Posted By Tony Brunskill
Apparently there was a programme on Radio 4 this morning denouncing an authority on asbestos as a fraud. Did anyone hear it and if so what programme was it so I can pick it up on the bbc "listen again" feature.
Thanks in advance

Tony

Posted By Andy Farrall
I think it was probably an article towards the end of "You and Yours" this afternoon.

I heard the article while I was in the car and they were denouncing a (Professor) John Bridle from Glamorgan who claims to be a world authority on asbestos. Apparently he claims that white asbestos is not particularly toxic and (according to the programme) he can idenify asbestos using the naked eye.

Mr Bridle has a conviction (brought about by Trading Standards) for using a professional qualification (asbestos surveyor) without authority.

An Internet search on Mr Bridle produces some rather interesting comments.

Posted By Dave Wilson
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rad...tenagain/wednesday.shtml

thats the badger!!!

Posted By jack rumbol
I hate john gaunt completly of the subject but had to say it

Posted By Merv Newman
Sorry, but my computer won't read this file unless I take out a subscription.

Can anyone help ?

Merv

Posted By Tony Brunskill
Now thats what I call a competency debate lol.

Posted By Adrian Watson
Sagalout,

Re analysis, failure to ensure that asbestos samples are tested by accredited labs is not a strict legal requirement here in the UK.

Standards for analysis

20. - (1) Every employer who analyses a sample of any material to determine whether it contains asbestos shall ensure that he meets criteria equivalent to those set out in the paragraphs of ISO 17025 which cover organisation, quality systems, control of records, personnel, accommodation and environmental conditions, test and calibration methods, method validation, equipment, handling of test and calibration items, and reporting results.

(2) Every employer who requests a person to analyse a sample of any material to determine whether it contains asbestos shall ensure that that person is accredited by an appropriate body as complying with ISO 17025.

The duty is on a person requesting a person to analyse a sample to ensure that they are accredited by a suitable body to ISO 17025. The duty is not on the person to be accredited. So you do not need to be accredited to analyse a sample!

Furthermore, you can analyse a sample by eye to ascertain whether it is asbestos. This is better done with a low power stereo microscope, but it can be done by eye. However, if you to identify the type of asbestos you need PLM or SEM!

Regards Adrian Watson

Posted By sagalout
Adrian,
thanks, I thought I was repeating the report from the clip, obviously either I misinterpreted it or the report was incorrect. Apologies for any confusion. I do not claim any competence in this area.

Someone send me 3 and 4 pence quickly please.

Posted By Adrian Watson
Tony,

You're quite right in your preposition that you need to ask for an accredited person. However, the point was, is he breaking the law. To which the answer is no!

Pete,

You did quote the programme accurately, but they got some things wrong - not a lot, I admit, but some things.

Regards Adrian

Posted By Geoff Ferneyhough
To add to my previous post, below is the response from John Bridle to the "Claims" made by the BBC.

In light of the confusion surrounding the supposed health risks of white asbestos products, Asbestos Watchdog and Professor Bridle have been constantly challenging the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and the Ban Asbestos Lobby group, spear-headed by Laurie Kazan Allen the sister of top US asbestos claims lawyer Steve Kazan, to have an informed debate to settle the confusion that is driving the current fraudulent activities in the asbestos removal industry and many spurious asbestos compensation claims.

Since 1998 this debate has continually been side-stepped and, after continued pressure from Professor Bridle, it appears that the BBC 'You and Yours' program has been a carefully crafted response to discredit any opposition to the HSE and Ban Asbestos Lobby Group.

Asbestos Watchdog has discussed each item presented in the BBC 'You and Yours' program extensively with Professor Bridle and is completely satisfied that the allegations the BBC has attempted to pin on Professor Bridle are either a lie or a manipulation of the facts.

Asbestos Watchdog is not Professor Bridle's company as was suggested and we have every confidence that his knowledge is totally sound. Professor Bridle lectures on asbestos matters all around the world, it is just unfortunate that the organisations that stand to lose many millions of pounds in revenue from Professor Bridle exposing various fraudulent activities in the asbestos industry are far from happy with his success in exposing their behaviour.

Not only was Professor Bridle made aware of the program by accident, but it must also be made clear that the BBC were warned that if they went ahead with the scheduled program and published the attack knowing the information was false, they would be sued. Professor Bridle was able to refute the allegations prior to the 'You and Yours' program and suggested an honest and open discussion; this request was denied. Unfortunately the BBC still chose to air the item with additional inaccuracies presented. The litigation has now started and writs are in the process of being issued.

Neither Professor Bridle, nor Asbestos Watchdog, suggests that all members of the asbestos industry are fraudulent; many contractors are of impeccable character and reputation and Asbestos Watchdog applauds their sterling work in protecting the UK public from potentially dangerous asbestos products. It is the few, however, that are causing problems for the many.

Hopefully, elevating the profile of Professor Bridle's work will now provide the opportunity for tax payers to get the proper debate about the supposed health risks of white asbestos products and stop the deception that seems to line the pockets of claims lawyers and the small group of dishonest contractors behind the deception.

If you have any doubt about Professor Bridle's reputation he would be more than willing to talk to you should you wish to hear the actual truth behind the spurious allegations.

Professor Bridle is well respected in the asbestos scientific industry, if not amongst the fraudulent contractors he seeks to expose, and has already received much support since the program aired.

