Mesothelioma diagnosis is very important as far as an early treatment is considered. It helps with better pain management. Mesothelioma diagnosis is confusing as the symptoms mimic many lung infections.
Steps
1. Don't sit there and keep guessing. Consult your physician.
2. Get Mesothelioma tests done. An early initiation of treatment will help reduce the cancer pain considerably.
* Valuable Imaging techniques used in Mesothelioma tests are X Ray, CT (Computerized tomography), MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) and PET (Positive Electron Tomography)
* Invasive procedures for Tissue and fluid samples are also done. Usually invasive procedures {which invade the body} are required to make a final confirmed Mesothelioma Diagnosis (Thoracoscopy, Peritoneoscopy and Biopsy)
* Recently the first ever Blood test for Mesothelioma have been devised as reported by Pacific North-West Research Institute. This is basedon the fact that [ cells release tumor markers called SMR (Soluble mesothelin-related) proteins
3. Two important questions you should answer before you go ahead with the Mesothelioma diagnosis are: Have you been exposed to asbestos? (Although not all the Mesothelioma cases are direct results of asbestos exposure there is a strong association between the two.) Do you experience Mesothelioma symptoms?
1. Don't sit there and keep guessing. Consult your physician.
2. Get Mesothelioma tests done. An early initiation of treatment will help reduce the cancer pain considerably.
* Valuable Imaging techniques used in Mesothelioma tests are X Ray, CT (Computerized tomography), MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) and PET (Positive Electron Tomography)
* Invasive procedures for Tissue and fluid samples are also done. Usually invasive procedures {which invade the body} are required to make a final confirmed Mesothelioma Diagnosis (Thoracoscopy, Peritoneoscopy and Biopsy)
* Recently the first ever Blood test for Mesothelioma have been devised as reported by Pacific North-West Research Institute. This is basedon the fact that [ cells release tumor markers called SMR (Soluble mesothelin-related) proteins
3. Two important questions you should answer before you go ahead with the Mesothelioma diagnosis are: Have you been exposed to asbestos? (Although not all the Mesothelioma cases are direct results of asbestos exposure there is a strong association between the two.) Do you experience Mesothelioma symptoms?
Tips
* If you suspect that you have been exposed to asbestos then get mesothelioma tests done at the earliest.
Warnings
* Mis-Diagnosis and late diagnosis is a grave error in mesothelioma as the treatment becomes difficult with late diagnosis.
Source
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Mesothelioma Diagnosis
Mesothelioma diagnosis typically begins with a sufferer's visit to the doctor complaining of chronic chest pain. This pain is caused as a result of a buildup of fluid inside the pleural space; this is called pleural effusion and is the most common presenting symptom of malignant mesothelioma.
Preliminary mesothelioma detection can be achieved through a chest imagery scan (CT scan, x-ray); however, mesothelioma is often misdiagnosed as viral pneumonia at this stage because of certain symptomatic similarities between the two. The only way to definitively verify a suspected case of malignant mesothelioma is through a biopsy.
A biopsy is a relatively minor procedure (dependent on the location of the tumor) during which a small section of suspect tissue is removed. The removed section is examined by a histopathologist, an expert in the study of diseased tissue. Histopathological examination can confirm a case of malignant mesothelioma while also typing and staging it. Understanding the type and stage can help doctors suggest the best of treatment.
Histopathological Examination
Histopathologists are focused on the microscopic study of diseased tissue. A field of pathology, histopathology is a particularly useful tool in forming an accurate diagnosis of cancer and other diseases. The first step in performing a histopathological examination is excising a section of suspect tissue from the patient in question (biopsy). In order to prevent the excised tissue from decaying, it is placed in a fixative (something that increases tissue durability), the most common of which is called formalin (formaldehyde mixed with water).
In order to be prepped for viewing under a high-powered microscope, tissue samples are bathed in a number of increasingly concentrated solutions of ethanol so as to dehydrate the tissue prior to it being dipped in a type of wax called paraffin. By undergoing this procedure, the tissue sample is transformed from a soft and moist section of tissue into a hard paraffin block. This process is called embedding and is performed for the purpose of making it possible to slice the tissue into incredibly thin sections (approximately five micrometers). The ultra-thin slices allow histopathologists to view the size and structure of individual tumor cells.
A tissue section with a thickness of five micrometers is virtually transparent, forcing histopathologists to "stain" the tissue with various types of pigments (hematoxylin and eosin are common) designed to make it viewable under the microscope. Once a section of tissue has been embedded and stained, it is ready for examination.
Mesothelioma Cellular Types
Histopathological examination provides a definitive mesothelioma diagnosis in addition to providing detailed information about the type of mesothelioma (pleural, peritoneal or pericardial) such as its cellular makeup. Mesothelioma cancer cells can be found in three distinct types: epithelioid, sarcomatoid and biphasic.
Epithelioid mesothelioma is the most common type of mesothelioma cancer cell, accounting for 50% to 70% of all mesothelioma cancer cells. Epithelioid cancer cells are distinguished by their unique cellular pattern. They are relatively uniform in shape with a tubular pattern and a clearly defined cell nucleus under magnification.
Sarcomatoid mesothelioma is the least common type of mesothelioma cancer cell, accounting for 10% to 15% of all mesothelioma cancer cells. Sarcomatoid cancer cells are typically oval shaped, but more irregular with a less visible cell nucleus under magnification.
Biphasic mesothelioma is the second most common type of mesothelioma cancer cell, accounting for 25% to 60% of all mesothelioma cancer cells. Biphasic cancer cells do not have a unique pattern because they are a combination of epithelioid cells and sarcomatoid cells. Biphasic mesothelioma cancer cells can be intertwined or isolated from one another across the tumor mass. The latter configuration can lead to a misdiagnosis of cellular type if an excised section of tissue contains only epithelioid or sarcomatoid cells.
Source
Preliminary mesothelioma detection can be achieved through a chest imagery scan (CT scan, x-ray); however, mesothelioma is often misdiagnosed as viral pneumonia at this stage because of certain symptomatic similarities between the two. The only way to definitively verify a suspected case of malignant mesothelioma is through a biopsy.
A biopsy is a relatively minor procedure (dependent on the location of the tumor) during which a small section of suspect tissue is removed. The removed section is examined by a histopathologist, an expert in the study of diseased tissue. Histopathological examination can confirm a case of malignant mesothelioma while also typing and staging it. Understanding the type and stage can help doctors suggest the best of treatment.
Histopathological Examination
Histopathologists are focused on the microscopic study of diseased tissue. A field of pathology, histopathology is a particularly useful tool in forming an accurate diagnosis of cancer and other diseases. The first step in performing a histopathological examination is excising a section of suspect tissue from the patient in question (biopsy). In order to prevent the excised tissue from decaying, it is placed in a fixative (something that increases tissue durability), the most common of which is called formalin (formaldehyde mixed with water).
In order to be prepped for viewing under a high-powered microscope, tissue samples are bathed in a number of increasingly concentrated solutions of ethanol so as to dehydrate the tissue prior to it being dipped in a type of wax called paraffin. By undergoing this procedure, the tissue sample is transformed from a soft and moist section of tissue into a hard paraffin block. This process is called embedding and is performed for the purpose of making it possible to slice the tissue into incredibly thin sections (approximately five micrometers). The ultra-thin slices allow histopathologists to view the size and structure of individual tumor cells.
A tissue section with a thickness of five micrometers is virtually transparent, forcing histopathologists to "stain" the tissue with various types of pigments (hematoxylin and eosin are common) designed to make it viewable under the microscope. Once a section of tissue has been embedded and stained, it is ready for examination.
Mesothelioma Cellular Types
Histopathological examination provides a definitive mesothelioma diagnosis in addition to providing detailed information about the type of mesothelioma (pleural, peritoneal or pericardial) such as its cellular makeup. Mesothelioma cancer cells can be found in three distinct types: epithelioid, sarcomatoid and biphasic.
Epithelioid mesothelioma is the most common type of mesothelioma cancer cell, accounting for 50% to 70% of all mesothelioma cancer cells. Epithelioid cancer cells are distinguished by their unique cellular pattern. They are relatively uniform in shape with a tubular pattern and a clearly defined cell nucleus under magnification.
Sarcomatoid mesothelioma is the least common type of mesothelioma cancer cell, accounting for 10% to 15% of all mesothelioma cancer cells. Sarcomatoid cancer cells are typically oval shaped, but more irregular with a less visible cell nucleus under magnification.
Biphasic mesothelioma is the second most common type of mesothelioma cancer cell, accounting for 25% to 60% of all mesothelioma cancer cells. Biphasic cancer cells do not have a unique pattern because they are a combination of epithelioid cells and sarcomatoid cells. Biphasic mesothelioma cancer cells can be intertwined or isolated from one another across the tumor mass. The latter configuration can lead to a misdiagnosis of cellular type if an excised section of tissue contains only epithelioid or sarcomatoid cells.
