I’m renovating a house that has vermiculite insulation in the attic. I’ve recently seen some warnings about asbestos in the vermiculite with recommendations that it not be disturbed during renovations. This particular renovation requires some work in the attic for electrical and structural changes. There also may be some vermiculite in the gable ends (fallen from the attic). Has anyone dealt with this and is the problem overblown?
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
The "She Build" initiative is empowering women in Seattle, WA by ensuring they have safe, healthy homes.
Featured Video
SawStop's Portable Tablesaw is Bigger and Better Than BeforeHighlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
MOST asbestos problems are overblown unless you are working in it daily. Be careful not to track it through the house and home to mama and the kids. a disposable Tyvek suit and N100 repsirator is recommended.
Some vermiculite has SOME asbestos in it. The only way to be sure is to have it tested - anywhere from fifteen to fifty bucks. Or just assume and treat yourself like it is.
Thing is, you have to have regular exposure over long time and generally have to also bea smoker for it to cause problems. Teh cig tars catch teh fibres inlungs and hold it while also making it harder for lung tissue to heal so scarring is worse.
One thing that bothers me is where they find Asbestos existing in schools, then go into pnaic mode and feel like they just have to get remediation immediately for a minor trace of it that will not hurt anybody.
What happens then is that becuase of disturbing it, the fibres are then found to be still floating around in the air of the building three years later in higher concentrations than the original testing showed, tho technically because of the remial process, it is all gone....
it is as much a financial game they are playing as much as it is a health issue. There are probably more fraudulent health claims based on Asbestos than any other thing out there, IMO.
It IS a serious problem for those who contract asbestosis or mesilthimioma, but the actual incidnce is very rare. It is not like you touch it three times and your lungs seize up. It is a certain kind of irritant, not a toxin like so many imagine.
Welcome to the
Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime.
where ...
Excellence is its own reward!
Yet another link: http://www.vermiculite.org/hse.htm#5 The title says it all: Vermiculite is NOT asbestos. NO asbestos related illnesses, except among workers at ONE mine- and that mine long since closed. Likewise, the EPA draft reports essentially NO asbestos risk. The whole asbestos / vermiculite panic is nothing but media-hyped junk science.
Like I said - some has someLong since closed - but this is older existing already in place so it is possible that it has some.Still I would not worry myself.
'course, I've already eaten enough dust of one kind or another to kill a normal human being, LOL
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
False, little exposure of asbestos can cause mesotheliema. Mesothelioma is more of a genetic condition, either you will get it and it will be fatal, or you can breath asbestos as a steam bath and won't ever get it. Asbestetosis, is however more related to extended exposure. You don't have to be a smoker to get it although smokers are 90-100 times more likely to develop it. This is because of the make of asbestos it's self, it's shape is a hollow fiber with barbs like a fish hook. When inhaled they imbed into the lining of the lung making a tiny permanent open sore, and the more of these penetrations you have or more carcinogen expose you have along with, such as cig smoke, inurn increase your chances for the harmful effects to creep up on you through these open sores. Also I can't tell you the contents of the vermiculite however the OSHA standard for asbestos indicates that all thermal insulating materials installed prior to I think 1975 are to be presumed to contain asbestos and treated as thus until identified. Additionally if you are in fact dealing with asbestos a simple dust mask and tyvek suit are not sufficient for removal there are pages and pages of requirements to be carried out only by those with a class 1 asbestos license. But I will warn you too that the laws are very clear that the owner of the building is responsible, so if you have a contractor doing demo work and they discover asbestos you are responsible from the cost of testing on through to removal---$$$$$ . Even if they hard bid a job that contractor has nothing to do with the removal and can not ask it's employees too or they themselves continue to work until abatement is completed.
He never said he was removing the vermiculite, only that he would be working in its presence.Can you cite one single case of disease from asbestos exposure in a non-smoker? I don't believe so. There is theoretical reasoning for what you say, but in the JM lawsuits and others for work dating back to WWII, one fact that was presented by the defense and then thrown out as being "prejudicial" was the actual finding that NO non-smoker had been found who had contracted disease following asbestos exposure.I have read this several times back in the eighties when things were proceeding. I paid attention because I have worked in it a good deal so I had personal concerns. Maybe in the ensuing twenty years somebody has been found to disprove this. But if even only a case ot two, that makes the odds more like a million to one not a hundred to one, eh?regardl;es, the best thing is to protect and keep in place, not to remove it. removal always results in more, not less finbres circulating in the aior, no matter how careful the remediation people are.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
The example of non-smokers receiving asbestosis would be all the Romans that where constantly sick with respiratory problems working in the asbestos mines 2000yrs. ago including those living in villages nearby with significantly shorter life spans than those without mines. All before they had cigarettes. Same goes for those in the Canadian mines today and surrounding areas where they still mine it today.