Asbestos Watchdog suggests if you would like a full discussion to convince yourself of Professor Bridle's integrity to telephone him on 02920 513 855. He will be more than happy for a frank and honest discussion.

I have used the services of Asbestos Watchdog and am more than happy to recommend them/him.

Posted By sagalout
Thanks for the tip about a balancing view. Used an free hour this pm to have a closer look.

We appear to have Booker's Notebook championing the challenge, over a number of years,from the relevant person. On the other hand, organisations like the International Ban Asbestos Secretariat being closely aligned with the content of the BBC report. I cannot say who or what the IBAS is, searches were a bit circular, British Asbestos Newsletter, Jerome Consulting, IBAS but I cannot find a definitive statement about their constitution etc. Doesn't mean they are not bona fide of course just saying I couldn't find, from a few quick searches, any balancing information on them.

see this link as an example of a newsletter from 2002.
http://www.lkaz.demon.co.uk/ban48.htm

So who knows who is right?
I guess we will have to wait to see any formal responses from the people involved.
Meantime, note to self, make sure you closely check any person you employ to help with asbestos mgmt.

Posted By Dave Wilson
The issue I have is that is at first glance the AW site tars all Licensed contractors with the same brush as it intimates that the asbestos industry is ripping people off and this is just not true.

It does not say what UK quals these people have or what standards they are working too it is in effect a sale3s pitch and should be seen as that.

Posted By John Murgatroyd
The guy seems quite believable....maybe he should set himself up as a Health and Safety consultant ?

OOpppss....he's not far away from that anyway....

Posted By Adrian Watson
Bruce,

Forty-two days from being laid in the library of the House of Commons to be exact!

Regarding toxicity, the consensus is that the risk of mesothelioma is much greater than the risk of mesothelioma from exposure to an equal amount of chrysotile. It has been estimated that the risk is 50 times greater if the exposure is fibrous grunerite (Amosite or Brown asbestos) and 200 times greater if the exposure is to fibrous reibeckerite (Crocidolite or Blue asbestos).

The areas of uncertainty are:

1. Does Chrysotile cause mesothelioma - the general opinion is that pure Chrysotile does not, but as nobody is exposed to pure milled Chysotile this is an academic point.

2. What is the threshold for mesothelioma - the general consensus is that if there is a threshold then it is very low and may not exist for practical purposes.

It must be noted that with the median latency period of 34 years the majority of persons dieing today were exposed in the 1960's and 1970's. At that time persons in the building industries (especially carpenters, electricians and plumbers) had massive exposures from cutting AIB boards inside rooms without mechanical ventilation and without wearing respiratory protection. Both of which were known about and readily available. Unfortunately, there was a failure to apply the Asbestos Regulations 1969 to the construction industry and properly enforce the regulations that were in force at the time. Furthermore with people in the building industry not being provided with laundry facilities; people wearing heavy duty cotton overalls; and rudimentary laundry facilities many wives and family members also had massive exposures when doing the work laundry!

Furthermore, what we are doing today is largely a cosmetic exercise as the evidence is that risk of developing disease from exposures to asbestos is generally very low.

Regards Adrian Watson

Posted By Bruce Sutherland
Hi Adrian

I am glad there are other people who know what Gruenerite is - it certainly threw one of my staff who holds CCP status.

Regs come in allegedly on 13 Nov - see post Artex to go go

interesting comment in your last para - obviously HSE and the rest of the occupational hygienists in the EC do not agree with you, or are you also subscribing to the political conspiracy theory? Obviously we do not have the continual gross exposures of the past but given the difficulty of quantifying "real" exposure risk as there seems to be such individual physiological differences in repsonse to fibre burden, surely this is one case of better safe than sorry - and if you think that people are not exposed to asbestos then you need to talk to demolition contractors and removal contractors. It is most certainly not quite the well behaved and controlled world that some would have us believe.

Must go and run the dog .... its a really gross day and I can not see Dartmoor out of the window yeuk.

Posted By peter gotch
interesting.

quick google search finds me lots of Full Members of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences and some Academicians, but only reference to a single Professor of this august body, who just happens to be in U.K.

regards, Peter

Posted By Dave Wilson
Just read this and to some extent I agree, we as a company do tell clients who want non licensable products remov ed etc that they can get an unlicensed contractor to do it cheaper, however we will do the work but it will be at greater expense as we have more overheads etc.

So this chap is in essence slightly right but as with anything in trhe media it does not tell tell both sides of the story evenly, so this chap is just as much to blame as the other side.

Chrysotile IS DANGEROUS maybe not as much as the amphibole group but a risk none the less and he should say so, maybe his street cred might go up.

As far as the Tories and the torygraph go they are all for increasing the profits of business and any way which they can portray this they would do so, just as the left parties are for worker protection etc.

Read both sides of the argument B4 you make a judgement I say!

Posted By NickW
I amy be wrong but would this the Mr Bridle who splashed ' BOHS accredited' letterheads over the covers of his asbestos surveys? BOHS (or BIOH as they were then) are are just the examining body for the courses (recent ABICS developments aside).

Posted By peter gotch
According to the Royal Mail website

Asbestos can be carried but only when it’s fixed in a resin, plastic or glass matrix.

Regards, Peter