Source
Mesothelioma Alternative Cancer Treatment
The clinic has treated many peritoneal mesotheliotics who have achieved "remarkable" results.
# A 64 year old gentleman from Buffalo, New York was diagnosed with pleural malignant mesothelioma in early 1998. He underwent the extra-pleural pneumonectomy by Dr. Sugarbaker, followed by three (3) chemotherapy and fifteen (15) radiation treatments in July of 1998. In September, doctors discovered the mesothelioma had spread to his healthy lung. He was given two (2) months to live. He learned of the IAT clinic from his neighbor and traveled to the Bahamas in December. "I should be dead! But here I am! I feel good and I plan on feeling good for a long time."
# A 77 year old gentleman, also from Buffalo, was diagnosed with pleural malignant mesothelioma in September of 1997. He was offered no treatment and given radiation only to the biopsy wound. His family researched the Internet and local libraries in search of alternative treatments. They discovered the IAT clinic while reading about alternative therapies in a book. He traveled to the Bahamas in September of 1998. "I had to quit working because of the mesothelioma. All my life I got up in the morning and went to work." After going to the IAT clinic, he no longer gets tired "just sitting around." He is able to walk his dog, pull weeds in his yard and, as he puts it -- he has been blessed with the privilege of living.
# Cori Harth was first diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma in 1997 at the age of 49. She is continuing to live a strong and active life. "Having been told I probably would not make it to my 50th birthday, and having celebrated my 51st in the Bahamas doing fantastic, I have ample reason to be very thankful. The mesothelioma is no doubt still "there", but between the laetrile and IAT and stem cell, plus continuing my usual juicing, vitamins and minerals, regular exercise, as well as a good attitude, faith and prayer, my immune system is giving the tumor one heck of a run for its money!!!! All I can say is that it is not anecdotal - they treat many different types of cancers there, and believe me, all you would have to do is spend some hours in the clinic talking to patients from all walks of life. And Dr. Clement is totally open to having anyone talk to the patients, and most patients are happy to do so."
# Two men, ages 45 and 38 respectively, who suffered from peritoneal mesothelioma. Both were diagnosed in 1980. The 45 year old underwent conventional chemotherapy (cytoxan, adriamyein, etc.) prior to arriving at the IAT Clinic. The 38 year old had several of the tumors surgically removed. Both started receiving sera treatment in 1980. As of 1988, both reportedly "were in good health." The brochure is undated.
# A 79 year old liver cancer patient from Minnesota who was diagnosed over one year ago. He joked: "I look pretty good for being dead. My doctors gave me six weeks to live. I've been to more places and seen more things than most people, but I was not ready to give up." This patient learned of the clinic from a friend of his ex-wife.
# A 50 year old breast cancer patient from the East Coast. She was diagnosed two years ago. Her doctors gave her no hope for a cure. She learned of the IAT clinic through her veterinarian. We met a 65 year old prostate cancer patient from Colorado who diagnosed in 1990. His urologist told him of the clinic. He is doing very well.
# An 80 year old breast cancer patient from New York. She was diagnosed five years ago and underwent several chemotherapy treatments. Her doctors told her she was to begin radiation treatments as soon as she "got her health back." She did not wait and traveled to the clinic. Now, she is "too busy with my life to find time to play golf, which I love!"
# A 50 year old breast cancer patient from Huntsville, Alabama. She was first diagnosed in 1981 and was told of the clinic by a friend who was being treated for brain cancer. She stopped taking the treatments in 1991. In 1994, she was diagnosed with liver cancer and offered the same conventional treatment as was offered by her doctors in 1981. She went back to the clinic and resumed taking the sera. Today, she is active and leading a "normal" life.
# A 60 year old leukemia patient from New York. She was diagnosed in the early 1970's. In fact, she was the third patient ever treated with the sera by Dr. Burton.
# A doctor from Scotland who is in complete remission after being diagnosed fifteen (15) years ago. A doctor from St. Louis, Missouri was diagnosed with colon cancer eight (8) years ago, a doctor from Seattle, Washington diagnosed with prostate cancer nine (9) years ago. Each was advised by their personal doctors that their tumors were beyond the reach of conventional medicine.
Nowak AK, Lake RA, Kindler HL, Robinson BW. New approaches for mesothelioma: biologics, vaccines, gene therapy, and other novel agents. Semin Oncol. 2002 Feb;29(1):82-96.
University Department of Medicine, University of Western Australia, Verdun St Nedlands, Australia.
Although malignant mesothelioma is not a classically immunogenic cancer, there is abundant evidence for immune recognition. The relative ease of obtaining tumor tissue makes mesothelioma ideal for studying surrogate biomarkers such as lymphocytic infiltration or expression of transduced genes. There is evidence that malignant mesothelioma patients as well as asbestos-exposed persons without mesothelioma have impaired immune responsiveness. Substantial progress has been made in animal models using several biological and immunological techniques, but clinical application has been problematic. Systems studied have included lysis by interleukin-2 (IL-2)-activated lymphokine-activated killer (LAK) cells, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), a p16-expressing adenovirus vector, suicide gene therapy using the herpes simplex virus-tyrosine kinase (HSV-tk) followed by ganciclovir, and immunomodulatory gene therapy with IL-2, IL-4, interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma), IFN-alpha, TNF-alpha, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), IL-6, and IL-1beta transfected into tumors. Vaccinia virus has been studied as a vector for cytokine gene transfer. Suicide gene therapy has been combined with a tumor vaccine. The University of Western Australia is initiating a pilot study of autologous vaccination in malignant mesothelioma. Novel agents under study include the angiogenesis inhibitors SU5416, bevacizumab, and thalidomide. ZD1839, an orally administered, highly selective inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase, is being tested in a phase II trial. Since platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) is thought to be an autocrine growth factor for mesothelioma STI-571 (Gleevec; Novartis, Basel, Switzerland), a highly selective inhibitor of the PDGF receptor tyrosine kinase, is being tested in a phase II trial. The development of more active cytotoxic combinations in this disease should facilitate further studies of chemoimmunotherapy. It seems likely that no single treatment modality will be effective by itself. Copyright 2002 by W.B. Saunders Company.
Eradication of intraperitoneal and distant tumor by adenovirus-mediated interferon-beta gene therapy is attributable to induction of systemic immunity. Cancer Res. 2001 Aug 15;61(16):6201-12.
Odaka M, Sterman DH, Wiewrodt R, Zhang Y, Kiefer M, Amin KM, Gao GP, Wilson JM, Barsoum J, Kaiser LR, Albelda SM. Thoracic Oncology Research Laboratory, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA.
Malignant mesothelioma remains an incurable disease for which immune-modulatory therapies, such as exogenous cytokines, have shown some promise. One such cytokine, IFN-beta, has potent antiproliferative and immunostimulatory activity in vitro, but its in vivo use has been limited by toxicity. We thus conducted studies evaluating intracavitary delivery of a replication-deficient adenoviral (Ad) vector encoding for the murine IFN-beta gene (Ad.muIFN-beta) in mouse models of malignant mesothelioma. In contrast to multiple injections of recombinant protein, a single i.p. injection of Ad.muIFN-beta into animals with established tumors elicited remarkable antitumor activity leading to long-term survival in >90% of animals bearing either AB12 or AC29 i.p. mesotheliomas. A control adenovirus vector had minimal antitumor effect in vivo. Significant therapeutic effects were also seen in animals treated with large tumor burdens. Importantly, treatment of i.p. tumor also led to reduction of growth in tumors established at a distant site (flank). A number of experiments suggested that these effects were attributable to an acquired CD8(+) T-cell-mediated response including: (a) the induction of long-lasting antitumor immunity; (b) loss of efficacy of Ad.muIFN-beta in tumor-bearing, immune-deficient (SCID, SCID/beige) mice; (c) detection of high levels of specific antitumor cytolytic activity from unstimulated splenocytes harvested from Ad.muIFN-beta-treated animals that was abolished by CD8(+) T-cell depletion; and (d) abrogation of antitumor effects of Ad.muIFN-beta in tumor-bearing CD8(+) T-cell-depleted animals. These data show that intracavitary IFN-beta gene therapy using an adenoviral vector provides strong CD8(+) T-cell-mediated antitumor effects in murine models of mesothelioma and suggest that this may be a promising strategy for the treatment of localized tumors such as mesothelioma or ovarian cancer in humans.
Source
# A 64 year old gentleman from Buffalo, New York was diagnosed with pleural malignant mesothelioma in early 1998. He underwent the extra-pleural pneumonectomy by Dr. Sugarbaker, followed by three (3) chemotherapy and fifteen (15) radiation treatments in July of 1998. In September, doctors discovered the mesothelioma had spread to his healthy lung. He was given two (2) months to live. He learned of the IAT clinic from his neighbor and traveled to the Bahamas in December. "I should be dead! But here I am! I feel good and I plan on feeling good for a long time."