As for the mesothelioma you don't have to be a smoker, as I said it's a genetic susceptibility for it after asbestos exposure.
The reason you haven't seen the cases to date is because both are long term illnesses resulting from causes that pre date accurate record keeping. But I bet in the next 15 years as the guys that worked around it prior to 75' and are now retiring and dying off you'll really start to see it. In just the last 5 years OSHA has doubled the permissible exposer limits as they find more and more linkage.
Have I ever swept up or broken off an asbestos insulated steam pipe elbow, yes. Have I ever chipped up 9x9 resilient flooring and scraped up the asbestos mastic, yes. Do I dwell on it, or have I even gone to a doctor after, no. But it's irresponsible to tell a home owner to just go ahead and work in the stuff.
Now, what really needs to be looked into and asked about since asbestos use is now limited to 1% of a products total weight is fiberglass, silica, and mineral wool. What kind of killers are these items going to end up finding to be.
The only one that's going to keep you safe on the job is yourself.
<<Can you cite one single case of disease from asbestos exposure in a non-smoker?>>I suppose we could use my non-smoking, dead husband, as Exhibit A. You're completely mistaken as to the effects of asbestos on the body. In Libby, MT, where W.R.Grace Co. made their money mining vermiculite and cleared out, about a third of the town is affected with asbestos-related disease. The high school put the stuff on the track, even. More exposure is linked to higher incidence of disease, but in my husband's case, he was aware of working with it only briefly, laying up cement-sheet soffits in the mid-60s in England when he started out as a carpenter. The bosses held safety meetings to tell the concerned crew that there was no crocidolite (blue) asbestos in the sheets - the kind that famously turned Wittenoom AU, into a ghost town - only the "safe", white, crysotile type. Any asbestos can kill, even a very few fibers. Peritoneal mesothelioma is a variation on the theme, a cancer of the lining of the stomach from fibers being ingested. Mesothelioma is 100% fatal, incidentally. As for your "odds of a million to one", asbestos is such an epidemic in England at present, where hundreds of tons of the stuff was shipped in from South Africa to make cheaper concrete products, that one of every 200 deaths there from all causes in the UK is now asbestos-related. The peak in deaths is expected not to occur until 2015. Many 'studies' have been done proving there was no harm to using asbestos, like the one in the textile mill in NC where all the workers who'd been there over ten years were fired before anyone was tested. Since asbestos-related problems are long in developing, they "proved" no harm was caused by asbestos. The insurance industry downplayed the concerns as well.Here's a link to point to the collusion between industry and insurers to hide the known issues with asbestos from workers and deny them medical and financial redress: http://www.mesothel.com/pages/workers_comp.htm
thank you. I stand corrected and now - newly concerned, having inhaled I am sure, far more asbestos fibre than Ian seems to have, given the way we used to use it.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I suppose i've inhaled a fair bit, too, from tilling it into the garden and having it in my attic in my Victorian i sold.
It got real cheap to buy, right before the asbestos hit the fan up there...and i didn't know any better at the time, either. Probably still wouldn't, except i had reason to research it to death.
cite a case:
Marvin Nobis
First, I'll preface each of my messages on this issue with: I think Fine Homebuilding is great, but they did a dangerous disservice by minimizing health risks of asbestos by quoting anonymous people with no public health qualifications.Piffin wrote:
Can you cite one single case of disease from asbestos exposure in a non-smoker? I don't believe so.OK, you're right. I don't have online access to the articles listed below, but they are six published studies that compared asbestos disease among exposed smokers and non-smokers to see if smoking made the problem worse, but they also concluded that non-smokers were 3.78 to 25 times more likely to get lung cancer than those not exposed to asbestos. Where do you get your "science"?Berry G, Newhouse ML, Antonis P. Combined effect of asbestos and smoking on mortality from lung cancer and mesothelioma in factory workers. Br J Ind Med 1985;42:12–8.Hammond EC, Selikoff IJ, Seidman H. Asbestos exposure, cigarette smoking and death rates.Ann N Y Acad Sci 1979; 330:473–90.McDonald JC, Liddell FDK, Dufresne A, et al. The 1891–1920 birth cohort of Quebec chrysotile miners and millers: mortality 1976–88. Br J Ind Med 1993;50:1073–81.Selikoff IJ, Seidman H, Hammond EC. Mortality effects of cigarette smoking among amosite asbestos factory workers. J Natl Cancer Inst 1980;65:507–13.Selikoff IJ, Hammond EC. Multiple risk factors in environmental cancer. In: Fraumeni JFJr, ed. Persons at high risk of cancer: an approach to cancer etiology and control. New York:
Academic Press, 1975:467–83.Zhu H, Wang Z. Study of occupational lung cancer in asbestos factories in China. Br J Ind Med 1993;50:1039–42.---mike...
