UPDATED ON MAY 14, 2015

Association Nationale de Défense des Victimes de l’Amiante, 8, rue Charles Pathé– 94300 VINCENNES, Tél 01 49 57 90 95 – Fax 01 49 57 97 71 – Mail contact@andeva.fr

COMMUNIQUÉ DE PRESSE

Mardi 12 mai 2015

AMIANTE ET CONVENTION DE ROTTERDAM : UN NOUVEAU SABOTAGE ANNONCÉ

Les représentants de 164 pays se réunissent à Genève les 12-13-14 mai pour la Conférence des Parties de la Convention de Rotterdam.

Le but simple et modeste de cette Convention – voisine des Conventions de Bâle et Stockholm qui la précèdent – n’est pas d’interdire et entraver le commerce; il est simplement de réguler l’information sur la dangerosité des produits exportés. Le fondement de la Convention de Rotterdam est la procédure PIC «consentement préalable éclairé» qui oblige l’état exportateur d’un produit dangereux à informer le pays importateur des risques et des procédures de prévention et obtenir son consentement.

Cependant cette obligation n’existe que si le produit est inclus dans une liste établie par la Convention de Rotterdam. Celle-ci comporte une quarantaine de produits comme les dérivés du mercure, le DDT, l’endosulfan et les variétés d’amiante amphibole.

La nécessité de l’inscription de l’amiante chrysotile – la seule variété d’amiante commercialisée – sur cette liste apparait comme une évidence à toute personne informée et sensée : l’Organisation Mondiale de la Santé (OMS), l’Organisation Internationale du Travail (OIT), l’Union Internationale Contre le Cancer (UICC) et les sociétés savantes d’épidémiologie du monde entier, pour ne citer qu’elles, estiment :

• que le chrysotile cause notamment le mésothéliome (cancer de la plèvre), le cancer du poumon, des fibroses
• que l’amiante est un produit extrêmement dangereux, impossible à contrôler et responsable chaque année plus de 100 000 morts.

Oui mais … la Convention de Rotterdam est un organisme sous l’égide des Nations-Unis et la règle du consensus est une tradition forte à l’ONU.

Il n’y a pas de produit pour lequel le consensus scientifique sur la dangerosité et l’ampleur de la mortalité provoquée soit plus fort que pour l’amiante. Même l’Organisation Mondiale du Commerce a donné raison à la France contre le Canada, quand le gouvernement français a décidé d’interdire l’amiante pour des raisons sanitaires et que le Canada l’a attaquée pour entrave au commerce.

Oui mais … la Convention de Rotterdam ne s’est pas donnée une règle qui empêche n’importe quel pays de déclarer que la terre est plate ou que l’usage de l’amiante chrysotile ne présente pas de dangers avérés.

Lors des précédente réunions de la Convention les pays suivants ont opposé un veto à l’inscription de l’amiante chrysotile sur la liste PIC des produits dangereux:

2004 : Canada
2006 : Canada, Inde, Iran, Kirghizstan, Pérou
2008: Canada, Inde, Kirghizstan, Mexique, Pakistan, Philippines, Ukraine, Vietnam
2011 : Canada
2013 : Russie, Inde, Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Ukraine, Vietnam, Zimbabwe

• Le Canada – grand producteur historique d’amiante et grand promoteur de la propagande mensongère et meurtrière sur l’innocuité de l’amiante chrysotile – ne produit plus d’amiante depuis 2012 et s’abstient donc désormais.
• La Russie est désormais, avec le Kazakstan, le grand producteur exportateur : la Russie produit 50% de l’amiante mondialement, soit un million de tonnes par an, et sa part de marché représente environ 60% des exportations mondiales. La Russie a siégé pour la première fois en 2013 …
• Les deux autres producteurs d’amiante s’abstiennent : la Chine consomme la quasi totalité de sa production et importe en plus de l’amiante, le Brésil exporte environ la moitié de sa production.
• L’Inde est le gros importateur d’amiante. Il est effroyable de constater qu’un pays qui a subi une catastrophe industrielle comme la tragédie de l’usine Bhopal (1984) puisse ainsi protéger l’intérêt de quelques marchands au détriment de l’information de sa population. La compagnie Union Carbide était d’ailleurs un géant de l’amiante.

L’ANDEVA sera présente à Genève, en compagnie de nombreuses associations de défense des victimes et de la santé publique. Elles ne seront pas seules, les marchands d’amiante et leurs association de propagande et corruption seront également présents.

Le résultat est difficile à accepter: le cynisme des marchands de mort et d’amiante est sans nul doute incurable, mais il est aberrant que des états – dans le passé le Canada, aujourd’hui principalement la Russie et l’Inde – se laissent convaincre par une poignée d’industriels sans scrupules de laisser empoisonner leurs propres populations et les autres.

