Silicosis and Lung Cancer News
Silica feared as 'next asbestos'
By Yvette Essen (Filed: 20/09/2004)
Silica sand, which is often turned into a gel and put into handbags and electronic goods to soak up moisture, has become the latest substance to join a list of toxic products worrying underwriters.
Aon, the second-largest insurance broker, said individuals extracting silica or working on manufacturing sites may be overexposed to the product, which could lead to silicosis - "a disabling, non-reversible and sometimes fatal lung disease". Other problems can include lung cancer, pulmonary tuberculosis, airway diseases, autoimmune disorders and chronic renal disease.
The broker has added silica to its toxic substances database, which lists materials troubling the insurance and reinsurance industry. Asbestos and tobacco are also on the list, as is toxic mould - a fungus that grows on walls and carpets, and can lead to respiratory problems. Aon said the potential for class action is "possible".
While there has been no medical evidence of a link between silica gel and silicosis, reinsurers are investigating whether exposure to silica sand could lead to numerous insurance claims.
Mark Hewett, deputy chairman of Guy Carpenter, the world's largest reinsurance broker, said his company is conducting research into silica. He said: "It is a common product in a natural environment but it starts to get hazardous if it is cut and the dust particles get in the air. The big question is, is it the next asbestos? We think it is probably not but it raises a number of similar issues."
Silica is used in the stone masonry business, for glass production and pool-filter sand. Aon says ground silica is "ideal for plastics and rubber, polishes and cleansers, glassfibre and precision castings."
Fine-ground silica is a high-quality filler used in paints and coatings.
Silicosis attorneys want sanctions
Defense wants $1.1M to cover companies' costs from February
By Neal Falgoust Caller-Times
March 15, 2005
U.S. District Judge Janis Graham Jack could issue a written opinion on a set of silicosis cases by the end of April.
Jack, who has been presiding over the cases, has called doctors' behavior in diagnosing nearly 10,000 patients fraudulent and stunning. However, she said Monday that she probably does not have the authority to throw the cases out of court and probably could only go so far as to express her thoughts on the cases.
"I feel like I have to sanction the behavior from the bench, and I'm going to do that in writing," Jack said.
She expects to document her findings in a roughly 100-page order that will be sent back to the courts where the cases originated. The consolidated litigation is made up of 90 lawsuits from eight states, and Jack was charged with organizing the cases for pre-trial purposes.
During a three-day hearing last month, defense attorneys systematically attacked the doctors, the thoroughness of their work and the legal context in which they determined thousands of workers suffered from silicosis, a chronic and potentially fatal lung disease caused by exposure to silica.
The disease can be diagnosed through the use of lung X-rays, a physical examination and a review of a patient's comprehensive work history and exposure to the dust, which is found in sandblasting, concrete demolition and the production of paint and fiberglass.
Dozens of manufacturing and mining companies are defending themselves against the lawsuits, including 3M Company, Lockheed Martin, Vulcan Materials and U.S. Silica.
Defense attorneys on Monday asked Jack to issue monetary sanctions of $1.1 million against the plaintiffs' attorneys to cover the costs the defendant companies accrued during the February hearings. Jack has estimated that the cost for the hearings, simply to pay the fees of all the attorneys, reached $275,000 per day.
Defense attorney J.A. "Tony" Canales argued that tough sanctions would send a message to other plaintiff attorneys who might consider bringing fraudulent claims to court. He attempted to appeal to Jack's place in legal history with this case.
"The court's order here will be read everywhere," he said. "This has national implications. It will be Judge Jack's order all over the country."
Plaintiff's attorney Mikal Watts said the defendants were attempting to draw the court into a political debate and use whatever order Jack issues to secure tort reforms in state legislatures and Congress.
"This is not the forum for that to happen," he said.
Contact Neal Falgoust at 886-4334_or falgoustn@caller.com
Senate inquiry begins
8 July 2005 - Whyalla is at the centre of a Federal Senate inquiry into workplace exposure to toxic dust. BHP Shipyard contractor, Dimet Contracting Pty Ltd, has had claims laid against it by former employees who have contracted respiratory disease silicosis as a direct result of working for the company.
The inquiry was launched by Richard White, a former Dimet employee in Darwin, and convenor of the Australian Sandblasting Diseases Coalition.
The Senate passed the inquiry on June 22, referring it to the Senate Community Affairs References Committee.
It will investigate the impacts of exposure, the extent to which the employees were informed about the risk, safety precautions, access to compensation, the extent of the illness and the potential of emerging technologies to create risk.
At least 137 people have put their names forward as being exposed to silica dust, with others encouraged to make submissions to the Senate.
New silicosis suit filed in Madison County
By Steve Gonzalez
5/10/2007 - A former National Steel employee filed a silicosis suit against 43 silica manufactures and suppliers in Madison County Circuit Court May 8, alleging that during the course of his employment he was exposed to silica-containing products on many occasions.
Robert Finke claims he has inhaled great quantities of silica dust leading to his diagnosis of silicosis on May 11, 2005.
Finke claims the defendants failed to timely warn him of the dangerous characteristics and serious health hazards associated with silica exposure.
He also claims the defendants failed to provide him information as to what would be reasonably safe and sufficient wearing apparel and proper protective devices, failed to place warnings on the containers of silica, failed to take reasonable precautions to publish and enforce a safe method of handling silica and failed to recall or remove silica from the stream of commerce.
Finke claims his silica-related disease has disabled and disfigured him, caused great physical pain and mental anguish, medical expenses and loss of wages.
Back to News Menu
|