Good Deal. I think we can all breathe easier now that you have cleared the air.;)
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
First, I'll preface each of my messages on this issue with: I think Fine Homebuilding is great, but they did a dangerous disservice by minimizing health risks of asbestos by quoting anonymous people with no public health qualifications.To renosteinke:Unbelievable! You chose a vermiculite industry webpage to give you unbiased science about vermiculite? Of course they are going to distance themselves from asbestos, because they are not the same. Truth is, multiple vermiculite mines, but not all, had asbestos mixed in as a contaminant. Who's quoting junk science?Next, did you actually *read* the EPA report you quote. One test indicates as much 2.6 fibers/cubic centimeter for a project like attic wiring or small renovation in the presence of vermiculite insulation. Considering an average breath is about 500 cc's, that well over a thousand asbestos fibers inhaled *per breath*!!The very last paragraph of the EPA report, that is, the overall conclusion, is included here in its entirety. How did you conclude "no asbestos risk" from the following?The implications of these results are: (1) routine disturbances of vermiculite insulation by homeowners (e.g., via homeowner repairs or remodeling) can result in asbestos exposure via inhalation of airborne fibers; (2) similar exposures can occur among homeowners who remove the insulation themselves; (3) these exposures can be mitigated to a certain extent by wetting the insulation before disturbing it; (4) vermiculite attic insulation can be removed safely (i.e., without generating airborne asbestos) by a qualified contractor; and (5) blower door tests such as those performed by Vermont Gas can be done without generating airborne fibers.from FINAL DRAFT, PILOT STUDY TO ESTIMATE ASBESTOS EXPOSURE
from VERMICULITE ATTIC INSULATION, Research Conducted in 2001 and 2002http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/insulationreport.pdf---mike...
I concluded "no risk," as either none was found .. or the amounts were less than the 'control' samples. You look hard enough, you will find for which you seek ... even if it's not there. Just look at the 'lead tests' that showed higher lead content in water taken from PVC pipes, than from lead-soldered copper. It's almost impossible to find any research report that says anything more definitive than "more research is needed." I need not take credit for labeling the asbestos hysteria as 'junk science.' Peter Huber used it as one of his examples in "Galileo's Revenge: Junk Science in the Courtroom." AFAIK, Peter Huber has degrees in both law and engineering, is a successful writer on environmental issues, and has no connection whatever with the asbestos industry. Proximity to something need not lead to expertise ... or I, being near "Area 51," could claim expertise in flying saucers.
Almost nothing has been added to the "facts" since Gordon Rattray Taylor wrote about asbestos in the early '70's. ("The Doomsday Book.) The entire "environmental" movement left the realm of science long ago. Whether in macro (global warming) or micro (asbestos), simple religious hysteria has pushed aside any attempts at reason, or perspective. I believe that both research and real-world numbers support my contention that asbestos in vermiculite is a non-issue. I will not debate religion; but neither will I allow evangelists to go unanswered. You want to eliminate a REAL cause of deadly lung disease, worry about pigeon droppings.
Renosteinke: I don't intend to try to change your mind; clearly your attempt to try to reverse decades of proven, peer-reviewed science by attempting to apply the label 'junk science' shows which 'religious' cult you follow. I'm am just trying to counter your unsubstantiated fallacies with substance from the real world to avoid further harm.First let me say I sort of agree with you on two points. Vermiculite insulation is probably not a large concern, but only as long as it stays undisturbed in the attic. Second, the vermiculite industry, which you use as half of your 'evidence,' is correct in saying 'vermiculite is not asbestos.'However, much vermiculite asbestos that had been installed decades ago was contaminated with asbestos. Vermiculite used for soil is also generally not a big issue; asbestos happens to bind well to soil, and often that use of vermiculite was outdoors, not in an enclosed area like an attic.For years, the tobacco industry claimed smoking wasn't proven harmful. And we all probably know some old person who had smoked forever and didn't die of cancer. So we can conclude that smoking doesn't cause cancer.Public health is different from a particular individual's health, and it can cut both ways. But known avoidable risks are different from unavoidable risks, particularly when costs (such as death) are large.Per your 'points'you wrote: I concluded "no risk," as either none was found .. or the amounts were less than the 'control' samples. You look hard enough, you will find for which you seek ... even if it's not there.response: Yeah, I searched real hard. I went to the very end of the EPA report you quoted (the other half of your 'evidence') to look for the conclusion, and came up