Welcome to GBAN!

November 15, 2010 Press Release

The power of social media is undeniably revolutionary, dynamic, and essential for grassroots organizations. Decades of work from around the world to educate, advocate, and ultimately ban asbestos has culminated in the creation of a new social media based community effort called the Global Ban Asbestos Network (GBAN).

GBAN is a non-profit and independent initiative established to promote and facilitate collaboration, communication, and action to achieve a global asbestos ban.  GBAN is being launched two months earlier based news and need, and will continue to add additional Charter Members representing their country and content to our website.  Our connected social media resources will pioneer innovative methods to improve the efficacy of grassroots efforts to combat the global asbestos threat. The Facebook page was the first part of the network and has hundreds of followers already within just a few weeks.

GBAN is proud to introduce the first 24 Charter Members representing 17 countries who have joined in solidarity and support. Initial charter members will be joined by other leading ban asbestos individuals from across the globe as GBAN rapidly expands. Each Charter Member can regularly contribute content to the site, providing an additional one-stop resource representing the world’s preeminent asbestos authorities. Technology allows the GBAN website portal to translate postings into nearly 60 different languages. In addition, visitors will be able to utilize a variety of social media programs including Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Picasa Photos to post comments, pictures, videos, etc. while easily sharing information with the click of a mouse.

It’s exciting to look at how all of our global efforts are now coming together through this kind of extensively linked social media network. GBAN is a strong and powerful reminder that the voices of ban asbestos advocates are truly united.

GBAN was founded by the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) and the Brazilian Association of the Asbestos-Exposed (ABREA).

Posted in Blog | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Welcome to GBAN!

Lou Williams, GBAN Australian Director: “There Is No Safe Asbestos! ALL ASBESTOS KILLS!”

Posted on May 6, 2016

Lou Williams, GBAN Australian National Director

Lou Williams, GBAN Australian National Director

I am constantly amazed to read/hear various reports around the world that continue to pop up saying that not all forms of asbestos are dangerous/deadly! Some for their own reasons choose to believe that chrysotile (white asbestos) is not harmful to humans! I have peritoneal and pleural mesothelioma (asbestos cancer).  It is a deadly aggressive brutal painful cancer. Having seen many many beautiful people die of this awful cancer including my darling dad – all asbestos kills – NO DEBATE – END OF STORY! Below are postings that may help to alleviate this debate and give some thought to this absurd questioning as to whether chrysotile is not harmful as a carcinogenic causing deadly asbestos cancer (Mesothelioma). Worldwide nearly 125 million people are exposed to asbestos at the workplace and according to World Health Organization (WHO) estimates, more than 107 000 deaths each year are attributable to occupational exposure to asbestos.

loLinda Reinstein, Co-Founder of Global Ban Asbestos Network (GBAN) and Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) recently blogged that “There is no debate or discussion for ADAO. As the World Health Organization (WHO) states, ‘exposure to asbestos, including chrysotile, causes cancer of the lung, larynx and ovary, mesothelioma (a cancer of the pleural and peritoneal linings) and asbestosis (fibrosis of the lungs).’I strongly RECOMMEND the WHO “Chrysotile Asbestos Report”.


Dr. Richard Lemen: “All Forms of Asbestos Cause Cancer”

Dear Drs. Dean Fennell and David Waller,

richardI would like to urge the IMig 2016 Conference, of which you are Co-Chairpersons, to adopt a resolution condemning the continued use of all forms of asbestos, including chrysotile.  Yesterday you held a discussion chaired by Dr. Jim te Water Naude, South Africa and Ms. Laurie Kazan-Allen, United Kingdom, concerning chrysotile asbestos, a substance that has been extensively studied and proven to cause asbestos-induced cancers, including mesothelioma. Now that this discussion is over and both speakers, Dr. David Egilman and Dr. Julian Peto have reiterated that chrysotile asbestos causes asbestos-induced cancers, including mesothelioma, I ask that you and the leadership of iMig 2016 join the World Scientific Community in condemning further use of all forms of asbestos, including chrysotile.

Recently, I and other scientists have put together a Chrysotile Fact Sheetsummarizing the scientific consensus of its dangers.  I am attaching this Fact Sheet and I hope you will make it available to your entire attendance.  In it you will see clear consensus that chrysotile asbestos cannot be used safely nor is it a safe form of asbestos.

I hope that during IMig 2016 your organization will now join the clarion call for a worldwide ban on the use of all forms of asbestos including chrysotile. As I understand iMig is “an independent international group of scientists and clinicians working to understand, cure and prevent mesothelioma.”  Thus, what better time to fulfill this mission and provide leadership through passing a resolution condemning the further use of asbestos worldwide and stopping the mushrooming epidemic of asbestos-related diseases.  I wish IMig continued success.


Richard A. Lemen, Ph.D., MSPH

Assistant United States Surgeon General,

United States Public Health Service (retired)


World Health Organization Asbestos Facts:

What is asbestos?

