You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letter
Mesothelioma risk from chrysotile
  1. John T Hodgson,
  2. Andrew Darnton
  1. Statistics Branch (Epidemiology Group), Health and Safety Executive, Bootle, United Kingdom
  1. Correspondence to John T Hodgson, Statistics Branch (Epidemiology Group), Health and Safety; Executive, Redgrave Court (S4.3), Merton Road, Bootle L20 7HS, UK; john.hodgson{at}hse.gsi.gov.uk

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/oem.2009.052860

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We welcome the appearance of the new analysis of asbestos related mortality by Loomis et al (Occup Environ Med 2009;66:535–42) which constitutes an important addition to the available evidence. We note that the lung cancer risk from these data highlighted by the authors and based on their internal analyses is identical to that suggested as the “best estimate” in our earlier meta-analysis1: a relative risk of 1.102 per 100 f/ml.yr translates almost exactly to an excess over expected of 0.1% per f/ml.yr.

    The risk of mesothelioma derived from these new data is higher by a factor of 10 than that which emerged from our meta-analysis. The following …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.