with: "The implications of these results are: (1) routine disturbances of vermiculite insulation by homeowners (e.g., via homeowner repairs or remodeling) can result in asbestos exposure via inhalation of airborne fibers; (2) similar exposures can occur among homeowners who remove the insulation themselves; ..."As I wrote before, the risk of getting cancer from an incidental adult exposure to asbestos from insulation may be small because it usually takes decades for the cancer to develop after first exposure (even if not continued exposure) to asbestos. Weigh that risk against cost of proper containment (and not necessarily removal) and you may not be concerned. If kids are present, however, the whole scenario changes for many reasons. (I can elaborate in another post if anyone's interested.)You wrote: Just look at the 'lead tests' that showed higher lead content in water taken from PVC pipes, than from lead-soldered copper.response: lead has been used as a stabilizer for PVC; could that be the source? Remember a few years ago, lead dust from imported vinyl blinds caused the Consumer Product Safety Commission to recommend removal of vinyl miniblinds after children got unexpected lead poisoning that could not be traced to other sources, until it was found the blinds were the source. There may be good explanations for results of studies that don't initially make sense.You wrote: It's almost impossible to find any research report that says anything more definitive than "more research is needed."response: depends on what you're talking about, but as a general statement, that sounds like a quote from someone unable to really comprehend scientific documents, particularly if you are referring to health risks from asbestos.You wrote: I need not take credit for labeling the asbestos hysteria as 'junk science.'response: I will grant you that many of the asbestos lawsuits are more than a stretch of science, but that should not diminish the actual science that says asbestos is a hazard. How lawyers have stretched the true science for an opportunity to profit on questionable bases is another issue entirely. It is nearly impossible to link most individual cases of lung cancer to incidental asbestos exposure (which is the attempt of the lawsuits), but it has been clearly established that asbestos exposure causes cancer.You wrote: I believe that both research and real-world numbers support my contention that asbestos in vermiculite is a non-issue.response: so where's your support? I've shown some of mine.You wrote: Almost nothing has been added to the "facts" since Gordon Rattray Taylor wrote about asbestos in the early '70's. response: where do you come up with a statement like that? The Toxicological Profile for Asbestos, published by the US Dept of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, has well over 50 pages of references for their 200+ page report, with about 15 references per page, and almost none of them as old as 1970. In fact, much has been learned since the investigations at Libby, Montana started in earnest in the 90's, such as that most of the tests used to quantify asbestos content with fail to identify or will under-report the most problematic forms of asbestos from the W.R. Grace Libby vermiculite mine, the main source of Zonolite insulation.You wrote: Proximity to something need not lead to expertiseresponse: agreed, I was merely trying to show I had an interest in a local problem, and to show the response as an example of the seriousness of asbestos, because I didn't want to get into my personal life. Now that you bring it up... I have a B.S. and M.S. in Biomedical Engineering, and have finished classwork toward a PhD in the same field, but I stopped pursuing that until my kids are a bit older. I have taken a undergraduate physiology/biophysics courses as well as a number of graduate physiology and pathphysiology courses, including the same required graduate physiology classes with the med students at Boston University. I've also taken graduate Cell Biology, in which I gained much insight into the mechanisms of cancer initiation. I have been a practicing engineer working on medical devices for the past twenty years continuously at respected Fortune 500/Global 500 companies, so I also know how to analyze and crunch through numbers. That doesn't make me an expert, but I have gained the respect of the Cambridge Public Health Dept. and the Mass. DEP regarding asbestos, as well as some other issues.I take it you're an electrician (?) who bases information on this asbestos issue from a book by a lawyer, the vermiculite industry, and a reference with a conclusion that contradicts yours.I'll leave with a quote from a real expert:
Dr. Philip Landrigan, who has served as Senior Advisor to the Environmental Protection Agency, wrote in the May 28, 1998 New England Journal of Medicine. "With the passage in 1986 of the federal Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA), a rational set of legally enforceable controls was put in place. The guiding principle of AHERA is that asbestos in a building is deemed to pose no hazard to health unless fibers become airborne and inhaled. So long as asbestos remains in place and is protected from disturbance, it can safely be left alone."---mike...
Cambridge, Mass.
