[HN Gopher] When Asbestos Was a Gift Fit for a King
___________________________________________________________________
When Asbestos Was a Gift Fit for a King
Author : onychomys
Score : 92 points
Date : 2020-08-27 20:11 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (daily.jstor.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (daily.jstor.org)
| PHGamer wrote:
| is asbestos really that bad? or is it the long term affects. if
| charlemagne just used it a show off thing in the diner would it
| have really mattered?
| t3rabytes wrote:
| My understanding is that it's only bad if disturbed and in the
| air. That's why popcorn ceilings, roof tiles, and insulation
| with asbestos is all "fine" and not mandated to be removed.
|
| But yes, the long-term effects are the real problem.
| aspett wrote:
| Yes. Breathing it's fibers can cause serious disease and
| cancer. Asbestos was used as a common building material in New
| Zealand for insulation, roof tiles, ceiling tiles and texturing
| and more in the 1950-1990 period. If you do any renovation or
| changes that interact with asbestos, it basically has to be
| handled by a hazmat team.
|
| https://ehs.oregonstate.edu/asb-when > When is Asbestos
| Dangerous?
| liability wrote:
| I think it was particularly lethal to miners and factory
| workers. One of my great grandfathers died years after working
| in a factory that made mittens out of asbestos. Any process
| that disturbs the asbestos is going to be risky.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| The Navy. It was used to insulate pipes and stop fires from
| spreading. Ships are basically one giant confined space full
| of pipes and fire barriers.
| liability wrote:
| It's sadly ironic that a fireproofing material meant to
| save lives has killed so many (a great deal more than it
| plausibly ever saved.)
| dekhn wrote:
| I don't know what the actual rates of lived saved by
| asbestos vs lives taken in. It's one of the classic risk
| evaluation problems: fires are big, scary and dramatic,
| people know who died in them, and so a tool that prevents
| it is welcome. On the other hand, asbestos being
| dangerous really only came into being after people
| noticed a pattern of increased early death in asbestos
| mining towns. We just don't process the risk of a
| statistically significant increase in early death,
| compared to the obvious risk of not using fire
| insulation.
| joezydeco wrote:
| The first 40 floors of the World Trade Center, both towers,
| had every steel beam covered in asbestos. The collapse
| released 2,000 _tons_ of fibers into the atmosphere on 9
| /11/01.
| bjoli wrote:
| I lived in a house with an asbestos facade. As long as you
| don't need to change anything it is even better than bricks.
| Easier to clean. Fire safe. Doesn't age much in 50 years. They
| used it everywhere: facade, insulation, floor glue.
|
| If it breaks however, the fibers go everywhere, especially to
| your lungs where they stay. People working with it died of all
| kinds of problems, but mostly cancer in the lungs iirc.
| sgt wrote:
| Also for asbestos roof - if it has been maintained and
| properly sealed once a decade or so, and is in good state,
| there is no reason to be worried. In that case it's actually
| much worse to remove it, and it is a great roofing material.
| However keep an eye on it if it shows signs of brittleness.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Exactly, it is the dust that is dangerous, not the bulk
| material. Avoid scratching, grinding, sanding, cutting,
| drilling and another kind of operation that turns some of
| the material into dust, especially airborne dust. Always
| wear a respirator when you have to work with it, always
| meticulously clean the area around it keep _everybody_ out
| and if at all avoidable: simply don 't touch it.
|
| There are companies that specialize in asbestos removal and
| safe work on it, it is one of the things I check for very
| carefully when looking at real estate.
|
| Finally, you find it in the most unexpected places. Floor
| coverings, roof coverings, liners, chimneys, stoves, ovens,
| as spray-on covering of steel beams and girders (and floor
| joists), the list if endless.
|
| If you don't know what you're looking at in an older
| building and it's gray stop until you are 100% sure that it
| isn't asbestos.
| paulgerhardt wrote:
| Yes, but in insidious ways. In the era of Charlemagne, many
| other things would have had significantly higher micromorts. As
| dinner guest, I would have enjoyed the show rather than headed
| for the doors. At a dinner party today? No way.
|
| According to the official CDC report which was used by the EPA
| to ban new uses of asbestos [1] the gist is that asbestos isn't
| a traditional poison. We measure most "poisons" in terms of
| Lethal Dose (LD50) or roughly paraphrased "how much of this
| would it take to kill 50% of subjects." We tend to think of
| something, like cyanide, as "very poisonous" if a small amount
| of something will kill you very quickly. But we measure
| lethality in other ways - "lethal concentration" (LC0 - whats
| the lowest concentration in air that has been observed to
| caused a fatality, LC50 at what concentration is 50% affected),
| lowest observed adverse affects level (will this mess you up
| like lead poisoning?), lethal time (LT0 - lowest amount of time
| observed to cause fatality, LT50 - time to cause fatality in
| 50% of population), and a host of others.
|
| Asbestos doesn't have an observed LD50 (at least not in that
| report). No one has died within a few hours of inhaling
| asbestos like they would if, say, they ate Fugu pufferfish.
|
| What it does have, is a very low LC0 and very long LT0 numbers.
| Only a little bit needs to get into your lungs, which unlike
| the pathway we observe in cigarettes, will stick around for a
| very long time, where it will eventually (on a long enough
| timeline) cause cancer. Exposure makes these numbers go up. 10%
| of asbestos mill workers die of mesothelioma, 2% of people who
| work with asbestos insulating boats and planes die of
| mesothelioma or related cancers - most within 5-20 years. If
| you're a smoker, the synergistic effects can further increase
| your risk of cancer by 90x(!). Other figures in other reports
| are a bit lower, but the panic was over the issue that there
| was no 'safe' dose of asbestos unlike with other toxins and no
| trivial environmental remediation.