De nombreuses voix s’élèvent de concert avec nos associations :

– le Journal de l’Association Médicale Canadienne a publié un éditorial appelant le gouvernement canadien à prendre fermement position pour l’interdiction de l’amiante au Canada et dans le monde.

– Le rapporteur des Nations-Unis sur les droits de l’homme et le droit à un environnement sain s’est déclaré choqué par la non inscription de l’amiante chrysotile et du paraquat – l’un des pesticides les plus commercialisés et les plus toxiques – et a rappelé les articles de la Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme et de la Convention des droits de l’enfant qui établissent le droit à l’accès à l’information comme fondamental.

Souhaitons que la voix de la raison et le véritable consensus prévalent.

Posted on March 14, 2015

“My recent scan results after radiation and closer to an asbestos ban in USA” by Lou Williams

After a few days of fatigue and resting I am now sitting at the main computer ready to type this blog.

Lou Williams, GBAN Australian National Director

Last Tuesday 10 March 2015 I had a blood test and CT scans for stomach, pelvic and chest with intravenous dye. Blood test went smoothly, the scan not quite to plan.  The hour prior to the scan it is a requirement to drink 1.5 litres of water – with nausea it went through me quite quickly clearing out my system lol! An hour delay and then trouble inserting the needle for the dye as my veins are quite depleted due to the years of chemo and tend to collapse at the best of times.  However it went okay and home to wait for my oncology visit Weds evening to see Dr Alan Zimet (11 March).

My oncology visit with Dr Zimet – Blood tests showed red blood cells depleted (haemoglobin 9.2) and also very very anaemic so an urgent blood transfusion of 2 units blood was ordered for Friday morning (13 March).  This is a pretty good result considering the last 4 units of blood transfusion (when haemoglobin was 7.6) was mid January so this one combined with extensive radiation in that time has lasted 2 months.  I had the blood transfusions yesterday – 5 hours all up – so pretty quick.  The day chemo staff all know me at John Fawkner Hospital in Melbourne and have followed my journey since day one.  They are all a unique and wonderful bunch of nursing staff whose care of the patients is paramount in ensuring that they are comfortable from the time they walk in the door to the time they leave.  It is the same with the Oncology ward – since day 1 of my journey in 2003 they have been there all the way (some oldies and of course some new nursing staff along the way) all devoted to the care of the patient being their number one priority.

Scan results – No real change since last scan in mid January when it was the very serious scan with not so good results.  Dr Zimet said that it was too early for this scan (4 weeks after finishing radiation). The radiation is still working slowly and will take another 4 to 6 weeks before anything shows up on another scan.  The tumour piercing into the stomach appears to have grown slightly in one of the measurements and shrunk slightly in another measurement!  So still pretty danger stage with tumours/fluid/stomach/arteries/blood vessels and we are now on a watch and come back for a visit in 3 weeks.  If anything presents itself prior to that – have a blood test and ring Dr Zimet/hospital.  I am improving each day although the fatigue is still my No. 1 friend!

Flying still not approved until the next blood test (in 3 weeks) appointment with Dr Zimet ... so unfortunately my plans to attend ADAO’s 11th Annual Asbestos Conference in Washington DC as a speaker and mesothelioma warrior has been cancelled!  This year the Conference will be made extra special with the recent announcement this week in America with the Legislation introduced by Sens. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Edward Markey, D-Mass., to fix the nation’s badly broken and outdated chemical safety law would be a major step in ensuring that Americans, especially children, are protected from toxic substances.

The Boxer-Markey bill, titled the Alan Reinstein and Trevor Schaefer Toxic Chemical Protection Act, would correct major weaknesses of the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA. It would ensure that all chemicals be proven to pose a “reasonable certainty of no harm” — the same standard required for pesticides on produce and food chemicals.

CLOSER TO AN ASBESTOS BAN!!! U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer, pictured here with ADAO President and Co-founder Linda Reinstein, and her beautiful daughter, Emily, signed a copy of The Alan Reinstein and Trevor Schaffer Toxic Chemical Protection Act. ADAO has been at the forefront of working with Congress to get asbestos banned. This is why ADAO needs your donations!! So our children, and grandchildren will never have to suffer from mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases.

