Causes of mesothelioma

Asbestos is the most common cause of mesothelioma. Up to nine out of ten cases of mesothelioma are caused by exposure to asbestos. Asbestos is a natural mineral, mined from rock found in many countries. It is made up of tiny fibres that are as strong as steel but can be woven like cotton and are highly resistant to heat and chemicals.

During the 1960s the first definite link between mesothelioma and asbestos was made. In the past asbestos was imported to the UK in large quantities. It was used in construction, ship-building and in household appliances. Asbestos was very widely used in insulation materials, such as amosite insulation board, and building materials, including asbestos cement.

When asbestos is disturbed or damaged, it releases tiny fibres that can be breathed into the lungs. Asbestos fibres are very fine and, when breathed in, they can make their way into the smallest airways of the lung, so they cannot be breathed or coughed out. Once the fibres are in the lungs, the body's defence mechanism tries to break them down and remove them, which leads to inflammation in the lung tissue.

The asbestos fibres can also penetrate through the lung tissue to settle in the pleura (the membrane around the lung). Over many years they can cause mesothelioma or other lung diseases to develop.

Asbestos fibres can also be swallowed, and some of the fibres can stick in the digestive system. They can then move into the membrane that lines the abdomen (the peritoneum), where they cause inflammation.

The people most likely to have been exposed to asbestos include:

• construction workers
• plumbers
• electricians
• boilermakers
• shipbuilders
• demolition workers
• people who worked in other places where asbestos was present and
• people who lived near to asbestos factories.

Family members of people who worked with asbestos and brought the dust home on their clothes have also sometimes developed mesothelioma.

There are three types of asbestos: blue, brown and white. Blue and brown asbestos are the types most commonly linked with mesothelioma. They are now very rarely used and cannot be imported into the UK. Originally, white asbestos was thought not to be dangerous but recent studies have now shown that it is also harmful.

In the 1980s, imports of blue and brown asbestos into the UK were stopped, and in 1999 the importation and use of all asbestos was banned. However, as mesothelioma develops so slowly, it is estimated that by 2015 approximately 3000 people will be diagnosed with mesothelioma each year. The number of people who develop mesothelioma will then start to reduce each year.

Mesothelioma does not usually develop until many years after exposure to asbestos. It can take any time from 10 to 60 years, although the average is about 30 to 40 years after exposure to asbestos.

Occasionally, mesothelioma develops in people who have never been exposed to asbestos. The other causes of the disease are not fully understood, but in rare cases the development of mesothelioma has been linked to exposure to radiation.

Research has not found any evidence that smoking increases a person's risk of developing mesothelioma. It is also thought that exposure to other building materials such as fibreglass does not increase the risk.

Mesothelioma is not contagious and cannot be passed on to other people. It is not caused by inherited faulty genes and so family members do not have an increased risk of developing it, unless they have been in contact with asbestos.

Mesothelioma- The Financial Costs to Society

Much has been written about asbestos connected diseases such as Meothelioma over the last seam of days. The focus has been on three chief areas:

a) The unfortunate victims of mesothelioma such as past employees of asbestos mining companies who trapped these diseases while during their employement. We have seen the center rendering metaphors on TV of these people, all of them in their retirement living wheezing for breath and misery enormously.

B) Whether the asbestos mining companies knew that asbestos mining was a menace to creature life.

C) The Multibillion dough flare actions filed by the victims against their former employers seeking compensation.

Two issues that have not been addressed are the pecuniary outlay to club of asbestos connected diseases such as Mesothelioma Cancer and who pays for these outlay. Secondly, should asbestos mining companies be paying compensation not only to the sufferers of mesothelioma and other diseases but also to Society as well?

There are two expenses to union that can be identified. The first expense is to the civic vigor technique. The trice loss is the loss of tax revenue by governments due to Asbestos mining companies claiming a tax deduction for compensation payments that are made to the victims.

In illustration of the overheads to the open strength approach, the Asbestos Diseases Foundation of Australia has confirmed that by 2020 there will be 13000 luggage of mesothelioma and 40000 asbestos linked lung bane diseases, tallying 53000 people and this is only in Australia! This means that 53000 people will necessary to have steady medicinal notice for the next 15 years or so. The suspect thus, who pays for the detriment? The answer of course is the tide taxpayer and the next generation of taxpayers.

In relative to tax revenue, governments are essentially mislaid out on tax revenue as the asbestos companies are claiming the compensation payment as a tax deduction. For illustrative purposes, believe that asbestos mining company pays out $100m per year over five years to the victims. Also guess that the corporate tax esteem is 30 percent. Therefore over five years, a respectrive government is losing $150m in tax revenue. Essentially it means that the asbestos mining companies are allotment the overheads with the taxpayer. They pay 70 percent of the compensation payment and the taxpayer pays the remaining rest. Most people would vista this as perfectly inequitable.

It could be seen that the Asbestos companies are only paying part of the outlay and not the packed cost.

To rectify this, there are two likely solutions.

A) Respective Governments should also join session actions with Mesothelioma sufferers against the asbestos mining companies seeking compensation for health and prospect checkup costs. This would not be unprecedented as many State Governments of the United States required compensation against the Tobacco Companies to pay for the checkup costs of its citizens who desirable health awareness because of the ill things of smoking.

B) Governments deny a tax deduction for Mesothelioma compensation payments made by the asbestos mining companies.

Until also part an or part b happens, it is the taxpayer who will be unduly burdended with the additional monetary costs of Asbestos related diseases such as Mesothelioma.