|
| I only gave it a scan; happy to be corrected by someone more
| informed on the subject.
|
| [1] https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp61.pdf - since
| updated in 2001
| aresant wrote:
| Build on this even in 1942, just prior to the discovery of the
| link to Mesothelioma, we were busily figuring out every use case
| we could for asbestos -
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC8L8ooBSgQ&t=1m8s
|
| Despite the recognition of Mesothelioma in the early 1900s it
| took almost 40 years to associate the disease with Asbestos.
|
| My understanding is that this was due to the 10 - 40 year average
| post exposure timeline for Mesothelioma to show up.
|
| If Asbestos was discovered today would our contemporary
| understanding of materials science & safety prevent us from
| spinning up factories and use cases like this?
|
| (1) https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-
| conditions/asbestosis/sy...
| skellera wrote:
| At least we think about it. The miracle material, graphene, has
| properties that could potentially cause problems when breathed
| in [0]. So at least we know what to look for and can mitigate.
|
| That said, who knows what other material might come about that
| causes problems 40 years later in a different way. We will
| learn when it comes but at least we're starting to be more
| aware of potential problems.
|
| [0]
| https://www.materialstoday.com/carbon/articles/s136970211270...
| ReptileMan wrote:
| If you really want to freak out - think xenoestrogens.
| mullingitover wrote:
| The crazy thing is that Pliny and Strabo were writing about the
| effects asbestos had on the slaves that processed it, ~2000
| years ago.
| flancian wrote:
| This sounded interesting so I looked it up; it seems it might
| be a popular misconception?
|
| > The term asbestos is traceable to Roman naturalist Pliny
| the Elder's manuscript Natural History and his use of the
| term asbestinon, meaning "unquenchable". While Pliny or his
| nephew Pliny the Younger is popularly credited with
| recognising the detrimental effects of asbestos on human
| beings, examination of the primary sources reveals no support
| for either claim.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestos#Early_uses
|
| I've found many references to Pliny and Strabo around the
| web, but as the Wikipedia fragment implies yet no actual
| quotation about its dangers. It seems like a very specific
| myth to just come up though; my interest remains. Do let me
| know if you know more about this.
| jacquesm wrote:
| There is some concern about carbon fiber and carbon nanotubes,
| they share some of the physical properties with asbestos
| fibers. So I do think that we would be on it pretty quickly but
| whether we would change course before the symptoms appeared is
| a different matter.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| >> If Asbestos was discovered today...
|
| I don't think it would. Asbestos is a totally natural product.
| It would probably bypass many of our testing standards.
| hansvm wrote:
| I don't like it, but I think I agree with you. Examples that
| come to mind include the use of copper sulphate as a more-or-
| less unregulated pesticide in organic farms, mutagenic
| breeding as the "safe and natural" alternative to gene
| splicing, and a whole host of other natural (and therefore
| obviously safe and beneficial) practices.
| Mitzz wrote:
| There is a fascinating 16 minute documentary about an Australian
| ghost town that once was a thriving asbestos mining town:
|
| Australia's Ghost Town: The contaminated city Wittenoom
| https://youtu.be/PaHw_bGI2ME
|
| SPOILER ALERT: it turns out the town is not uninhabited.
| knolax wrote:
| Apparently asbestos has been used since at least 5000 years
| ago[0]. I wonder what prevented large scale extraction between
| then and the 19th century.
|
| [0]
| https://books.google.com/books?id=eYHEEWhye94C&pg=PA449#v=on...
| ermir wrote:
| For those that are unaware, if you or a loved one was diagnosed
| with Mesothelioma you may be entitled to financial compensation.
| leptoniscool wrote:
| who's paying out?
| mjamesaustin wrote:
| Found this just searching: https://www.mesotheliomafund.com/
| liability wrote:
| I've heard this Charlemagne legend before but I'd love to see
| somebody put it to the test. I'm thinking the tablecloth would
| come out of the fire soiled with ash and bits of charcoal. I
| suppose it might still impress his guests but I don't think this
| party trick would work quite as well as the legend suggests.
|
| Also, 'Salamander Cotton' is a delightful name for asbestos.
| agumonkey wrote:
| A tiny video relating a lot of antique use of asbestos
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EJ-4koV7m0
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Less a tablecloth, more a placemat. And it is doubtful it was
| thrown _onto_ the fire, where it would probably put the fire
| mostly out, rather than thrown _into_ the fireplace to hang on
| something over the fire. There are also translation issues from
| royal to plain speak. Royals like this rarely did physical
| things. When the king is observed to "throw" something, it is
| more likely that he _had it thrown_ by a servant who then
| placed the valuable object on a rack as planned. Readers of the
| time would not see a practical difference.
| liability wrote:
| That seems plausible, though not quite as cool.
| jacobwilliamroy wrote:
| Like how Steve Jobs made the iPhone?
| saagarjha wrote:
| Legend has it that he threw a development team and a
| multitouch capacitive display in a fire and then pulled a
| fully built, finished iPhone from the flames.
| zdragnar wrote:
| I thought that was the kindle fire tablet
| Codesleuth wrote:
| An exquisite read. The author (Amelia Soth) should be proud of
| something so captivating.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-08-27 23:00 UTC)