In article ,
Martin writes:
|
| You will also find nothing but support for the current lunacies to
| do with asbestos. When they were introduced, I talked to one of
| the world experts, and he said that it was likely that leaving it
| in houses would cause only 1-2 deaths a year in the UK. But
| removing all of it from houses would cause hundreds (not per year).
| So we have this massive industry to remove the stuff.
|
| 1-2 deaths a year, ignores the accidental release of asbestos, caused
| by fires etc.

No, it didn't. It included that. Note that I said houses.
Some factories were pretty badly saturated with loose fibres,
which is the form in which it is dangerous.

| I worked in an office building where there was a steady release of
| stuff from between ceiling tiles.

His figures were based on the assumption that asbestos that was
causing problems would be removed, and that not causing trouble
would be left. Unlikely to see that level of intelligence in the
UK, I know.

| Insuring US companies against asbestos and other pollution risks is
| the main cause of Lloyds of London's problems.

And virtually NONE of that corresponds to people harmed by
domestic use of any such material.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.