Asbestos is a group of naturally occurring fibrous minerals with current or historical commercial usefulness due to their extraordinary tensile strength, poor heat conduction, and relative resistance to chemical attack. For these reasons, asbestos is used for insulation in buildings and as an ingredient in a number of products, such as roofing shingles, water supply lines and fire blankets, as well as clutches and brake linings, gaskets and pads for automobiles. The main forms of asbestos are chrysotile (white asbestos) and crocidolite (blue asbestos). Other forms are amosite, anthophylite, tremolite and actinolite.

Why is asbestos a problem?

All forms of asbestos are carcinogenic to humans. Exposure to asbestos, including chrysotile, causes cancer of the lung, larynx and ovaries, and also mesothelioma (a cancer of the pleural and peritoneal linings). Asbestos exposure is also responsible for other diseases such as asbestosis (fibrosis of the lungs), and plaques, thickening and effusion in the pleura.

Currently, about 125 million people in the world are exposed to asbestos at the workplace. According to the most recent WHO estimates, more than 107 000 people die each year from asbestos-related lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis resulting from exposure at work. Approximately half of the deaths from occupational cancer are estimated to be caused by asbestos. In addition, it is estimated that several thousand deaths annually can be attributed to exposure to asbestos in the home.

It has also been shown that co-exposure to tobacco smoke and asbestos fibres substantially increases the risk for lung cancer – and the heavier the smoking the greater the risk.

WHO Response

The World Health Assembly Resolution 58.22 on cancer prevention urges Member States to pay special attention to cancers for which avoidable exposure is a factor, including exposure to chemicals at the workplace and in the environment. With Resolution 60.26, the World Health Assembly requested WHO to carry out a global campaign for the elimination of asbestos-related diseases “…bearing in mind a differentiated approach to regulating its various forms – in line with the relevant international legal instruments and the latest evidence for effective interventions.” Cost-effective interventions for prevention of occupational lung diseases from exposure to asbestos are among the policy options for implementing the global action plan for the prevention and control of non-communicable diseases (2013-2020), as endorsed by the Sixty-sixth World Health Assembly in resolution WHA66.10 in 2013. Eliminating asbestos-related diseases is particularly targeted at countries still using chrysotile asbestos, in addition to assistance in relation to exposures arising from historical use of all forms of asbestos. WHO, in collaboration with the International Labour Organization and other intergovernmental organizations and civil society, works with countries towards elimination of asbestos-related diseases in the following ways:

  • by recognizing that the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos-related diseases is to stop the use of all types of asbestos;
  • by providing information about solutions for replacing asbestos with safer substitutes and developing economic and technological mechanisms to stimulate its replacement;
  • by taking measures to prevent exposure to asbestos in place and during asbestos removal (abatement);
  • by improving early diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation services for asbestos-related diseases;
  • by establishing registries of people with past and/or current exposures to asbestos and organizing medical surveillance of exposed workers;
  • by providing information on the hazards associated with asbestos-containing materials and products, and by raising awareness that waste containing asbestos should be treated as hazardous waste.

Let us continue the fight until asbestos is banned throughout the world.

Lou Williams, GBAN Australian National Director

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Lou Williams, GBAN Australian Director: “There Is No Safe Asbestos! ALL ASBESTOS KILLS!”

ADFA Press Release: National asbestos response grinds to a halt as Federal Government withholds funding

MEDIA RELEASE: Tuesday 29 March 2016

ADFANational asbestos response grinds to a halt as Federal Government withholds funding

Asbestos victim support groups have slammed the Federal Government for allowing the national response to the deadly mineral to grind to a halt over a funding dispute with the independent government agency tasked with overseeing its eventual eradication.

Setup with bipartisan support in 2013, the Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency has been working with state and territory governments on a coordinated plan to address ageing asbestos products located in millions of homes, workplaces and public buildings.

But support groups say that process has ground to a halt because the Agency has been unable to access the funding needed to implement the plan.

“The whole situation is like a bad episode of Yes Minister,” Asbestos Diseases Foundation of Australia president Barry Robson said.

“We have an agency that was created to address a serious issue, that has spent several years developing a national strategic plan that was agreed to by every state and territory, yet now can’t access previously committed funding to actually put that plan into action.”

Mr Robson, who is also a member of the Asbestos Safety and Eradication Council that advises the agency, said the Federal Government was refusing to allow the agency to access $3 million that was unspent in previous years to roll out the plan.

“A public service hiring freeze delayed the setup of the agency, while the need to ensure every states and territory was happy with the strategic plan slowed down its adoption, meaning some of the funding from the first two years went unspent,” he said.

“Now that those issues are resolved and there’s a clear course of action on the table, the Federal Government is refusing to allow the agency to access that money to put the plan into action.

“It’s an absurd situation that has left support groups around the country asking whether the agency has lost bipartisan support and whether this financial strangulation is simply closure by stealth.”

Mr Robson said ASEA has already dealt with a range of major issues in its short life, from coordinating the inspectors who oversaw the remediation of Telstra pits after asbestos concerns halted the construction of the NBN, to addressing the ongoing importation of asbestos products, located in items ranging from trains, boats, and electrical equipment to Dora the Explorer crayons.