As I stated, I'll not criticize another mans' religion. I've only seen the problem result from one mine, long closed. Heck, even the problems among asbestos workers are closely tied to certain mines. It's not simply enough to say "asbestos is there"... you have to be able to say it not only is asbestos, but that it came from a certain mine, it has a certain structure, the fibers are exactly the right length, AND they are airborne. None of this applies to vermiculite- even the affected Montana mine. Some will say that industry sources are automatically without merit. I beg to disagree. If I need my car fixed, I look to the car industry ... and not the garden club. To carry your implication further, someone with academic credentials is automatically suspect, being part of the 'environmental' movement. Is that your logic? One of the problems with "peer review" is that an awful lot of it has been, well, deceptive. We've seen far too many examples of supposedly "scientific" journals suppressing debate for political reasons. Public health? That field has become so twisted that so MD's consider it proper to ask every patient whetner they own firearms (because there is a movement to consider the 2nd Amendment a 'public health concern.' "Can" is a wide-open word, almost as bad as "possible." The actual numbers in the EPA report say "no asbestos." Yet, the ghost findings leave enough of a hook for the report to say "can." After all, they are not able to say that there is absolutely none, anywhere. One simply can't prove a negative. I deplore the way the asbestos hysteria has harmed a valuable industry, without justification. There simply is no reason in the environmental movement. You want to worry about asbestos in your home, look no further than you floors and walls. Prior to the late 70's, many joint compounds had asbestos in them. Even drywall often had asbestos in the gypsum. Virtually all floor tiles had it. I suppose I should expect the Home Depot clerk to roll his eyes and gasp "Asbestos!" the next time I ask for these, or many other products. It's a matter of perspective. All risks are relative. I mentioned the 'lead in PVC' because, if one were logical, the numbers would say 'ban the plastic, keep the lead solder.' Yet, that is the opposite of what actually happened. Likewise, if one were to look at the numbers, the illnesses caused by all asbestos, from whatever source, pale in comparison to, say, injuries caused by hospitals administering the wrong medications. Getting back to the specific: Despite ad campaigns nationwide, looking for asbestos victims, no a single case has been tied to consumers with vermiculite insulation. Even the cases at the suspect mine are -correctly- associated with the asbestos mining portion, and not the vermiculite. Yet some continue to apply the same impossible standards to vermiculite. These are the same folks who recently paraded a picture of "stranded" polar bears, and think we should limit ourselves to one square of toilet paper. Or that asserted that Spotted Owls required 'old growth' K-Mart signs for habitat. Sources? I've offered Taylor and Huber. If you want to say that they're not 'primary' authors, fair enough. Both have their sources cited, and have covered the breadth of the issue.
Taylor is particularly good at identifying the social and legal quirks of environmentalism ... and suggesting proven ways to address real concerns.
Huber, as the title of his book suggests, focuses on how partisans have twisted our system for their own purposes. It's no accident that he opens his book discussing witch trials. Why stop this hysteria now? Because your BBQ is next. Or your spray paint. Or the clothes you wear. Or the food you give your pets. It will never end .... there are those who believe that THEY have a divine right to govern, and attempt to usurp this power by creating a state of fear amongst the public. That is the real danger.
>>First, I'll preface each of my messages on this issue with: I think Fine Homebuilding is great, but they did a dangerous disservice by minimizing health risks of asbestos They? This is a public forum which 'they' sponsor - "They" (Taunton) do not produce or edit the content here. (Too bad you didn't read the Taunton Terms of Use page as closely as you think you've read the EPA pages: "Comments by Users are not Endorsed or Verified by Taunton")>>by quoting anonymous people with no public health qualifications.And the name "MadisonRenovations" is so loaded with obvious public health qualifications that we should accept what you pronounce without out further qualification?Many of us here have been following various public health issues as awareness and views of them developed over the years and have a certain "expertise" is weighing the various issues.As a home inspector, for example, I've ben watching the vermiculite issue for about 10 years now.As a government agency, EPA operates within certain constraints and presures.My experience in this field and a prior line of work involving review and analysis and implementations of government "decrees/regulations" have fostered a certain "awareness" of the nuances of bureaucrat-ese in reading these sorts of things (See, also, for example, the EPA's radon pages and mold pages - both of which i have also tracked.)The language of their asbestos pages is about as guarded and subtly qualified as any I've seen.Based on my following this issue, my interpretation of the EPA's latest pages on the issue (and this is mine only:) "If you don't bet on it, don't sweat it - we've gotta acknowledge the possibility to cover our butts but, _in undisturbed_ the amount typically suspected is so frigging low it usually can't be measured. In other words, getta life."Your mileage may vary.
With my mouth I will give great thanks to the Lord; I will praise Him in the midst of the throng. For He stands at the right hand of the needy, to save them from those who would condemn them to death.