# A 77 year old gentleman, also from Buffalo, was diagnosed with pleural malignant mesothelioma in September of 1997. He was offered no treatment and given radiation only to the biopsy wound. His family researched the Internet and local libraries in search of alternative treatments. They discovered the IAT clinic while reading about alternative therapies in a book. He traveled to the Bahamas in September of 1998. "I had to quit working because of the mesothelioma. All my life I got up in the morning and went to work." After going to the IAT clinic, he no longer gets tired "just sitting around." He is able to walk his dog, pull weeds in his yard and, as he puts it -- he has been blessed with the privilege of living.
# Cori Harth was first diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma in 1997 at the age of 49. She is continuing to live a strong and active life. "Having been told I probably would not make it to my 50th birthday, and having celebrated my 51st in the Bahamas doing fantastic, I have ample reason to be very thankful. The mesothelioma is no doubt still "there", but between the laetrile and IAT and stem cell, plus continuing my usual juicing, vitamins and minerals, regular exercise, as well as a good attitude, faith and prayer, my immune system is giving the tumor one heck of a run for its money!!!! All I can say is that it is not anecdotal - they treat many different types of cancers there, and believe me, all you would have to do is spend some hours in the clinic talking to patients from all walks of life. And Dr. Clement is totally open to having anyone talk to the patients, and most patients are happy to do so."
# Two men, ages 45 and 38 respectively, who suffered from peritoneal mesothelioma. Both were diagnosed in 1980. The 45 year old underwent conventional chemotherapy (cytoxan, adriamyein, etc.) prior to arriving at the IAT Clinic. The 38 year old had several of the tumors surgically removed. Both started receiving sera treatment in 1980. As of 1988, both reportedly "were in good health." The brochure is undated.
# A 79 year old liver cancer patient from Minnesota who was diagnosed over one year ago. He joked: "I look pretty good for being dead. My doctors gave me six weeks to live. I've been to more places and seen more things than most people, but I was not ready to give up." This patient learned of the clinic from a friend of his ex-wife.
# A 50 year old breast cancer patient from the East Coast. She was diagnosed two years ago. Her doctors gave her no hope for a cure. She learned of the IAT clinic through her veterinarian. We met a 65 year old prostate cancer patient from Colorado who diagnosed in 1990. His urologist told him of the clinic. He is doing very well.
# An 80 year old breast cancer patient from New York. She was diagnosed five years ago and underwent several chemotherapy treatments. Her doctors told her she was to begin radiation treatments as soon as she "got her health back." She did not wait and traveled to the clinic. Now, she is "too busy with my life to find time to play golf, which I love!"
# A 50 year old breast cancer patient from Huntsville, Alabama. She was first diagnosed in 1981 and was told of the clinic by a friend who was being treated for brain cancer. She stopped taking the treatments in 1991. In 1994, she was diagnosed with liver cancer and offered the same conventional treatment as was offered by her doctors in 1981. She went back to the clinic and resumed taking the sera. Today, she is active and leading a "normal" life.
# A 60 year old leukemia patient from New York. She was diagnosed in the early 1970's. In fact, she was the third patient ever treated with the sera by Dr. Burton.
# A doctor from Scotland who is in complete remission after being diagnosed fifteen (15) years ago. A doctor from St. Louis, Missouri was diagnosed with colon cancer eight (8) years ago, a doctor from Seattle, Washington diagnosed with prostate cancer nine (9) years ago. Each was advised by their personal doctors that their tumors were beyond the reach of conventional medicine.
Nowak AK, Lake RA, Kindler HL, Robinson BW. New approaches for mesothelioma: biologics, vaccines, gene therapy, and other novel agents. Semin Oncol. 2002 Feb;29(1):82-96.
University Department of Medicine, University of Western Australia, Verdun St Nedlands, Australia.
Although malignant mesothelioma is not a classically immunogenic cancer, there is abundant evidence for immune recognition. The relative ease of obtaining tumor tissue makes mesothelioma ideal for studying surrogate biomarkers such as lymphocytic infiltration or expression of transduced genes. There is evidence that malignant mesothelioma patients as well as asbestos-exposed persons without mesothelioma have impaired immune responsiveness. Substantial progress has been made in animal models using several biological and immunological techniques, but clinical application has been problematic. Systems studied have included lysis by interleukin-2 (IL-2)-activated lymphokine-activated killer (LAK) cells, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), a p16-expressing adenovirus vector, suicide gene therapy using the herpes simplex virus-tyrosine kinase (HSV-tk) followed by ganciclovir, and immunomodulatory gene therapy with IL-2, IL-4, interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma), IFN-alpha, TNF-alpha, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), IL-6, and IL-1beta transfected into tumors. Vaccinia virus has been studied as a vector for cytokine gene transfer. Suicide gene therapy has been combined with a tumor vaccine. The University of Western Australia is initiating a pilot study of autologous vaccination in malignant mesothelioma. Novel agents under study include the angiogenesis inhibitors SU5416, bevacizumab, and thalidomide. ZD1839, an orally administered, highly selective inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase, is being tested in a phase II trial. Since platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) is thought to be an autocrine growth factor for mesothelioma STI-571 (Gleevec; Novartis, Basel, Switzerland), a highly selective inhibitor of the PDGF receptor tyrosine kinase, is being tested in a phase II trial. The development of more active cytotoxic combinations in this disease should facilitate further studies of chemoimmunotherapy. It seems likely that no single treatment modality will be effective by itself. Copyright 2002 by W.B. Saunders Company.
Eradication of intraperitoneal and distant tumor by adenovirus-mediated interferon-beta gene therapy is attributable to induction of systemic immunity. Cancer Res. 2001 Aug 15;61(16):6201-12.
Odaka M, Sterman DH, Wiewrodt R, Zhang Y, Kiefer M, Amin KM, Gao GP, Wilson JM, Barsoum J, Kaiser LR, Albelda SM. Thoracic Oncology Research Laboratory, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA.
Malignant mesothelioma remains an incurable disease for which immune-modulatory therapies, such as exogenous cytokines, have shown some promise. One such cytokine, IFN-beta, has potent antiproliferative and immunostimulatory activity in vitro, but its in vivo use has been limited by toxicity. We thus conducted studies evaluating intracavitary delivery of a replication-deficient adenoviral (Ad) vector encoding for the murine IFN-beta gene (Ad.muIFN-beta) in mouse models of malignant mesothelioma. In contrast to multiple injections of recombinant protein, a single i.p. injection of Ad.muIFN-beta into animals with established tumors elicited remarkable antitumor activity leading to long-term survival in >90% of animals bearing either AB12 or AC29 i.p. mesotheliomas. A control adenovirus vector had minimal antitumor effect in vivo. Significant therapeutic effects were also seen in animals treated with large tumor burdens. Importantly, treatment of i.p. tumor also led to reduction of growth in tumors established at a distant site (flank). A number of experiments suggested that these effects were attributable to an acquired CD8(+) T-cell-mediated response including: (a) the induction of long-lasting antitumor immunity; (b) loss of efficacy of Ad.muIFN-beta in tumor-bearing, immune-deficient (SCID, SCID/beige) mice; (c) detection of high levels of specific antitumor cytolytic activity from unstimulated splenocytes harvested from Ad.muIFN-beta-treated animals that was abolished by CD8(+) T-cell depletion; and (d) abrogation of antitumor effects of Ad.muIFN-beta in tumor-bearing CD8(+) T-cell-depleted animals. These data show that intracavitary IFN-beta gene therapy using an adenoviral vector provides strong CD8(+) T-cell-mediated antitumor effects in murine models of mesothelioma and suggest that this may be a promising strategy for the treatment of localized tumors such as mesothelioma or ovarian cancer in humans.
Source
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Pinay Scandal Revealed!
Today I am revealing some "Pinay Scandal" - no it's not about me and my adventures/mis-adventures, ohh gosh I got too much scandals already here in my blog.
What Am talking about is "Pinay Scandal" by Marhgil Macuha. Originally it is an SEO contest. I didn’t think it would catch fire until macuha.com according to Pinoy Ambisyoso, many posted comments on his Pinay Scandal post, and are interested to join this campaign. Get started now - this was simply similar to the Viral Tags that went around and got me right at the bottom - before I knew it, my ratings on Technorati and Alexa has jumped 10-fold! This campaign will generate tons of traffic from Pinoys searching for a piece of something.. and guess what? We just changed the Google Trend for this keyword. They’ll find your blog instead!! Haha!
I will make serial updates to this post adding those that will join the campaign. Let’s continue the experiment and see where it takes us… Goodluck bloggers! Let us change the
The Pinay Scandal Hitlist posted below.