“It took more than a decade of lobbying for this agency to be created and for the Federal Government to take the lead to eradicate the millions of tonnes of asbestos still in our community,” he said.

“It’s heartbreaking to think that all that work could be lost because of a dispute over a few million dollars.”

Media comment: Barry Robson — 0407 235 685

Further information: Tim Vollmer — 0404 273 313

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on ADFA Press Release: National asbestos response grinds to a halt as Federal Government withholds funding

ADFA Press Release: Asbestos victims slam James Hardie over slashed compensation funding

Media Release: Friday November 20, 2013

Asbestos victims slam James Hardie over slashed compensation funding

ADFAAsbestos victims are outraged following the revelation that James Hardie has almost halved its contributions to its compensation fund, despite increasing cash flow and profit.

Asbestos Diseases Foundation of Australia president Barry Robson said the move was a devastating blow for asbestos victims and a sign that once again James Hardie was placing profits over human lives.

“This is simply morally bankrupt,” Mr Robson said.

“The James Hardie company only exists because of the profits made from asbestos products – products they knew would kill.”

Figures released in James Hardie’s interim profit announcement revealed contributions to the Asbestos Injury Compensation Fund (AICF) fell to $US62.8 million this financial year, down from $US113 million the year before.

“That is a massive reduction of 44 per cent, which not only risks leaving asbestos victims high and dry, but will force taxpayers to shoulder the burden,” Mr Robson said.

“The funding cuts came despite a rise in interim profit from $US156.1 million to $US190 million, and operating cash flow increasing by 160 per cent.

“James Hardie spent decades knowingly selling these deadly products.

“To this day, nearly one third of Australian homes contain asbestos — leading to a whole new generation of Australians at risk from asbestos related disease in the years to come.”

Mr Robson said the funding reduction followed an urgent intervention by the New South Wales Government earlier this year to extend further credit to the AICF, which was facing an $183 million shortfall by 2017 and had proposed moving to an instalment scheme to cover the gap.

“Australians were outraged by the way this company behaved 10 years ago when it tried to leave Australian without compensating victims,” he said.

“James Hardie seem to be trying to shirk their responsibilities once again, showing continued contempt to the thousands of people killed by their unsafe product.

“It is time for James Hardie to stop playing games and to genuinely commit to looking after the innocent victims of their asbestos products.”

For media comment please call ADFA President Barry Robson on 0407 235 685

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on ADFA Press Release: Asbestos victims slam James Hardie over slashed compensation funding

Guest Blog: “Cause-effect” Relation between White Asbestos and Mesothelioma” by Francisco Báez Baquet

Guest Blog: “Cause-effect” Relation between White Asbestos and Mesothelioma” by Francisco Báez Baquet

The demonstration of a causal relationship between chrysotile and mesothelioma, it is essential to justify the ban on industrial use of the mineral.



This is so, because of that, to cause mesothelioma, weak enough, small doses, as determined by short, sporadic or even specific and unique exhibits, as evidenced by the experimental and epidemiological studies demonstrating these latter, even exhibitions of only several minutes, or even a single inhalation, may be sufficient to cause malignancy.

Epidemiological studies show that because of non-occupational exposure, in which fiber concentrations given in atmospheres, well below those corresponding to those generated in the workplace, determined, however, detectable increases in the rate of mesothelioma incidence compared with background, for the whole nation or geographical area considered. That morbid effect, extending around the industrial source of pollution, to expressible distances in complete kilometers, depending on the direction of prevailing winds, which is an additional element of conviction of the truth of causation.

Furthermore, it is affecting those who have not had any employment relationship with chrysotile, as in the case of pets that have lived in the vicinity of the industrial centers of the use of that mineral.

In these conditions, it is impossible alleged “safe and controlled use” of chrysotile, and the only effective alternative is the absolute prohibition of use.

Click here to view the full text of our article about all these issues.

Francisco Baez Baquet
Former clerk of the sales office in Sevilla, of the firm manufacturing asbestos cement, Uralita SA
Former member co-founder of the “National Commission of Asbestos.”
Former member of the General Council of the “National Institute for Safety and Health at Work” (INSHT), on behalf of the Trade Union “Comisiones Obreras”


Posted in Blog | Comments Off on Guest Blog: “Cause-effect” Relation between White Asbestos and Mesothelioma” by Francisco Báez Baquet

Exclusive ADAO Guest Asbestos Blog by Alok Gupta “Crayons of Cancer”

Posted on July 12, 2015

bows4uhH14e59lWNHuDqX3qtkkxYBRZdPUdnml4wjwMThe Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization is honored to have talented journalist Alok Gupta write about the new study finding Asbestos in children’s toys. Voices like Alok’s are necessary to inspire change and ADAO is beyond grateful for his bravery and honesty.

Alok Gupta was born and raised in one of India’s poorest and lawless state of Bihar. After witnessing violent crimes and injustice in the society, he took up journalism to change things for better. He specializes in development and environment journalism. He feels that majority of environment issues impacts the poor more than the rich. It’s the aboriginal who face the stigma of displacement and disease due to mining, drought and floods due to extreme weather is destroying farmers.


Crayons of Cancer

Deadly asbestos laced crayons might be making children severely ill.

