Biological effects of mineral fibres

The history of asbestos-related disease and the results of research into the ways in which asbestos fibres are able to damage tissue are reviewed. Although crocidolite has been accepted as constituting a particularly great hazard and is subject to a more stringent hygiene standard that has effectively terminated its use in the U.K., experimental studies on animals have not proved it to be more carcinogenic than chrysotile. It is possible that rats react differently from humans, but more likely possibilities are that in past industrial usage crocidolite produced higher dust concentrations than amosite or chrysotile and that chrysotile is less durable than crocidolite in the lungs over the 10–20 yr that tumour induction takes in man.

Other mineral fibres, both natural and man-made, have come under study and there is some evidence from laboratory experiments that they may produce similar effects to asbestos if of comparable size. The position for man-made insulation fibres appears relatively good and the results of studies of human populations exposed to glass fibre have so far been negative. While not all mineral fibres may constitute a health hazard if used industrially, there is enough evidence of potential harm to indicate that all new types of fibre should be subjected to careful testing.