1. Wanna know the latest trend about Pinay Scandal? by Dexter of Tech At Hand
2. Pinay Scandal… The Issue by Darang Sisa
3. Pinay Scandal by Almer Viloria
4. Google Suggested Pinay Scandal by Ada
5. Pinay Scandal by Ada
6. Pinay Scandal by Catzie
7. Pinay Scandal by Jehzeel Laurente
8. Pinay Scandals: Earning Big Bucks? by Nika
9. Pinay Scandal by Heart
10. Looking For Pinay Scandals?! by Eli
11. Pinay Scandal by Eligio
12. Pinay Scandal by Stentorized
13. Pinay Scandal by Caryl
14. Pinay Scandal o Iskandalosang Pinay by Kengkay
15. Pinay Scandal by Hazel
16. Pinay Scandal by Baby Face
17. Pinay Scandal Story by Pinoy Ambisyoso
18. Pinay Scandal by Kenneth
19. Pinay Scandal by JoanJoyce
20. Pinay Scandal, Anyone? by MyGlitch
21. Pinay Scandal Here by Jojitah
22. “Pinay Scandal” Idea by Neil
23. Pinay Scandal… In The Mind Of Pinays by Marikenya
24. The Pinay Scandal - Most Outrageous and Raw Scandal by Chuva
25. Pinoy Scandal Survivor No. 1 Proud Filipina: Julie Borje by Marikenya
26. Pinay Scandal by Chuvaness
27. The Best of Pinay Scandals by Rhodilee
28. Pinay Scandal by Che
29. Pinay Scandal by JeanGrey
30. Pinay Scandal Revealed! by Glitchline
31. Pinay Scandal on the Web by Philippine Elections 2007
32. Pinay Scandal, Let’s Play The Trend by Selaplana
33. The Hottest Pinay Scandals by iRonnie
34. Blog About Filipina, Pinay Scandal And Vedio by Allen
35. Pinay Scandal Video by Ronald Mojica
36. Pinay Scandal by Paulyn
37. Pinay Scandal Videos by Mi
38. Pinay Scandals by RhyannefranzWhat Am talking about is "Pinay Scandal" by Marhgil Macuha. Originally it is an SEO contest. I didn’t think it would catch fire until macuha.com according to Pinoy Ambisyoso, many posted comments on his Pinay Scandal post, and are interested to join this campaign. Get started now - this was simply similar to the Viral Tags that went around and got me right at the bottom - before I knew it, my ratings on Technorati and Alexa has jumped 10-fold! This campaign will generate tons of traffic from Pinoys searching for a piece of something.. and guess what? We just changed the Google Trend for this keyword. They’ll find your blog instead!! Haha!
I will make serial updates to this post adding those that will join the campaign. Let’s continue the experiment and see where it takes us… Goodluck bloggers! Let us change the
The Pinay Scandal Hitlist posted below.
1. Wanna know the latest trend about Pinay Scandal? by Dexter of Tech At Hand
2. Pinay Scandal… The Issue by Darang Sisa
3. Pinay Scandal by Almer Viloria
4. Google Suggested Pinay Scandal by Ada
5. Pinay Scandal by Ada
6. Pinay Scandal by Catzie
7. Pinay Scandal by Jehzeel Laurente
8. Pinay Scandals: Earning Big Bucks? by Nika
9. Pinay Scandal by Heart
10. Looking For Pinay Scandals?! by Eli
11. Pinay Scandal by Eligio
12. Pinay Scandal by Stentorized
13. Pinay Scandal by Caryl
14. Pinay Scandal o Iskandalosang Pinay by Kengkay
15. Pinay Scandal by Hazel
16. Pinay Scandal by Baby Face
17. Pinay Scandal Story by Pinoy Ambisyoso
18. Pinay Scandal by Kenneth
19. Pinay Scandal by JoanJoyce
20. Pinay Scandal, Anyone? by MyGlitch
21. Pinay Scandal Here by Jojitah
22. “Pinay Scandal” Idea by Neil
23. Pinay Scandal… In The Mind Of Pinays by Marikenya
24. The Pinay Scandal - Most Outrageous and Raw Scandal by Chuva
25. Pinoy Scandal Survivor No. 1 Proud Filipina: Julie Borje by Marikenya
26. Pinay Scandal by Chuvaness
27. The Best of Pinay Scandals by Rhodilee
28. Pinay Scandal by Che
29. Pinay Scandal by JeanGrey
30. Pinay Scandal Revealed! by Glitchline
31. Pinay Scandal on the Web by Philippine Elections 2007
32. Pinay Scandal, Let’s Play The Trend by Selaplana
33. The Hottest Pinay Scandals by iRonnie
34. Blog About Filipina, Pinay Scandal And Vedio by Allen
35. Pinay Scandal Video by Ronald Mojica
36. Pinay Scandal by Paulyn
37. Pinay Scandal Videos by Mi
39. Pinay Scandal Revealed! by Mesothelioma Info
40. Pinay Scandal or Pinay Sex Scandal SEO Project by Lestat
41. Pinay Scandal Here by Ronald
42. Sendal Videos Sell by Blogging Pinay
43. Pinay Scandal / Pnx And Pinay Scaay Scandal: 18 Above Only by Ceefive
44. Pinay Scandal Me by Marlene
45. Pinay Scandal in Baguio City by Reyna Elena
46. Pinay Scandal, Performing In Bubbles by Kotsengkuba
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Mesothelioma Survivors: John Smith, Age 64
I was always taught by my parents that to live a successful life, I should be an honest, hard-working and compassionate person.I lived each and every day of my life like this.
I began working in the manufacturing plant of a large auto company once I was finished with school. I married my wife 40 years ago and always provided for her and my four kids. We lived a good life, were never wealthy, but comfortable and happy.
I worked long hours, 10 to 12 hours a day, 5 to 6 days a week, so that my wife could stay at home and raise our children. I was an honest man who worked his way up to plant manager. I was fair to my workers, and worked side-by-side with them in each area of the plant. We were dedicated to our company and gave them the best years of our lives.
And we were happy to do it.
Now, decades later, I am being re-paid in a way I never expected…
It was almost six weeks ago now that I found out I have a very deadly form of cancer called mesothelioma. This has become the worst word in the English language to me and my family. We were devastated to hear the cruel diagnosis after a short period of time when I was having some trouble breathing. It never crossed our minds that I was breathing in deadly asbestos fibers at the workplace where I gave so much of my life, 50 hours or more a week for years.
Each breath I took while at work was contributing to my early death sentence.
I felt so betrayed.
So, I have now begun my dreaded journey to treat a disease that is said to be incurable. I have already had a pneumonectomy, which consisted of an operation to remove the lung that was infected. The recovery has been tough, but with the support of my family, I am getting through it.
The other treatments that I am facing are radiation and chemotherapy. I know that the side effects of these are said to be most unpleasant, but at this point, there really aren’t too many options. I continue to hope for a miracle and try not to let bitterness and anger fester over how this disease began in my body.
I find myself thinking of which day of work it was that I finally took in one too many deadly breaths that pushed my body into a deadly spiral towards this horrible disease. I try to fight these feelings, but sometime I just can’t help the thought of what was done to my body in the quest for profits and a better life for others.
I feel so betrayed. But, at least I am alive… That is more than can be said for many others in my position. I have the love and support of my caring wife and family, and the help of friends and associates. Each day is a struggle, but we are getting on.
And we will; until the very end.
I began working in the manufacturing plant of a large auto company once I was finished with school. I married my wife 40 years ago and always provided for her and my four kids. We lived a good life, were never wealthy, but comfortable and happy.
I worked long hours, 10 to 12 hours a day, 5 to 6 days a week, so that my wife could stay at home and raise our children. I was an honest man who worked his way up to plant manager. I was fair to my workers, and worked side-by-side with them in each area of the plant. We were dedicated to our company and gave them the best years of our lives.
And we were happy to do it.
Now, decades later, I am being re-paid in a way I never expected…
It was almost six weeks ago now that I found out I have a very deadly form of cancer called mesothelioma. This has become the worst word in the English language to me and my family. We were devastated to hear the cruel diagnosis after a short period of time when I was having some trouble breathing. It never crossed our minds that I was breathing in deadly asbestos fibers at the workplace where I gave so much of my life, 50 hours or more a week for years.
Each breath I took while at work was contributing to my early death sentence.
I felt so betrayed.
So, I have now begun my dreaded journey to treat a disease that is said to be incurable. I have already had a pneumonectomy, which consisted of an operation to remove the lung that was infected. The recovery has been tough, but with the support of my family, I am getting through it.
The other treatments that I am facing are radiation and chemotherapy. I know that the side effects of these are said to be most unpleasant, but at this point, there really aren’t too many options. I continue to hope for a miracle and try not to let bitterness and anger fester over how this disease began in my body.
I find myself thinking of which day of work it was that I finally took in one too many deadly breaths that pushed my body into a deadly spiral towards this horrible disease. I try to fight these feelings, but sometime I just can’t help the thought of what was done to my body in the quest for profits and a better life for others.