By: Alok Gupta

A non-profit, Environment Working Group Action Fund’s Asbestos Nation has found traces of lethal cancer causing asbestos in children crayons and crime scene toy kits. Around four out of 28 samples of four crayon brands tested positive for asbestos in the US.

This is not the first time that asbestos has been detected in crayons. Similar tests in the year 2000 and 2007, considerable amount of asbestos were detected in the crayons. Agencies like Consumer Product Safety Commission that monitors toy safety in the US have remained silent on these killer crayons that might be creating havoc on children’s health.

The current findings nails four brands Disney Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, Nickelodeon Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle, Saban’s Power Rangers Super Megaforce and those made by Amscan. EWG report claims that package labels of asbestos containing crayons mention product ‘Made in China’ and imported to the US.

Dr. Philip Landrigan, professor of pediatrics and preventive medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York observes that asbestos in toys poses an unacceptable risk to children, today as it did in 2000 and 2007, the last time tests found the deadly substance in these children’s products.

Campaigners at Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, a non-profit that exposed asbestos presence in children toy in 2007 are outraged after the findings of EWG. Linda Reinstein, president of ADAO says, “Since asbestos was found in children’s crayons in 2000, an estimated 150,000 Americans have died from preventable asbestos-caused disease and the USA has consumed more than 55,000 metric tons of asbestos. This killer chemical has caused one of the largest manmade disasters in history, yet imports continue.”

Interestingly, in 2007 when ADAO found asbestos in five consumer products including a child’s toy, it submitted a detailed report to The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) but agency didn’t initiate any action.

ADAO raised alarm over asbestos in Planet Toys CSI Fingerprint Examination Kit, DAP “33” window glazing, DAP Crack Shot spackling paste, Gardner Leak Stopper roof patch, and Scotch High Performance Duct Tape.

Damage caused by asbestos inhalation can show its impact even decades after the exposure has stopped. Inhalation of asbestos fibers for prolonged time can trigger serious and fatal illnesses it includes malignant lung cancer, Asbestosis and mesothelioma.

One of the most common diseases caused by asbestos are asbestosis and pleural abnormalities.

Beyond America

Asbestos contamination in the crayons and crime scene testing kit toys is apparently not just limited to the US. The Sydney Morning Herald reports that crayon that have tested positive for containing asbestos is also available in Australia.

Report also states that the National Toxics Network (NTN) has attempted unsuccessfully to alert the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, the body responsible for the safety of products in Australia about the potential problems.

A simple Google search on availability of four brands Disney Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, Nickelodeon Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle, Saban’s Power Rangers Super Megaforce and those made by Amscan shows that these products are also available in British and Indian markets

It’s baffling why law-implementing agencies have refused to crack whip on importers or products for playing with children health. Now, the hope hinges on non-profits like International Council of Toy Industries, a non-profit that work to ensure safety standards of toys. ICTYI recently started its Hong Kong chapter that might work towards making safe toys in China, a world leader in toy manufacturing.

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on Exclusive ADAO Guest Asbestos Blog by Alok Gupta “Crayons of Cancer”

“The 1st Conference of the European Asbestos Forum – Meeting the Need to Share” by Yvonne Waterman

Posted on June 10, 2015

EAFOn May 27th 2015, Amsterdam was the exciting scene of the first international conference of the European Asbestos Forum (EAF). The long held dream of our Charter Member and EAF founder, Dr. Yvonne Waterman, the EAF aims to improve networks and sharing asbestos knowledge across both borders and asbestos sectors.

All day, the motto ‘Sharing makes us stronger!’ resonated across the venue, gaining strength by the hour as the many visitors from over ten countries and three continents became visibly enthused by this concept. Flawlessly chaired by Hans van der Wart of Shield Group International, the conference proceeded at a fast pace.

Richard Lemen EAFThe Opening Speech was provided by the Director General Work of the Ministry for Social Affairs and Employment, Marcelis Boereboom. He was followed by Wayne Williams, who represented the English IATP, Mark Wit and Linda Reinstein. Dr. Richard Lemen closed the morning session by giving a very varied, profound and impressive Keynote Speech – when he warned of the combined dangers of asbestos and tobacco, you could hear a pin drop.

In the afternoon, three simultaneous sessions were held to allow for a wide array of asbestos specialists. Sadly, Nicola Pondrano, who was to have spoken on the Italian fight against Eternit, was ill. But his colleagues in the session Asbestos & Labour, Arco Engelen, Lydia Charlier, Wayne Williams, Christian Lahnstein and Dilan Yesilyurt provided very interesting insights in the asbestos awareness problems faced on the work floor and in schools, and subsequently the problems encountered in the legal process and the insurance aspects. Lydia for instance pointed out the huge discrepancies in compensation between various countries for one and the same case.

During the session on Asbestos & Technological Developments, new innovations and technologies regarding asbestos were the main topic, with speeches provided by Ruud Janssen, Nick Garland, Tony Rich, Mark Winter, Joris Gribnau and Herm Zweerts. We learned about new removal techniques, comparative methods and legislations and the importance of a real estate asbestos register.