- Psalms 109:30-31
>>First, I'll preface each of my messages on this issue with: I think Fine Homebuilding is great, but they did a dangerous disservice by minimizing health risks of asbestosrjw wrote in response: They? This is a public forum which 'they' sponsor - "They" (Taunton) do not produce or edit the content here.If it was just in the forum, I wouldn't care so much. But the original question and (only) two selected responses that indicated people shouldn't be worried, made it into the print version of their Spring/Summer 2007 'Houses' issue. By selecting only two items with one view, it gives readers the impression that there are no health risks. And because it's in the Houses issue, it'll reach a wider audience that likely includes people who are not up-to-date on the issue, and probably some with kids, which is the real issue. That's why I'm taking issue with this.I have no problem with workers willing to take the relatively low risk to themselves; I mean, I don't always wear a mask and goggles when sanding, etc. But the risk of asbestos to kids is fundamentally different than for adults.rjw: And the name "MadisonRenovations" is so loaded with obvious public health qualifications that we should accept what you pronounce without out further qualification?I don't expect you to; I wouldn't trust anything on a website without following up myself. But I leave you with a trail that you can follow, with references and quotes. Everything I write can be supported if you want to follow up. I'm an engineer, by nature I don't go out on a limb. I'm also a decent woodworker, who now has some knowledge about homebuilding, and would like to expand on that, hence the side business. Other posters have made comments such as that there's been no new information on asbestos since 1970. That's just plain false, with no supporting evidence. I just want to try to counter the fallacies with some facts.rjw: As a government agency, EPA operates within certain constraints and presures.From what I've read (e.g. book An Air That Kills by Andrew Schneider, the report who broke the Libby, Montana issue) the asbestos industry has pressured the government pretty hard. Did you know that asbestos is still in brakes because the week that all the car and brake manufacturers were going to stop using asbestos in an agreement brokered by the feds, the industry threatened to sue each of them for working together (collusion)? The EPA reports on asbestos were supposedly reworked until they were softened into nothing solid after numerous reviews of the draft by the asbestos industry. (ref: An Air That Kills)As you said, it's not much of an issue if undisturbed. That what we fought for at the W.R. Grace site in Cambridge, that is, leave it alone. That's the EPA recommendation for vermiculite insulation. The original question was whether renovations that could disturb the insulation could be hazardous. I'd say yes, they *could*: lower risk for adults, higher risk for kids, and lower risk if you use appropriate containment measures. That's all I want to get across, but you can't say disturbing it presents *no* risk. I'm not on some witch hunt, but there were supposedly millions of houses that had the contaminated insulation installed, so it continues to be an issue. (see below)Again, it's only because of the view presented in the print issue that I've taken time to comment here.---mike...The following is from the House Committee on Government Reform website:
http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=249Sunday, February 23, 2003
Environment
EPA and OMB Failed to Warn Public About Asbestos-Contaminated InsulationIn letters to EPA Administrator Whitman and OMB official John Graham, Rep. Waxman and other members of Congress ask why EPA has failed to warn homeowners and workers nationwide about the risks from asbestos-contaminated Zonolite, an insulation used in up to 35 million homes.
Thank you, Madison Renovations, for your extensive effort to correct several misconceptions here. In addition, i'd like to mention that attempts by researchers to cause asbestos-related disease in animals have failed, furthering the erroneous idea that asbestos is safe. Animals (besides baboons) just don't contract it like humans do, but the industry used those finding for years to refuse to institute safeguards.
http://www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/verm.html
A great place for Information, Comraderie, and a sucker punch.
Remodeling Contractor just outside the Glass City.
http://www.quittintime.com/
first i would have it tested.maybe 50.00 bucks. then i would look at getting a insulation guy to come in there and suck it out and replace with cellouse with a higher r value.
i did fill a 40 yd container out of a building one time. just started shoveling,at least its light! this was before i ever heard about poss. asbestos in the material. larry
hand me the chainsaw, i need to trim the casing just a hair.
For those who have been exposed to vermiculite products from W.R Grace, you should know about the C.A.R.D. clinic in Libby Montana, where miners who worked for Grace are treated. They are willing to negotiate with the federal government to provide funds for testing of anyone who worked with those products. Phone 406-293-9274
Best wishes, Peter
i don't know about "junk science" but i do know that anyone renovating a house built prior to 1975 had best become aware of the liabilities incurred
there are two things you have to be aware of and treat with respect .. one is Asbestos... the other is Lead
the Law is pretty specific
you have to give your customers the RPA booklet about Lead Hazard and have them sign for receipt
also.... yes , some Vermiculite is not Zonelite ( W.R. Graces's product.....)
can you tell which one is which ?