I feel so betrayed. But, at least I am alive… That is more than can be said for many others in my position. I have the love and support of my caring wife and family, and the help of friends and associates. Each day is a struggle, but we are getting on.
And we will; until the very end.
Mesothelioma Survivors: Jane Doe, Age 58
The day started out like any other day. I was planning on going out to lunch with two of my long-time friends and then spending the afternoon with my daughter and my three beautiful grandchildren.
I noticed what a beautiful sunny day it was as I drove to my primary care doctor to discuss a reoccurring cough that I had had for the past few months. Previous doctor’s visits had not resulted in any diagnosis; but when my doctor’s office called the previous day, they said I should go in to the office to discuss the next step.
When I left the office only 45 minutes later, I realized my life was changed forever. I had been given the devastating news that I had mesothelioma, a deadly form of cancer that is currently untreatable.
Looking back on that day, I was in shock. I don’t remember driving home, or how my friends knew enough to come over.
How could this be happening to me?
I have always been a healthy, active woman. Other than losing my husband to lung cancer 4 years ago, I have always had a pretty blessed life. Telling my kids was the hardest part. Knowing that I wouldn’t be around to watch my precious grandchildren grow up, or to see my youngest son get married, was unbearable.
I was about to begin the last chapter of my life... A chapter that no one could ever be prepared to face.
After living in a state of shock, anger, and then followed by severe depression for a few weeks, I began to ‘come out of the fog’. I realized that yes, my life was going to be much shorter than I had anticipated, but I was still alive. I began to seek out support groups for people with terminal illness. This was a tremendous help for me.
It didn’t make having mesothelioma any easier. That part still felt as if I was living a nightmare. What the support group did do was to help me feel like I am not the only person to go through such a horrible experience.
By sharing our stories and our sources of comfort and hope, I felt a sense of being more at peace with things.
One question that I can’t get out of my head is how?
I have always been healthy, active, never smoked…
Where did this horrible disease come from?
It has been concluded that the cause of my disease was 25 years of my husband working as a carpenter and coming home with dust-filled clothes. I always assumed it was drywall dust; in-fact, it was asbestos…
Being the home-maker I was, I routinely did laundry for the family several times a week. Apparently this simple, mundane task that seemed so harmless for all those years, was like breathing in deadly air in the mistaken ‘safety’ of my own home.
The hardest part of this whole illness isn’t all of the pain and suffering that quickly comes along, nor is it the endless doctors appointments, and losing your sense of independence. The worst part of mesothelioma is how quickly the disease progresses and how little time that leaves you with family and loved ones.
I just can’t imagine not being here with them on holidays, and for all of the daily nuances of life. I still struggle with this each and every day, and try to be thankful for every minute I am on this earth with the people I love.
I have some comfort in knowing that when my time comes, I will be able to be with my husband once again, hopefully watching over my family like a guardian angel, to make sure they are never working in an environment that years later could kill them or their own family.
Source
I noticed what a beautiful sunny day it was as I drove to my primary care doctor to discuss a reoccurring cough that I had had for the past few months. Previous doctor’s visits had not resulted in any diagnosis; but when my doctor’s office called the previous day, they said I should go in to the office to discuss the next step.
When I left the office only 45 minutes later, I realized my life was changed forever. I had been given the devastating news that I had mesothelioma, a deadly form of cancer that is currently untreatable.
Looking back on that day, I was in shock. I don’t remember driving home, or how my friends knew enough to come over.
How could this be happening to me?
I have always been a healthy, active woman. Other than losing my husband to lung cancer 4 years ago, I have always had a pretty blessed life. Telling my kids was the hardest part. Knowing that I wouldn’t be around to watch my precious grandchildren grow up, or to see my youngest son get married, was unbearable.
I was about to begin the last chapter of my life... A chapter that no one could ever be prepared to face.
After living in a state of shock, anger, and then followed by severe depression for a few weeks, I began to ‘come out of the fog’. I realized that yes, my life was going to be much shorter than I had anticipated, but I was still alive. I began to seek out support groups for people with terminal illness. This was a tremendous help for me.
It didn’t make having mesothelioma any easier. That part still felt as if I was living a nightmare. What the support group did do was to help me feel like I am not the only person to go through such a horrible experience.
By sharing our stories and our sources of comfort and hope, I felt a sense of being more at peace with things.
One question that I can’t get out of my head is how?
I have always been healthy, active, never smoked…
Where did this horrible disease come from?
It has been concluded that the cause of my disease was 25 years of my husband working as a carpenter and coming home with dust-filled clothes. I always assumed it was drywall dust; in-fact, it was asbestos…
Being the home-maker I was, I routinely did laundry for the family several times a week. Apparently this simple, mundane task that seemed so harmless for all those years, was like breathing in deadly air in the mistaken ‘safety’ of my own home.
The hardest part of this whole illness isn’t all of the pain and suffering that quickly comes along, nor is it the endless doctors appointments, and losing your sense of independence. The worst part of mesothelioma is how quickly the disease progresses and how little time that leaves you with family and loved ones.
I just can’t imagine not being here with them on holidays, and for all of the daily nuances of life. I still struggle with this each and every day, and try to be thankful for every minute I am on this earth with the people I love.
I have some comfort in knowing that when my time comes, I will be able to be with my husband once again, hopefully watching over my family like a guardian angel, to make sure they are never working in an environment that years later could kill them or their own family.
Source
Monday, November 5, 2007
Mesothelioma Subtype Shows Lengthier Projected Longevity: IASLC
SEOUL, Sept. 21 -- Some malignant mesothelioma patients may have a prognosis that's not as grim as once widely believed, said a Nordic collaborative group.
Patients diagnosed with epithelial subtype mesothelioma and treated solely with chemotherapy had a median survival of 15 months, while some patients survived beyond three years. This was reported at the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer meeting by Gunnar Hillerdal, M.D., of the Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm and colleagues.
The Nordic group experience contrasts with a clinical perception that mesothelioma patients usually die within a year, the investigators noted. A large multicenter trial based in the U.S. demonstrated a 12 month survival rate when using cisplatin with or without pemetrexed versus nine months with cisplatin alone. Other trials have yielded similar results.
Dr. Hillerdal said, "The Nordic Mesothelioma Group experience is different."
Surgery is used sparingly in treating mesothelioma in the Nordic countries. Dr. Hillerdal said, elsewhere in the world, patients with the most favorable characteristics (such as good performance status and lower-stage disease) often are recommended for surgery, leaving patients with the worst prognosis for chemotherapy treatment.
Data on 147 mesothelioma patients treated with chemotherapy alone and followed until death or for a minimum of 18 months were analyzed by Nordic investigators. All the patients were given gemcitabine, carboplatin, and liposomal doxorubicin.
In analyzing survival by histologic subtype it was seen that the epithelial subtype represented 108 patients (73%), 21 patients (14%) for the mixed subtype, and 18 patients (12%) for the sarcomatous subtype.
44% of epithelial subtype mesothelioma patients survived at least 18 months, 25% survived for two years, 9% lived three years or longer, and two patients remained alive after five years of follow-up. Those diagnosed with epithelial stage IV disease (distant metastases) had a median survival rate of 11 months, two lived for at least two years, and one patient was still living at 61 months.
Dr. Hillerdal remarked, "This is more favorable than stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer".
Patients with mixed subtype mesothelioma or sarcomatous disease had a less favorable outlook. This was demonstrated in a median survival rate of eight months and four months, respectively. There were no patients in either group that lived as long as two years.
"The key message from this study is that the survival rate for people diagnosed with mesothelioma is not as bad as many would believe," said Dr. Hillerdal. "Survival with chemotherapy can be just as good as with surgery or even better with proper patient selection. Patient selection is the important thing to consider. Stage is less important than subtype, and that should be kept in mind when evaluating results of surgical remedies."
Source
Patients diagnosed with epithelial subtype mesothelioma and treated solely with chemotherapy had a median survival of 15 months, while some patients survived beyond three years. This was reported at the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer meeting by Gunnar Hillerdal, M.D., of the Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm and colleagues.
The Nordic group experience contrasts with a clinical perception that mesothelioma patients usually die within a year, the investigators noted. A large multicenter trial based in the U.S. demonstrated a 12 month survival rate when using cisplatin with or without pemetrexed versus nine months with cisplatin alone. Other trials have yielded similar results.
Dr. Hillerdal said, "The Nordic Mesothelioma Group experience is different."
Surgery is used sparingly in treating mesothelioma in the Nordic countries. Dr. Hillerdal said, elsewhere in the world, patients with the most favorable characteristics (such as good performance status and lower-stage disease) often are recommended for surgery, leaving patients with the worst prognosis for chemotherapy treatment.
Data on 147 mesothelioma patients treated with chemotherapy alone and followed until death or for a minimum of 18 months were analyzed by Nordic investigators. All the patients were given gemcitabine, carboplatin, and liposomal doxorubicin.