The third session related to European Policy & Raising Awareness, where Gonzalo Zufia, Barry Robson, Linda Reinstein, Prof. Gert van der Laan, Prof. Thomas Kraus and Prof. Nico van Zandwijk used different approaches to this subject. Prof. Kraus for instance showed that the incidence of asbestos related lung cancer is several times as high as the mesothelioma incidence, and yet these patients are very neglected from every angle.

The EAF’s special honour, the Dr. J. Stumphius Recognition Award, was awarded to Prof. Nico van Zandwijk, who spoke on his ground-breaking discovery of a new and hopeful treatment of mesothelioma. His research is truly equal to that of Nobel Prize winners. The Award, showing a glass plate supported by a bronze base, signifying a large burden carried by many people, was proudly sponsored by Shield Group International, also a very supportive Main Sponsor.

Since the conference, enthusiasm for the concept of building and improving the asbestos network has grown daily by leaps and bounds, as word of the EAF spreads. Many visitors admitted to being stunned by the diversity of methods, techniques and insights and the many possibilities that combining forces could provide for all. Indeed, many allowed it was the first time they even realised they had an insular approach to asbestos; and how much there was to be gained in saving lives, raising awareness, improving safety and health on the work floor etc. by sharing.

This conference is sure to have a follow-up in 2016! News on this as well as many of the presentations may soon be found regularly on www.europeanasbestosforum.org.

Yvonne Waterman Ph.D. LL.M., GBAN Charter Member for the Netherlands.



Posted in Blog | Comments Off on “The 1st Conference of the European Asbestos Forum – Meeting the Need to Share” by Yvonne Waterman

Press Release: Prime Minister should ensure that Indian govt officials do not get subordinated by asbestos industry at UN meet underway in Geneva

Posted on May 14, 2015

india-flagUN Meet on hazardous substances concludes on May 15

Making India rife with asbestos related diseases, a sad legacy for
Make in India slogan

Indian opposition to listing of white chrysotile asbestos in UN
hazardous substances list would be contrary to its domestic laws and

Opposition to listing of white chrysotile asbestos in UN hazardous
substances list untenable, unscientific, unsound, unsustainable,
unacceptable and unpardonable

May 14, 2015: ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) appeals to the Prime Minister
Narendra Modi to ensure that Indian government officials do not get
subordinated by representatives of Asbestos Cement Product
Manufacturers Association (ACPMA), a cartel of some 18 companies and
its international allies for the fifth time at the Seventh Conference
of UN’s Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure
for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade
(CoP-7) in deciding to get white chrysotile asbestos listed under UN
list of hazardous substances. Contrary to the misinformation campaign
and propaganda war unleashed by asbestos producing countries like
Russia and Kazakhstan, mere listing of white asbestos chrysotile does
not constitute a trade ban. Indian delegation should be directed to
act with the knowledge that listing it under the Convention does not
constitute a trade ban on white chrysotile asbestos.

Under the influence of white chrysotile asbestos producing countries
like Russia, if India opposes listing of white chrysotile asbestos in
UN list would be in blatant violation of its domestic laws and
regulations like Factories Act, 1948. In short, if Government of India
takes such position, it will be deemed untenable, unscientific,
unsound, unsustainable, unacceptable and unpardonable for all times to
come among the comity of nations and amidst own people. Indian
delegation should pay heed to the resolutions and recommendations of
World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour
Organization (ILO) instead of allowing itself to be hijacked by
accompanying members of ACPMA. It will be a shame if the Indian
delegation betrays the cause of public health and national interest to
safeguard the interest of the ACPMA.

Indian delegation should re-adopt its 2011 position on white
chrysotile asbestos when Mira Mehrshi led the Indian delegation and
resisted the influence and presence of asbestos industry lobby amidst
standing ovation. It is hoped that Shashi Shekhar, the head of
Hazardous Substances Management Division, MoEF, Government of India
will restore India’s prestige by re-adopting a scientifically and
legally defensible position. Shashi Shekhar who also heads the
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB)’s INVENTORY OF HAZARDOUS
CHEMICALS IMPORT IN INDIA prepared by CPCB, under Union Ministry of
Environment & Forests, Government of India that lists ‘asbestos’ at
serial no. 26 as one of the 180 hazardous chemicals in international
trade which is imported in India.

Under Factories Act, 1948, the List of 29 industries involving
hazardous processes is given under Section 2 (cb), Schedule First,
asbestos is mentioned at serial no. 24. The Act defines “hazardous
process” as “any process or activity in relation to an industry
specified in the First Schedule where, unless special care is taken,
raw materials used therein or the intermediate or finished products,
bye-products, wastes or effluents thereof would–(i) cause material
impairment to the health of the persons engaged in or connected
therewith, or (ii) result in the pollution of the general
environment”. This leaves no doubt that asbestos is a hazardous
The Act is available at:

A letter of B N Mehta, the then Chief Inspector of Factories, Gujarat
State dated December 24th, 2002 submitted in the Hon’ble Supreme Court
categorically reveals that two workers of Gujarat Composites Ltd were
confirmed for Asbestosis, an incurable lung disease by National
Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH), Ahmedabad. The workers were
(1) Shri Hazarilal Manraj and (2) Shri Sahejram B Yadav. The letter
recommended compensation of Rs 1 lakh as per the Hon’ble Court’s order
but till date the same has not been given. This establishes the
hazardous nature of asbestos. The letter is available at

It must be recalled that on June 22, 2011 Indian delegation led by Ms.
Mira Mehrishi, Additional Secretary, had supported the listing
ofChrysotile asbestos as a hazardous chemical substance at the fifth
conference on Rotterdam Convention (COP-5) amidst standing ovation.
Not surprisingly, Mira Mehrishi’s reputation remains impeccable with
unblemished track record.

