Asbestos Lung Cancer Risks: Comparison of Animal and Human Extrapolations

James N. Rowe and Janet A. Springer

Risk Analysis, 1986, vol. 6, issue 2, 171-180

Abstract: Using the most comprehensive inhalation study available, (Wagner, et al., 1974), the dose‐response effects of the four major types of asbestos fibers (amosite, anthophyllite, crocidolite, and chrysotile: Canadian, Rhodesian) for lung cancer have been determined. From linear regression analysis of the animal data and five human epidemiology studies giving a wide range of risk estimates, slopes of the curves have been determined and lifetime risk estimates made. Projected risks for rats are presented with and without surface area (s.a.) conversion factors. On the basis of cumulative exposure, the geometric mean of the point estimates for the human studies (0.0146) is quite close to the geometric mean of the animal data (0.0179 without s.a.; 0.0122 with s.a. calculations). These values also match quite well if one of the studies (McDonald, et al.) is eliminated (geometric mean = 0.031) due to qualitatively different exposure considerations (mining and milling vs. industrial environments). Animal risks based on a concentration per day basis (assuming an average 70‐year lifespan for humans) are below the lowest human estimate but within 5–6 fold (less) of the projected risk from nonsmoking asbestos workers (2.2time10‐3) using the Hammond et al. study.

Date: 1986
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1986.tb00205.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:riskan:v:6:y:1986:i:2:p:171-180

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Risk Analysis from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().