In analyzing survival by histologic subtype it was seen that the epithelial subtype represented 108 patients (73%), 21 patients (14%) for the mixed subtype, and 18 patients (12%) for the sarcomatous subtype.
44% of epithelial subtype mesothelioma patients survived at least 18 months, 25% survived for two years, 9% lived three years or longer, and two patients remained alive after five years of follow-up. Those diagnosed with epithelial stage IV disease (distant metastases) had a median survival rate of 11 months, two lived for at least two years, and one patient was still living at 61 months.
Dr. Hillerdal remarked, "This is more favorable than stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer".
Patients with mixed subtype mesothelioma or sarcomatous disease had a less favorable outlook. This was demonstrated in a median survival rate of eight months and four months, respectively. There were no patients in either group that lived as long as two years.
"The key message from this study is that the survival rate for people diagnosed with mesothelioma is not as bad as many would believe," said Dr. Hillerdal. "Survival with chemotherapy can be just as good as with surgery or even better with proper patient selection. Patient selection is the important thing to consider. Stage is less important than subtype, and that should be kept in mind when evaluating results of surgical remedies."
Source
Mesothelioma Treatment News; Medical, Legal and Legislative Stories
As advocates for asbestos victims, the attorneys at Brayton Purcell keep up–to–date on medical, legal, and legislative issues that affect mesothelioma patients and their families. Bookmark this page for the latest information about mesothelioma treatment and diagnosis, asbestos in the home and workplace, funding for mesothelioma centers, and halting asbestos exposure. For earlier news articles, see Mesothelioma News Archive.
Medical Articles:
September 28, 2007
Certain Mesothelioma Patients Living Longer with Chemotherapy
August 17, 2007
School of Public Health Heads Study on Iron Range Miners and Mesothelioma
June 29, 2007
Six More Minnesota Iron Range Miners Have Mesothelioma
June 15, 2007
Study Confirms Usefulness of Pemetrexed (Alimta®) As Mesothelioma Treatment
April 20, 2007
Minnesota Iron Miners Developed Mesothelioma
March 30, 2007
Measuring Mesothelin in Effusions May Be Useful in Mesothelioma Diagnosis, Study Suggests
March 16, 2007
Asbestos More Likely to Cause Mesothelioma in Men Than in Women, Study Suggests
February 23, 2007
FDA Approves MESOMARK® Assay Test for Detecting Mesothelioma
February 16, 2007
Combination of Pemetrexed and Cisplatin Improves the Survival Rate of Mesothelioma Patients
February 9, 2007
Onconase® Granted Orphan Drug Status for Mesothelioma Treatment
January 5, 2007
Pemetrexed May Be Helpful in the Treatment of Peritoneal Mesothelioma, Case Study Suggests
November 22, 2006
Alimta® (Pemetrexed) Study Indicated Drug’s Effectiveness in Treating Pleural Mesothelioma
July 28, 2006
Statins May Help Pleural Mesothelioma Cells Respond to Chemotherapy Drug Doxorubicin
June 2, 2006
Surgery Plus Chemotherapy May Help Peritoneal Mesothelioma Patients
April 21, 2006
Sequential Chemotherapy Regime Showed Promise in Treating Mesothelioma Patients, According to New Study
March 31, 2006
Clinical Trial Looks at Pleural Mesothelioma Treatment with Pemetrexed (Alimta®) Plus Carboplatin (Paraplatin®)
March 24, 2006
Study Pinpoints Distribution of Mesothelioma in US
February 24, 2006
Early Chemotherapy Benefits Mesothelioma Patients
December 16, 2005
Montana Study Shows Mesothelioma Cases Follow Railroad Lines
October 21, 2005
Osteopontin Shows Promise as Marker for Detecting Pleural Mesothelioma
October 14, 2005
Study Shows Improvement in Pleural Mesothelioma Patients Treated with Cisplatin Plus Raltitrexed
September 30, 2005
MARF To Hold Second International Symposium On Malignant Mesothelioma
August 5, 2005
Mesothelioma Patients Being Recruited for Sorafenib Study
July 8, 2005
Naturally Occurring Asbestos May Increase Mesothelioma Risk, Study Suggests
May 11, 2005
New Mesothelioma Blood Test Now Available
April 01, 2005
Effect of IMRT Radiation Following the Mesothelioma Surgery Known as “Extrapleural Pneumonectomy”
April 01, 2005
Onconase® Granted Orphan Drug Status for Mesothelioma Treatment in Australia
December 03, 2004
Mesothelioma Treatment Using A Combination of Surgery and Chemotherapy
October 1, 2004
Gemcitabine and Cisplatin May Improve Outcome of Surgery for Mesothelioma Patients, Study Suggests
August 6, 2004
Australian Researchers Report on New Mesothelioma Drug, SBP002
July 16, 2004
Study Reviews Complications of Mesothelioma Surgery
June 25, 2004
Clinical Trial Shows Promise for Veglin In Fighting Tumors
May 28, 2004
Research on Surgery in Treating Mesothelioma
April 9, 2004
Cancer Center to Treat Mesothelioma Patients Exposed to Vermiculite
March 26, 2004
Newly Approved Colorectal Cancer Drug Now in Clinical Trial for Mesothelioma Patients
February 13, 2004
FDA Approves Sale of Mesothelioma Drug Alimta®
December 12, 2003
Distinguishing Mesothelioma From Lung Adenocarcinoma Through MUC4 Analysis
November 21, 2003
Scientists Working on Blood Test to Detect Mesothelioma
October 3, 2003
Positron Emission Tomography Indicated Spread of Pleural Mesothelioma
September 12, 2003
EPA Downplayed Post–9/11 Asbestos and Other Safety Hazards in NYC, Report Says
September 5, 2003
Radiotherapy and Surgery in Pleural Mesothelioma Treatment
August 22, 2003
Pemetrexed (Alimta®) Plus Cisplatin Shows Continuing Promise in Pleural Mesothelioma Treatment
July 3, 2003
Use of Mediastinoscopy to Determine Whether Mesothelioma Tumors Have Spread
June 13, 2003
Gemcitabine and Carboplatin May Prove Helpful in Mesothelioma Treatment
May 5, 2003
New Ways to Approach Mesothelioma Diagnosis
April 18, 2003
Foscan–Mediated PDT and Surgery May Prove Helpful for Mesothelioma Patients
March 7, 2003
Growth Factors in Mesothelioma Cell Lines Studied
February 14, 2003
Study Shows Raltitrexed Alone May Be Helpful in Mesothelioma Treatment
January 24, 2003
Raltitrexed and Oxaliplatin Evaluated in Mesothelioma Treatment
Legal
February 18, 2005
W.R. Grace Accused of Hiding Asbestos Health Problems
May 30, 2003
EPA Issues Vermiculite Insulation Warning
March 10, 2003
Asbestos Victims Can Sue for Stress Due to Cancer Fears
Legislative
January 14, 2005
Specter Wants To Finish Asbestos Bill By Early February
July 23, 2004
Update on Asbestos Legislation
May 14, 2004
Talks on Frist/Hatch Asbestos Bill End Without Agreement
April 27, 2004
Hatch/Frist Asbestos Bailout Bill Stalled in Senate
September 5, 2003
Hatch Asbestos Bill to Go Before Senate; Annotated Text of Bill Provided
August 22 2003
Asbestos Bill, S.B. 1125, Is a Sham, Construction Worker Says
August 15, 2003
S.B. 1125 Deprives Asbestos Victims of Due Process, Asbestos Claimants’ Committee Says
July 31, 2003
Texas Bills Harmful to Asbestos Victims
July 7, 2003
Hatch Bill Provides Inadequate Protection for Asbestos Victims
June 6, 2003
Bill Reintroduced to Ban Asbestos, Set Up Mesothelioma Registry
Source
Medical Articles:
September 28, 2007
Certain Mesothelioma Patients Living Longer with Chemotherapy
August 17, 2007
School of Public Health Heads Study on Iron Range Miners and Mesothelioma
June 29, 2007
Six More Minnesota Iron Range Miners Have Mesothelioma
June 15, 2007
Study Confirms Usefulness of Pemetrexed (Alimta®) As Mesothelioma Treatment
April 20, 2007
Minnesota Iron Miners Developed Mesothelioma
March 30, 2007
Measuring Mesothelin in Effusions May Be Useful in Mesothelioma Diagnosis, Study Suggests
March 16, 2007
Asbestos More Likely to Cause Mesothelioma in Men Than in Women, Study Suggests
February 23, 2007
FDA Approves MESOMARK® Assay Test for Detecting Mesothelioma
February 16, 2007
Combination of Pemetrexed and Cisplatin Improves the Survival Rate of Mesothelioma Patients
February 9, 2007
Onconase® Granted Orphan Drug Status for Mesothelioma Treatment
January 5, 2007
Pemetrexed May Be Helpful in the Treatment of Peritoneal Mesothelioma, Case Study Suggests
November 22, 2006
Alimta® (Pemetrexed) Study Indicated Drug’s Effectiveness in Treating Pleural Mesothelioma
July 28, 2006
Statins May Help Pleural Mesothelioma Cells Respond to Chemotherapy Drug Doxorubicin
June 2, 2006
Surgery Plus Chemotherapy May Help Peritoneal Mesothelioma Patients
April 21, 2006
Sequential Chemotherapy Regime Showed Promise in Treating Mesothelioma Patients, According to New Study
March 31, 2006
