Summary of Council’s View On the basis of its evaluation of the studies discussed above, the Council considered that the presence of either asbestos bodies or pleural plaques (and diffuse pleural thickening) were indicative of prior asbestos exposure. However, the Council did not find evidence that the presence of either of these markers alone, without a stated asbestos exposure level and duration, and suitable lag period, would indicate that the disease asbestosis was also present. The Council recommends that the RMA considers whether diffuse pleural thickening should be specifically included in the SoPs regime as a compensable disease, possibly by recognising it as a separate disease. New Information on the Relationship between Pleural Plaques and / or Asbestos Bodies and Fibrosing Interstitial Lung Disease and Asbestosis The Council noted there is new information available on the relationship between pleural plaques, asbestos bodies, and asbestosis (see Appendix A. Table A4) and in relation to diffuse pleural thickening (see Appendix A. Table A5). Comparison of the Statements of Principles, Duration of Exposure is used as a Measure of Dose, with the Literature on a Threshold of Asbestos Concentrations In previous RMA reviews in 1996, and 2005 the required of asbestos exposure associated with producing FILD or Asbestosis expressed as days was reduced, and exposure expressed as days changed to hours of exposure. In the SoPs for Asbestosis for 1996 the minimum period of exposure to asbestos fibres was changed from 500 days (RH and BoP) to 200 days (RH) and 365 days (BoP). The rationale for the change was the 500 days minimum period of exposure was derived from occupational studies (15 studies/reviews, particularly studies of Wittenoom mine workers and insulators by de Klerk et al and Cookson et al) and the dose was lowered to account for naval personnel who are often on board ship for 24 hours per day, seven days per week.
Summary of Council’s View On the basis of its evaluation of the studies discussed above, the Council considered that the presence of either asbestos bodies or pleural plaques (and diffuse pleural thickening) were indicative of prior asbestos exposure. However, the Council did not find evidence that the presence of either of these markers alone, without a stated asbestos exposure level and duration, and suitable lag period, would indicate that the disease asbestosis was also present. The Council recommends that the RMA considers whether diffuse pleural thickening should be specifically included in the SoPs regime as a compensable disease, possibly by recognising it as a separate disease. New Information on the Relationship between Pleural Plaques and / or Asbestos Bodies and Fibrosing Interstitial Lung Disease and Asbestosis The Council noted there is new information available on the relationship between pleural plaques, asbestos bodies, and asbestosis (see Appendix A. Table A4) and in relation to diffuse pleural thickening (see Appendix A. Table A5). Comparison of the Statements of Principles, Duration of Exposure is used as a Measure of Dose, with the Literature on a Threshold of Asbestos Concentrations In previous RMA reviews in 1996, and 2005 the required of asbestos exposure associated with producing FILD or Asbestosis expressed as days was reduced, and exposure expressed as days changed to hours of exposure. In the SoPs for Asbestosis for 1996 the minimum period of exposure to asbestos fibres was changed from 500 days (RH and BoP) to 200 days (RH) and 365 days (BoP). The rationale for the change was the 500 days minimum period of exposure was derived from occupational studies (15 studies/reviews, particularly studies of Wittenoom mine workers and insulators by de Klerk et al and Cookson et al) and the dose was lowered to account for naval personnel who are often on board ship for 24 hours per day, seven days per week.
asb_reasons10.12.2015.docx