Linda Reinstein and ADAO released this press release 13 March 2015.
PRESS RELEASE – http://bit.ly/1NPU9Gw  These past eight days moved fast. Sen. Boxer called me last Tuesday asking to name her TSCA reform bill after Alan and all of the hundreds of thousands of “Alans.” The new Boxer-Markey bill, “The Alan Reinstein and Trevor Schaefer Toxic Chemical Protection Act”, will update the outdated 1976 TSCA bill and empower the EPA to finally ban asbestos and regulate an estimated 80,000 chemicals. This would not be possible without all of our supporters, volunteers, donors, and sponsors – Congratulations to all! I can say with sincerity that when Doug Larkin and I co-founded ADAO in 2004, that neither the Larkin nor the Reinstein families could have ever envisioned a day when a piece of legislation aimed at reforming our laws to influence a ban on asbestos and seek to further our education and awareness mission – would be named after one of our loved ones who influenced our founding. We are humbled by this bill’s introduction that names all asbestos victims and their families in spirit and showcases the power of our united efforts to end the tragedies associated with asbestos. Special thanks to Kimberly Starr Cecchini – who spent HOURS in the last 48 hours working on press releases and communication.

Lou Williams, GBAN Australian National Director

Posted on February 4, 2015

SOURCE: Right on Canada 

At a symposium on Why Is Asbestos Still A Health Problem? held in Copenhagen on December 12, 2014, Dr. Rolf Petersen presented two cases studies which showed individuals with mesothelioma, who had no known work exposure to asbestos. In both cases, the individuals were exposed to asbestos when they installed or replaced Eternit asbestos-cement roofing on their homes. Dr. Petersen’s presentation is available here: Non-Occupational Mesothelioma. Eternit operated a factory in northern Denmark from 1928-1986, which produced asbestos cement roofing. Many workers at the factory, as well as family members, died of asbestos-related disease. In spite of knowing that its product was causing disease and death, Eternit suppressed and falsified the evidence and went on selling millions of square metres of its asbestos cement roofing in Denmark, as well as exporting huge quantities to other countries, thus creating a health tragedy that continues today.

Kathleen Ruff, Global Asbestos Awareness Network (GBAN) Charter Member

NOTE: Below are links to three presentation links from “The Is Asbestos Still A Health Problem?” which was held on December 12, 2014 in Copenhagen, Denmark 

• Philippe Grandjean, Asbestos Conference 1964, Selikoff, and subsequent controversy
• Kathleen Ruff, How the asbestos industry used McGill University scientists to promote its interests
  
• Maria Albin, How many new cases of mesothelioma should we accept? 

This book contains the proceedings from the “International Day of Asbestos Victims” symposium organized by French National Association for the Defense of Asbestos Victims (ANDEVA) which was held in Paris on October, 12 2012.  This two-part book includes presentations from “State of Science” and  “State of the World. For more information about ANDEVA visit http://www.andeva.fr.

View the “International Day of Asbestos Victims” Book.

International Day of Asbestos Victims by Marc Hindry

                      State of Science — State of the World 

 “The  proceedings of  the symposium «international day of asbestos victims» organised  in Paris, 12th October 2012 by the French National Association for the Defense of Asbestos Victims — ANDEVA — are built in two parts.

The first part  « state of science » includes texts on the history and state of epidemiology of asbestos diseases by R. Lemen,  on the epidemiology of asbestos-related diseases in Italy   by E. Merler, in Québec, Canada,  by F. Turcotte and in Brazil   by H. Castro, followed by texts on medicine and fundamental research by A. Scherpereel, P-G. Betta and M-C. Jaurand.

The second part «state of the world»displays a global panorama of the  situation with respect to the use and exposure to asbestos, the different legislations, situation and compensation of victims, struggles and actions for public health:

economic and geographical data about asbestos trade (L. Kazan-Allen), the historical responsibility of Canada (P. Martin and K. Ruff), the situation in United States (L. Reinstein), the two judgements with international repercussions on banning asbestos, that is, the cancellation in 1991 of the EPA regulations in United States (L. Kazan-Allen) and the rejection of the complaint of Canada to WTO against France in 2000 (M. Parigot), the contrasting situations of India (M. Gupta), Japan and Korea, with an overview of the tragic situation in Asia, notably in China (S. Furuya and Y. Choi), also in Brazil (F. Giannasi) and Australia (L. Singh), the issue of compensation is described in the context of South Africa (T. da Cruz), France (M-J. Voisin) and the Netherlands  (T. de Bruin), the current European situations in Belgium (E. Jonckheere), Germany (G. Albracht) and Albany (R. Hanxari), finally the global impact of the Eternit trial in Italy (B. Pesce) and an overview of the general situation in France and throughout the world (M. Hindry and P. Pluta).

This book has  a double purpose: to increase diffusion of scientific knowledge and to develop an international public health movement; it should  help to provide better awareness of the risks and damages due to asbestos and stimulate better public health policies to fight this plague at regional, national, European and worldwide level.”

Marc Hindry, GBAN Charter Member, France