and .... when i see vermiculite , i think Asbestos... it's like an alarm bell... start looking around in the rest of the house and it usually is present..... wrapping some pipes in the basement is the usual culprit.... or perhaps some of the heat ducts
the down side is you can be named in a personal injury suit for contaminating the house .. especially if there are children living in the house
Asbestos....Lead... Mold.... don't take them lightly.... the courts don't
Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
That's the rub ... one irresponsible slander, and a fine product is casually lumped with true problems. Kind of like fearing ranging packs of rabid wolves, all because you heard that SOME place in Montana MIGHT have prairie dogs! The entire vermiculite / asbestos myth has been pretty much debunked. Even the EPA links given earlier concede this ... the measured levels, found only occasionally in some sample, in trace amounts, are pretty conclusive evidence that there is no problem. Yet media hype and mass hysteria has many folks worried to death about a non-issue. That OTHER products in older homes MIGHT also have asbestos in them is not the issue. You might as well fear Indian attack on old ranches, because arrowheads MIGHT be found. The asbestos problem, wherever it may be, is NOT in the vermiculite. Now, some might say "anything in the name of safety." Sure, let's replace idiot-proof, everlasting, mold-free, fire proof vermiculite with, say, cellulose insulation. So what if it burns, the treatment chemicals have known quality control issues, are corrosive, and cause cancer. Let's provide a good place for mold, while we're at it.
Or, let's use some nice high-R value foam. So what if it burns like rocket fuel, emits exceptionally toxic fumes when it does burn, contributes to mold by trapping moisture, and requires major construction to add to existing homes. There is no "absolute" safety. You pick and choose your risks. To do so, you need accurate information ... and not the hysteria of the moment.
What, you mean I can come out of my bomb shelter, & the sky is not falling---- surely you jest.“When politicians and journalists declare that the science of global warming is settled, they show a regrettable ignorance about how science works.” Nigel Calder, editor of New Scientist
>>That's the rub ... one irresponsible slander, and a fine product is casually lumped with true problems. I've been following the vermiculite situation for about 10 years now.In my opinion, your views represent one extreme, there are also a few who appear to exaggerate the dangers, the vast majority of views expressed fall in between.To me, the key point is that there is no certainty: the odds appear to be low, but are unknown.And missing from this discussion of risk is evaluation of the degree of harm.The risks of getting a splinter are pretty high, the degree of harm is pretty low, so we take minimal precautions.As the potential degree of harm rises, we increase the precautions we take.In risk analysis, the amount of precaution in which we invest also varies with the likelihood of the harm occurring.So, with vermiculite: low odds, high harm - pick your precaution.The idea of throwing precaution to the winds seems, to me, however, unjustified.
With my mouth I will give great thanks to the Lord; I will praise Him in the midst of the throng. For He stands at the right hand of the needy, to save them from those who would condemn them to death.
- Psalms 109:30-31
The entire vermiculite / asbestos myth has been pretty much debunked. Even the EPA links given earlier concede this...
I can tell you're a True Believer and facts won't matter, but just in case anyone else is inclined to stick his/her head in the same sand dune:
No sense worrrying about it if you've already been exposed - i have been, from using W. R. Grace's Zonolite in the garden - bec there's no remedy. However, to blithely assure someone on the verge of disturbing vermiculite not to be concerned at all is willful ignorance that might be fine for your own use, but not the most neighborly thing to advise.
My husband's death cert listed COD as "lung cancer", by the way, so he might slip through that statistical crack, as well.
You're mixing apples and oranges. Ore is entirely different from a finished product. A co-incidence of materials on one part of one mine does not translate into all products being bad. The EPA analysis of vermiculite samples, almost all of which came from that very mine, showed little or no asbestos in the vermiculite. By "little" I mean trace amounts so small as to be almost beyond detection. It's not a matter of belief; it's a matter of science. There have been NO instances of illness associated with vermiculite, once you get away from the workers in that one mine, and their nearby town. That's why I used the term "junk science." The careless application of innuendo, and the ignoring of follow-up studies, is a matter of fiction, not science. One might as well condemn all row boats, since some shipyard workers suffered in a similar manner as the folks in Libby.
<<There have been NO instances of illness associated with vermiculite, once you get away from the workers in that one mine, and their nearby town.>>Well, at least we're making a little progress away from your earlier statement that there is no connection at all between vermiculite and asbestos-related diseases. However, since it was not only the workers in the mine who were affected, but also their families who only breathed a few fibers the miners brought home with them have suffered from the disease, then it stands to reason, if a person can be affected by only being in proximity to the substance, that fluffing up any asbestos-tainted vermiculite in one's attic could have the same effect. I agree that in a general population it would be difficult to attribute an asbestos-related death to vermiculite one fluffed in one's attic since it could be due to a number of exposures from floor tiles to brake pads. However, if it weren't for the much higher incidence of these cancers and related diseases in focussed populations, the problem of asbestos would not be known, just as the dangers of secondhand smoke in non-smokers would not be known except for smokers having a much-higher incidence of lung cancer. Without testing first to determine absence or presence of the mineral, why would one take a needless chance? Unlike exposure to cigarette smoke, asbestos diseases can takes an extremely small exposure, nuisance dust abatement is useless, and the results (from mesothelioma) are 100% fatal. It is also quite a painful way to die.
