledged tremolite asbestos samples were found to be dominated by elongate particles longer than 5⯵m that are within the dimensional range of non-asbestiform amphiboles. Prior studies have shown that these elongate particles obscure a correlation between a specific size range of particles and results of animal implantation studies that used tremolite of various morphologies. In the prior studies, a reference protocol was developed from four crushed non-asbestiform amphiboles to differentiate the size range of amphibole particles that correlates with the mesothelioma frequencies observed in the animal studies. In the work reported here, this correlation was tested with TEM analyses of amphiboles from Libby, MT, Sparta, NJ and Homestake mine, Lead, SD, which represent known environmental/occupational situations. Further TEM analyses of the tremolite samples used in the original animal implantation studies have also shown that the numbers of elongate tremolite particles with lengths ≤5⯵m implanted into the animals are not correlated with the observed mesothelioma frequencies.