For a government which has adopted the slogan of “Make in India”,
endorsement of asbestos like products would be a glaring taint because
it ends up making India with the blood money of white chrysotile
asbestos manufacturers. It will tarnish its image by end up making
India rife with asbestos related diseases, a sad legacy for slogan
Make in India.

It tantamounts to sacrificing public health in order to support the
ideology of naked lust for profit espoused by unscrupulous white
chrysotile asbestos companies at any human cost. In effect, India
would be seen taking an irrational position arguing that it does not
wish to be informed about the hazardous nature of substances it
imports and does not wish to inform about it to the countries which
export asbestos based goods from India. This also means that India is
becoming complicit in the violation of human rights by knowingly doing
business in hazardous substances like white chrysotile asbestos as per
its own law.

It is hoped even at this late stage that India will disassociate
itself from the influence of white chrysotile asbestos producing
companies and countries after examining the finding of the Contact
Group set up by the President of the Conference of the Parties to
achieve a consensus to list while chrysotile asbestos in the UN’s
Prior Informed Consent (PIC) list-Annex III of the Rotterdam
Convention. Chemical Review Committee (CRC) of the Convention has
recommended its listing in view of compelling scientific and medical

It is noteworthy that when the attached joint letter dated May 3, 2015
was sent to Prakash Javdekar, Union Minister of Environment, Forests &
Climate Change and Ananth Kumar, Union Minister of Chemicals and
Fertilizers, the former responded with alacrity and put his
acknowledgement of reasons for disassociating with asbestos producing
countries like Russia on record. The fact remains Union Minister of
Chemicals and Fertilizers did not respond although Ministry of
Chemicals and Fertilizers is the Focal Point for Rotterdam Convention.
It is also a fact that Indian delegation was misled in 2013 by an
irrelevant and conflict of interest ridden note of this very Ministry.
Notably, Indian delegation was joined by supporters of asbestos
industry in 2013. It is quite apparent that the industry
representatives overwhelmed the government representatives who were
made to take position against human health and the environment and to
put profit of the asbestos industry before gnawing public health

When ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) had confronted MoEF with domestic laws
in 2013, the officials from MoEF expressed helplessness as they were
bound by the attached note of the Ministry of Chemicals and
Fertilizers. Hopefully, the structural compulsions of
inter-ministerial coordination will be overcome this time to outwit
the designs of ACPMA to subjugate the Indian delegation to its whims
in fancies.

Notably, India’s National Human Rights Commission is deeply concerned
about the issue and is seized with case dealing with deaths and
diseases caused by exposure asbestos fibers.

Indian history remembers such examples of notorious, timid, weak,
pliable, gullible and docile individuals with unfailing memory. It’s
a conflict between truth and profit. A poison is a poison. A
hazardous substance will remain a hazardous substance irrespective the
outcome of the UN meeting that concludes on May 15, 2015 but the
Indian delegation will stand exposed for compromising India’s stature
and its scientific reputation.

White chrysotile asbestos is banned in over 50 countries because it’s
safe and controlled use is impossible. In countries like India there
is almost no health infrastructure to even diagnose the incurable
diseases caused by exposure to its fibers. There is lack of lab
facilities which can detect its presence in buildings and products in
a situation where there is not a single building India which can claim
to be asbestos free. It’s listing in the UN list merely a preliminary
preventive step.

For Details: Gopal Krishna, Ban Asbestos Network of India-ToxicsWatch
Alliance (TWA), Mb: 08227816731, 09818089660,
E-mail-1715krishna@gmail.com, Web: www.toxicswatch.org

Ban Asbestos Network of India (BANI)
ToxicsWatch Alliance
New Delhi
Mb: 07739308480, 09818089660
Skype id: witnesskrishna
E-mail: krishna2777@gmail.com
Blog: banasbestosindia.blogspot.com

Posted in Blog, Press Release | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Press Release: Prime Minister should ensure that Indian govt officials do not get subordinated by asbestos industry at UN meet underway in Geneva

India blocks listing of Chrysotile Asbestos in Rotterdam Convention: Hides behind smokescreen of bogus science

Posted May 14, 2015

india-flagIndia along with a handful of countries including Russia, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Cuba once again blocked the
listing of Chrysotile Asbestos in the Prior Informed Consent list (PIC) at a UN convention meeting currently underway in Geneva, using bogus science and advocating “controlled use”. We would like to point out that “Controlled” or “safe” use of all varieties of asbestos including Chrysotile is a “myth” and that all major independent scientific bodies including the WHO and ILO have categorically stated that Chrysotile (white) asbestos cannot be safely used. Mere listing of chrysotile in the PIC list does not constitute a trade ban or ban on use but it helps the importing country to get information regarding the hazardous effects of the chemical and empowers them to take an informed decision. The Indian delegation should be directed to act with the knowledge that listing chrysotile asbestos under the Convention does not constitute a trade ban on chrysotile asbestos.