Clinical Trial Looks at Pleural Mesothelioma Treatment with Pemetrexed (Alimta®) Plus Carboplatin (Paraplatin®)
March 24, 2006
Study Pinpoints Distribution of Mesothelioma in US
February 24, 2006
Early Chemotherapy Benefits Mesothelioma Patients
December 16, 2005
Montana Study Shows Mesothelioma Cases Follow Railroad Lines
October 21, 2005
Osteopontin Shows Promise as Marker for Detecting Pleural Mesothelioma
October 14, 2005
Study Shows Improvement in Pleural Mesothelioma Patients Treated with Cisplatin Plus Raltitrexed
September 30, 2005
MARF To Hold Second International Symposium On Malignant Mesothelioma
August 5, 2005
Mesothelioma Patients Being Recruited for Sorafenib Study
July 8, 2005
Naturally Occurring Asbestos May Increase Mesothelioma Risk, Study Suggests
May 11, 2005
New Mesothelioma Blood Test Now Available
April 01, 2005
Effect of IMRT Radiation Following the Mesothelioma Surgery Known as “Extrapleural Pneumonectomy”
April 01, 2005
Onconase® Granted Orphan Drug Status for Mesothelioma Treatment in Australia
December 03, 2004
Mesothelioma Treatment Using A Combination of Surgery and Chemotherapy
October 1, 2004
Gemcitabine and Cisplatin May Improve Outcome of Surgery for Mesothelioma Patients, Study Suggests
August 6, 2004
Australian Researchers Report on New Mesothelioma Drug, SBP002
July 16, 2004
Study Reviews Complications of Mesothelioma Surgery
June 25, 2004
Clinical Trial Shows Promise for Veglin In Fighting Tumors
May 28, 2004
Research on Surgery in Treating Mesothelioma
April 9, 2004
Cancer Center to Treat Mesothelioma Patients Exposed to Vermiculite
March 26, 2004
Newly Approved Colorectal Cancer Drug Now in Clinical Trial for Mesothelioma Patients
February 13, 2004
FDA Approves Sale of Mesothelioma Drug Alimta®
December 12, 2003
Distinguishing Mesothelioma From Lung Adenocarcinoma Through MUC4 Analysis
November 21, 2003
Scientists Working on Blood Test to Detect Mesothelioma
October 3, 2003
Positron Emission Tomography Indicated Spread of Pleural Mesothelioma
September 12, 2003
EPA Downplayed Post–9/11 Asbestos and Other Safety Hazards in NYC, Report Says
September 5, 2003
Radiotherapy and Surgery in Pleural Mesothelioma Treatment
August 22, 2003
Pemetrexed (Alimta®) Plus Cisplatin Shows Continuing Promise in Pleural Mesothelioma Treatment
July 3, 2003
Use of Mediastinoscopy to Determine Whether Mesothelioma Tumors Have Spread
June 13, 2003
Gemcitabine and Carboplatin May Prove Helpful in Mesothelioma Treatment
May 5, 2003
New Ways to Approach Mesothelioma Diagnosis
April 18, 2003
Foscan–Mediated PDT and Surgery May Prove Helpful for Mesothelioma Patients
March 7, 2003
Growth Factors in Mesothelioma Cell Lines Studied
February 14, 2003
Study Shows Raltitrexed Alone May Be Helpful in Mesothelioma Treatment
January 24, 2003
Raltitrexed and Oxaliplatin Evaluated in Mesothelioma Treatment
Legal
February 18, 2005
W.R. Grace Accused of Hiding Asbestos Health Problems
May 30, 2003
EPA Issues Vermiculite Insulation Warning
March 10, 2003
Asbestos Victims Can Sue for Stress Due to Cancer Fears
Legislative
January 14, 2005
Specter Wants To Finish Asbestos Bill By Early February
July 23, 2004
Update on Asbestos Legislation
May 14, 2004
Talks on Frist/Hatch Asbestos Bill End Without Agreement
April 27, 2004
Hatch/Frist Asbestos Bailout Bill Stalled in Senate
September 5, 2003
Hatch Asbestos Bill to Go Before Senate; Annotated Text of Bill Provided
August 22 2003
Asbestos Bill, S.B. 1125, Is a Sham, Construction Worker Says
August 15, 2003
S.B. 1125 Deprives Asbestos Victims of Due Process, Asbestos Claimants’ Committee Says
July 31, 2003
Texas Bills Harmful to Asbestos Victims
July 7, 2003
Hatch Bill Provides Inadequate Protection for Asbestos Victims
June 6, 2003
Bill Reintroduced to Ban Asbestos, Set Up Mesothelioma Registry
Source
Learning About Mesothelioma Clinical Trials
A clinical trial is a research study using volunteers. Its purpose is to find cures or treatments for diseases such as mesothelioma or other serious health conditions. Researchers must conduct animal or laboratory studies that produce positive results before they try a new procedure or drug on human subjects in a clinical trial. A typical mesothelioma clinical trial determines whether a treatment is safe and effective, the best way to administer a drug, and the proper dosage. Any side effects are observed and noted.
Some mesothelioma patients choose to participate in clinical trials in order to have a greater sense of control over their health, and renewed hope for an improved quality of life. Pemetrexed or Alimta® is an example of a drug originally tested in a mesothelioma clinical trial. It has been approved as a pleural mesothelioma treatment when combined with a standard chemotherapy agent, cisplatin.
The downside of clinical trials is that patients are participating in an experimental study. Results may be positive and helpful, inconclusive, or negative. There are no guarantees. You should carefully consult with your physician before you decide to participate in a mesothelioma clinical trial. Consider your own needs and desires, as well as your health status.
Types of Clinical Trials
Clinical trials are conducted in segments or phases. A phase I clinical trial determines how a drug works, and its side effects at various doses. It may give some preliminary evidence of effectiveness. Usually, only a small number of people take part in a phase I clinical trial. A phase II clinical trial involves more participants. Its purpose is to further evaluate the drug’s effectiveness, its safety, and side effects.
A phase III trial gathers even more information about the overall benefits and risks of a drug or treatment. For example, the effects of a new drug or procedure are compared to a current standard treatment. This is done by randomly assigning participants to receive the standard or new treatment. Phase III trials often enroll large numbers of people and may be conducted at several clinics or cancer centers at once.
Who Conducts Mesothelioma Clinical Trials?
The federal National Cancer Institute (NCI) of the National Institute of Health sponsors many of the clinical trials in the United States. The studies may be funded by the NCI and run by a network of doctors, hospitals, and cancer centers. Other sponsors include drug manufacturers, biotechnology companies, nonprofit groups, or even private physicians.
Finding Mesothelioma Clinical Trials
Your doctor or cancer center may recommend a particular mesothelioma clinical trial. You may also read about a clinical trial that is recruiting volunteers through a newspaper or magazine. Some patients actively look for clinical trials. If you are in the later category, you may want to consult the web sites listed below. They provide current lists of clinical trials, including eligibility requirements, geographic location, and medical background.
National Cancer Institute (NCI) Clinical Trial Search
This database may be accessed by type of treatment and geographical location. Also see the NCI’s advanced search, which allows you to locate clinical trials by drug or procedure name, your cancer stage, sponsor name, as well as by geographic area and other factors.
National Institute of Health Clinical Trial Search
You can indicate type of treatment or drug, stage of cancer, clinical study phase, or sponsor in accessing this database.
Coalition of National Cancer Cooperative Groups, Inc.
Provides a 9–step questionnaire before you may access the database. This may be somewhat burdensome.
In addition, you can check the web sites of major cancer centers near you. They usually have information about current mesothelioma clinical trials.
Questions to Ask About Mesothelioma Treatment and Clinical Trials
The American Cancer Society suggests asking these questions of your medical team before participating in a mesothelioma clinical trial.
* » Why is this study being done?
* » What is likely to happen in my case if I decide to participate or not participate?
* » What are my other options (standard treatments, other studies)?
* » What are their advantages and disadvantages?
* » What were the results in previous studies of this treatment?
* » What kinds of tests and treatments does the study involve? How often are they done, and how much time it required?
* » How could the study affect my daily life?
* » What are the possible side effects?
* » Will I have to be hospitalized? Will I still be seeing my regular doctor?
* » What are my costs, if any?
* » How long is the study?
* » Is long–term follow–up care part of the study?