>>However, since it was not only the workers in the mine who were affected, but also their families who only breathed a few fibers the miners brought home with them have suffered from the disease, then it stands to reason, if a person can be affected by only being in proximity to the substance, that fluffing up any asbestos-tainted vermiculite in one's attic could have the same effect.Doesn't major stripping mining, transportation and processing of an ore cause significant of particle release into the air?I'm with you, we shouldn't dismiss the risk, but we also need to be sure we're thinking the situation through.
With my mouth I will give great thanks to the Lord; I will praise Him in the midst of the throng. For He stands at the right hand of the needy, to save them from those who would condemn them to death.
- Psalms 109:30-31
You make a good point about the release of fibers during shipment and 'popping' as well as mining. The Libby plant shipped around 6 milllion tons to 236 manufacturing plants in 41 sates, and was the world's largerst supplier of vermiculite, so it's not an issue local to one podunk town in Montana or only to miners. Los Angeles County is the most-stricken place in the nation for asbestos-related disease, a consequence of the double whammy of a vermiculite plant there as well as the shipbuilding industry.
I'm not sure what needs to be considered in "thinking the situation through". Unless you're in the corporate structure that has profited from lying to workers about the dangers of asbestos, there isn't much upside.
First, I'll preface each of my messages on this issue with: I think Fine Homebuilding is great, but they did a dangerous disservice by minimizing health risks of asbestos by quoting anonymous people with no public health qualifications.One last statement for now:It usually takes a while for asbestos to cause lung cancer. It's usually a number of the extremely sharp fibers re-injuring the same area of the lungs over decades. The chance of a 30 or 40 year-old contractor suffering from cancer by incidental contact with asbestos before dying of something else is pretty small.If there are kids in the house when causing asbestos exposure, there is a much different story. Kids breathe faster, are still developing, and have much longer to suffer the effects, with risks increasing dramatically about 40 years after first exposure. (note: not 40 years of continuous asbestos exposure, but 40 years after the first exposure; the body cannot remove the sharp fibers if the lodge deep in the lungs - they stay for life)Maybe that's fine for you because you'll be dead before kids you might expose get hit with lung cancer. Or maybe we'll be lucky and they'll have a sure-fire cure for cancer by then.I'd rather not feel guilty about taking a crap shoot with some innocent kid's life.Not all vermiculite has asbestos, but until you test, you won't know. The best treatment for asbestos is not necessarily removal, the best thing is to leave it undisturbed and protect it from being disturbed.By the way, I know a fair amount about asbestos because I live pretty much across the street from W.R. Grace in Cambridge, Mass., and they were planning to build 4 office buildings on their prime Cambridge property, which was found to have asbestos contamination in the soil. After 10 years of neighborhood discussions, including EPA and Mass DEP involvement, Grace worked with us to file deed restrictions preventing any new development on their site because of the asbestos concerns. That wouldn't have happened if asbestos was no big deal. I've read through all 200+ pages of the federal ATSDR's Toxicological Profile on Asbestos, the one that says there is no known safe lower limit for asbestos exposure. Asbestos was one of the first proven carcinogens. To say it's not a hazard shows profound ignorance.Asbestos lawsuits may be excessive, but the industry brought it upon itself by ensuring that people didn't find out about the hazards of asbestos, by proliferating its use into just about every construction product as a miracle additive (durable, fire resistant, chemical resistant, doesn't evaporate) without warning of the dangers it knew, by fighting and influencing legislation, etc.---mike...
Cambridge, Mass.
Mike, what exactly is the RPA? Is this RI law or federal?
damn, i meant to go back and edit that.. but i was skeered restinoke ( sic ? )
was going to jump my bones about cellulose
it was supposed to be the EPA
and yes , it's federal law.. and the liability is amazing...
funny thing ... the law has been on the books for some time now.. but not much is said about it
anyways...
get the booklet.. ( you can download it )..... get the notification / receipt acknowledgment form... and make sure you comply and give out the book for any homes you work on that were built before 1978.. especially if there are children living in the homeMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
i've been following this thread closely,
my wife and i are considering a house with
vermiculite in the attic.
we talked to a company that tests for asbestos today.
just tests mind you, not an abatement company.
this guy says there are two tests they run
#1 does not find asbestos generally
#2 (a test with a high-powered microscope of some kind) always finds asbestos.
he also said something about where you sample affects the results.
i.e. if you pick whole big crumbs off the top little will show.
i have lost interest in this house anywhere near the asking price.
espalier