More than 800 victims of Chrysotile asbestos related disorders have been diagnosed by independent doctors across the country. One of these victims has also travelled to Geneva to participate in the conference and urged the delegates to allow the listing.

The Indian officials participating in the convention have based their position on a study done by National Institute of Occupational Health (NIOH) which was conducted with active funding and participation by the asbestos industry. This study has been reviewed by a body of scientists and scientific organizations from across the world, who have found serious flaws in the design, methodology and interpretation of the results. They have written a statement regarding the flawed nature of the study and requested India to recall the study and to support the inclusion of Chrysotile Asbestos in the PIC list (http://www.anroev.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Statement-of-scientists-re-chrysotile-asbestos-March-21-2015.pdf).

The Indian position is contrary to the rules and regulations of the country and is untenable, unscientific, and unpardonable. It is only going to lead to a disaster of unimaginable proportions.

We urge the Prime Minister to ensure that Indian government officials take a stand which is favourable to the health and safety of Indian workers, the community and the environment and not be influenced by the asbestos industry at the UN meeting. We urge the Prime Minister to re-adopt India’s  2011 position on chrysotile asbestos and favour its listing at the UN Convention.
For Details: Mohit Gupta, Occupational and Environmental Health Network of India (OEHNI), Ph – 9811369045, Email – oehni.del@gmail.com, Web – www.oehni.in

Posted in Blog, Press Release | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on India blocks listing of Chrysotile Asbestos in Rotterdam Convention: Hides behind smokescreen of bogus science

ADAO Urges the Rotterdam Convention Delegates to List Chrysotile Asbestos on the PIC List Now

Posted on May 1, 2015

Rotterdam Convention

The UN Rotterdam Convention is a critical piece of the global effort to prevent exposure to toxic chemicals, including asbestos.  Join in solidarity. Be heard. Share your message of support by posting pictures, short videos, and messages to the Asbestos Free Future Facebook page here. These messages will be delivered to delegates at the convention broadcasting a “message from the world” to ban chrysotile asbestos.

As this year’s convention approaches in May, we wanted to share the history and purpose of this event with those following the battle against asbestos.

Public and official concern about the potential risks posed by hazardous chemicals and pesticides has existed  for decades. In response to these concerns, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) started developing and promoting voluntary information-exchange programmes in the mid 1980’s. FAO launched its International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides in 1985 and UNEP set up the London Guidelines for the Exchange of Information on Chemicals in International Trade in 1987. Soon after, officials attending the 1992 Rio Earth Summit called for the adoption of a legally binding instrument on the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure by the year 2000. The group agreed that, while chemicals could potentially be essential to fighting poverty and disease, many were also hazardous to human health. Many of the chemicals that had already been banned by Western countries were still being shipped to developing countries with little understanding of the dangers of these chemicals and a lack of communication on the best practices for how to monitor them. In response to these concerns, officials finalized text for the Convention on the Prior Informed Consent for Certain Hazardous Chemicals in International Trade in March 1998. This was adopted and opened for signatures at a Conference of Plenipotentiaries in Rotterdam in 1998 and then entered into force in early 2004. The first Conference of the Parties to the Rotterdam Convention (COP-1) was held in September 2004.

The UN Rotterdam Convention endeavored to advance responsible trade and environmental justice through sharing responsibilities related to hazardous chemicals and suggesting that all countries have a legal and moral duty to inform on exporting countries while providing the basic human right of PIC to importing countries. Any opposition to the PIC Lis demonstrates how the global asbestos industry is endangering the integrity and effectiveness of the Rotterdam Convention, in addition to the health and safety of citizens. As a result, countries in transition will continue to import deadly chemicals such as asbestos and, in doing so, expose their own population to their dangers.

Make sure your voice is heard. Send a message to the Rotterdam Convention by posting on the Asbestos Free Future Facebook page here.

The ADAO message to the 2015 delegates is: “ADAO urges the Rotterdam Convention delegates to list chrysotile asbestos on the PIC List now. Everyone has the right to safe water, soil, and air free from hazardous chemicals. The life you save may be your own.”



Posted in Blog | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on ADAO Urges the Rotterdam Convention Delegates to List Chrysotile Asbestos on the PIC List Now



14 Mai 2015. Convention de Rotterdam 2015 : l’amiante chrysotile ne sera pas inscrit sur la liste des produits dangereux. Une victoire à la Pyrrhus pour l’industrie russe de l’amiante


Association Nationale de Défense des Victimes de l’Amiante, 8, rue Charles Pathé– 94300 VINCENNES, Tél 01 49 57 90 95 – Fax 01 49 57 97 71 – Mail contact@andeva.fr


Mardi 12 mai 2015


Les représentants de 164 pays se réunissent à Genève les 12-13-14 mai pour la Conférence des Parties de la Convention de Rotterdam.

ANDEVALe but simple et modeste de cette Convention – voisine des Conventions de Bâle et Stockholm qui la précèdent – n’est pas d’interdire et entraver le commerce; il est simplement de réguler l’information sur la dangerosité des produits exportés. Le fondement de la Convention de Rotterdam est la procédure PIC «consentement préalable éclairé» qui oblige l’état exportateur d’un produit dangereux à informer le pays importateur des risques et des procédures de prévention et obtenir son consentement.

Cependant cette obligation n’existe que si le produit est inclus dans une liste établie par la Convention de Rotterdam. Celle-ci comporte une quarantaine de produits comme les dérivés du mercure, le DDT, l’endosulfan et les variétés d’amiante amphibole.

La nécessité de l’inscription de l’amiante chrysotile – la seule variété d’amiante commercialisée – sur cette liste apparait comme une évidence à toute personne informée et sensée : l’Organisation Mondiale de la Santé (OMS), l’Organisation Internationale du Travail (OIT), l’Union Internationale Contre le Cancer (UICC) et les sociétés savantes d’épidémiologie du monde entier, pour ne citer qu’elles, estiment :

  • que le chrysotile cause notamment le mésothéliome (cancer de la plèvre), le cancer du poumon, des fibroses
  • que l’amiante est un produit extrêmement dangereux, impossible à contrôler et responsable chaque année plus de 100 000 morts.

Oui mais … la Convention de Rotterdam est un organisme sous l’égide des Nations-Unis et la règle du consensus est une tradition forte à l’ONU.

Il n’y a pas de produit pour lequel le consensus scientifique sur la dangerosité et l’ampleur de la mortalité provoquée soit plus fort que pour l’amiante. Même l’Organisation Mondiale du Commerce a donné raison à la France contre le Canada, quand le gouvernement français a décidé d’interdire l’amiante pour des raisons sanitaires et que le Canada l’a attaquée pour entrave au commerce.

Oui mais … la Convention de Rotterdam ne s’est pas donnée une règle qui empêche n’importe quel pays de déclarer que la terre est plate ou que l’usage de l’amiante chrysotile ne présente pas de dangers avérés.

Lors des précédente réunions de la Convention les pays suivants ont opposé un veto à l’inscription de l’amiante chrysotile sur la liste PIC des produits dangereux:

2004 : Canada
2006 : Canada, Inde, Iran, Kirghizstan, Pérou
2008: Canada, Inde, Kirghizstan, Mexique, Pakistan, Philippines, Ukraine, Vietnam
2011 : Canada
2013 : Russie, Inde, Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Ukraine, Vietnam, Zimbabwe

  • Le Canada – grand producteur historique d’amiante et grand promoteur de la propagande mensongère et meurtrière sur l’innocuité de l’amiante chrysotile – ne produit plus d’amiante depuis 2012 et s’abstient donc désormais.
  • La Russie est désormais, avec le Kazakstan, le grand producteur exportateur : la Russie produit 50% de l’amiante mondialement, soit un million de tonnes par an, et sa part de marché représente environ 60% des exportations mondiales. La Russie a siégé pour la première fois en 2013 …
  • Les deux autres producteurs d’amiante s’abstiennent : la Chine consomme la quasi totalité de sa production et importe en plus de l’amiante, le Brésil exporte environ la moitié de sa production.
  • L’Inde est le gros importateur d’amiante. Il est effroyable de constater qu’un pays qui a subi une catastrophe industrielle comme la tragédie de l’usine Bhopal (1984) puisse ainsi protéger l’intérêt de quelques marchands au détriment de l’information de sa population. La compagnie Union Carbide était d’ailleurs un géant de l’amiante.

L’ANDEVA sera présente à Genève, en compagnie de nombreuses associations de défense des victimes et de la santé publique. Elles ne seront pas seules, les marchands d’amiante et leurs association de propagande et corruption seront également présents.

Le résultat est difficile à accepter: le cynisme des marchands de mort et d’amiante est sans nul doute incurable, mais il est aberrant que des états – dans le passé le Canada, aujourd’hui principalement la Russie et l’Inde – se laissent convaincre par une poignée d’industriels sans scrupules de laisser empoisonner leurs propres populations et les autres.

De nombreuses voix s’élèvent de concert avec nos associations :

– le Journal de l’Association Médicale Canadienne a publié un éditorial appelant le gouvernement canadien à prendre fermement position pour l’interdiction de l’amiante au Canada et dans le monde.

– Le rapporteur des Nations-Unis sur les droits de l’homme et le droit à un environnement sain s’est déclaré choqué par la non inscription de l’amiante chrysotile et du paraquat – l’un des pesticides les plus commercialisés et les plus toxiques – et a rappelé les articles de la Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme et de la Convention des droits de l’enfant qui établissent le droit à l’accès à l’information comme fondamental.

Souhaitons que la voix de la raison et le véritable consensus prévalent.