* » Are there others participating in the study whom I could speak to?
Again, you will need to look at the risks versus the benefits of taking part in any clinical trial. Factors to consider include your own health, your expectations, your family relationships, and your present quality of life.
Source
Some mesothelioma patients choose to participate in clinical trials in order to have a greater sense of control over their health, and renewed hope for an improved quality of life. Pemetrexed or Alimta® is an example of a drug originally tested in a mesothelioma clinical trial. It has been approved as a pleural mesothelioma treatment when combined with a standard chemotherapy agent, cisplatin.
The downside of clinical trials is that patients are participating in an experimental study. Results may be positive and helpful, inconclusive, or negative. There are no guarantees. You should carefully consult with your physician before you decide to participate in a mesothelioma clinical trial. Consider your own needs and desires, as well as your health status.
Types of Clinical Trials
Clinical trials are conducted in segments or phases. A phase I clinical trial determines how a drug works, and its side effects at various doses. It may give some preliminary evidence of effectiveness. Usually, only a small number of people take part in a phase I clinical trial. A phase II clinical trial involves more participants. Its purpose is to further evaluate the drug’s effectiveness, its safety, and side effects.
A phase III trial gathers even more information about the overall benefits and risks of a drug or treatment. For example, the effects of a new drug or procedure are compared to a current standard treatment. This is done by randomly assigning participants to receive the standard or new treatment. Phase III trials often enroll large numbers of people and may be conducted at several clinics or cancer centers at once.
Who Conducts Mesothelioma Clinical Trials?
The federal National Cancer Institute (NCI) of the National Institute of Health sponsors many of the clinical trials in the United States. The studies may be funded by the NCI and run by a network of doctors, hospitals, and cancer centers. Other sponsors include drug manufacturers, biotechnology companies, nonprofit groups, or even private physicians.
Finding Mesothelioma Clinical Trials
Your doctor or cancer center may recommend a particular mesothelioma clinical trial. You may also read about a clinical trial that is recruiting volunteers through a newspaper or magazine. Some patients actively look for clinical trials. If you are in the later category, you may want to consult the web sites listed below. They provide current lists of clinical trials, including eligibility requirements, geographic location, and medical background.
National Cancer Institute (NCI) Clinical Trial Search
This database may be accessed by type of treatment and geographical location. Also see the NCI’s advanced search, which allows you to locate clinical trials by drug or procedure name, your cancer stage, sponsor name, as well as by geographic area and other factors.
National Institute of Health Clinical Trial Search
You can indicate type of treatment or drug, stage of cancer, clinical study phase, or sponsor in accessing this database.
Coalition of National Cancer Cooperative Groups, Inc.
Provides a 9–step questionnaire before you may access the database. This may be somewhat burdensome.
In addition, you can check the web sites of major cancer centers near you. They usually have information about current mesothelioma clinical trials.
Questions to Ask About Mesothelioma Treatment and Clinical Trials
The American Cancer Society suggests asking these questions of your medical team before participating in a mesothelioma clinical trial.
* » Why is this study being done?
* » What is likely to happen in my case if I decide to participate or not participate?
* » What are my other options (standard treatments, other studies)?
* » What are their advantages and disadvantages?
* » What were the results in previous studies of this treatment?
* » What kinds of tests and treatments does the study involve? How often are they done, and how much time it required?
* » How could the study affect my daily life?
* » What are the possible side effects?
* » Will I have to be hospitalized? Will I still be seeing my regular doctor?
* » What are my costs, if any?
* » How long is the study?
* » Is long–term follow–up care part of the study?
* » Are there others participating in the study whom I could speak to?
Again, you will need to look at the risks versus the benefits of taking part in any clinical trial. Factors to consider include your own health, your expectations, your family relationships, and your present quality of life.
Source
Mesothelioma Verdicts and Settlements
Below are samples of some of our mesothelioma trial court cases and settlements. For details about our complete court record and our law practice, please feel free to contact us.
Todak v. Foster Wheeler L.L.C., 2002, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 320621 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A San Francisco jury returned the largest asbestos verdict in California, $33.7 million, in favor of a Navy electrician and his wife. The electrician had developed mesothelioma from his occupational exposure to asbestos. He was awarded $22.7 million in economic and non–economic damages. His wife was awarded $11 million for loss of consortium. The defendant, Foster Wheeler Corporation, designed, manufactured and supplied marine boilers with asbestos–containing components including refractory block insulation, roving material, and gaskets.
Garcia v. Duro Dyne Corporation, 2005, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 418098 (Peritoneal Mesothelioma)
A jury awarded over $1.9 million to a 71–year–old retired sheet metal worker who developed peritoneal mesothelioma from his prior on–the–job exposure to asbestos. Peritoneal mesothelioma is an aggressive form of cancer that first attacks the membranes lining the stomach.
The defendant, Duro Dyne Corporation, is a former manufacturer and distributor of asbestos–containing flex HVAC duct connectors and duct sealer used for sheet metal duct connections. Mr. Garcia worked with Duro Dyne Corporation’s asbestos–containing sheet metal products throughout his 48–year career.
Cadlo v. John Crane Inc. and Metalclad Insulation Corp., 2005, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 412325 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A 60–year–old Navy machinist and engineering officer was exposed to asbestos in products made by the defendants, John Crane, Inc. and Metalclad Insulation Corp., and developed pleural mesothelioma. The jury returned a verdict of over $8.6 million in his favor. During his naval career, Mr. Cadlo removed and installed pump and valve packing and gaskets, all of which contained asbestos. He was also routinely exposed to high levels of airborne asbestos from thermal insulation, packing, and gaskets in the engine rooms of ships.
Hoeffer v. Rockwell Automation, 2003, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 28817 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A San Francisco jury awarded $2,999,543 to a 74–year–old retired electrician who was terminally ill with pleural mesothelioma caused by occupational asbestos exposure. He had worked with asbestos–containing phenolic plastic compounds and asbestos–containing parts on electrical equipment.
The defendant, Rockwell Automation, was held liable for the defective products and negligence of its Allen Bradley division and a former division, Rostone Corporation. Rostone Corporation developed, manufactured and sold asbestos–containing phenolic plastic compounds and molded asbestos–containing parts for many of the major electrical equipment manufacturers. Allen Bradley also manufactured and sold asbestos–containing electrical equipment.
Vasen v. Exxon Mobil Corporation, 2001, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 312211 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
An insulator contracted mesothelioma from work around boilers at a refinery located in Benicia, California. A jury returned a verdict of $8 million in his favor and against the defendant, Exxon Mobil Corporation, the owner and operator of the oil refinery.
Clemmer v. John Crane, Inc. and Thorpe Insulation Company, 2006, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 434434 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A jury returned a verdict in favor of a retired machinist and his wife in their products liability and negligence trial against John Crane, Inc., a former manufacturer of asbestos–containing valve and pump packing, and Thorpe Insulation Company, a former supplier and distributor of asbestos thermal insulation. The defendants were negligent and failed to warn about defects in their products, which were defectively designed, according to the jury. It assessed over $550,000 in economic damages, $1.1 million in non–economic damages and $250,000 for loss of consortium.
Nagl v. Dowman Products Inc., 2004, Oregon Circuit Court, Multnomah County, Case No. 02–04–04227 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
An Oregon jury determined that a floor installer suffering from the cancer mesothelioma was entitled to over $659,000 due to his on–the–job exposure to asbestos. The plaintiff was first diagnosed with asbestos pleural disease, and then with malignant mesothelioma. He died from mesothelioma five months after the trial ended.
Mr. Nagl installed new floors in hundreds of homes in Northern Oregon. He used various hazardous asbestos–containing products, including vinyl asbestos floor tile, sheet flooring products, floor leveling compounds, and joint compounds. Dowman Fix–All patching compound, manufactured by the defendant, Dowman Products Inc., was one of these products.
Efstratios v. John Crane, Inc., 2001, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC226519 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A steamfitter diagnosed with mesothelioma was awarded over $4.4 million in damages. The defendant, John Crane, Inc., manufactured asbestos pump and valve packing and gaskets that the steamfitter used at a power plant during the 1950s and 1960s.
Traverso, et al. v. Lorillard Tobacco Company, 2000, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 990560 (Peritoneal Mesothelioma)
A jury awarded over $1 million to two children of a woman who died from abdominal mesothelioma caused by her exposure to asbestos when she smoked Kent Micronite asbestos–filtered cigarettes from 1953–1956. The defendant, Lorillard Tobacco Company, manufactured the cigarettes during this period.
Chavers v. Owens–Illinois, Inc.; Gatke Corporation, 2000, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 320851 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A San Francisco jury awarded over $4.6 million to a former Navy seaman afflicted with malignant mesothelioma caused by his occupational exposure to asbestos. The defendants were Owens–Illinois, Inc. and Gatke Corporation, former manufacturers of asbestos–containing insulation and friction products.
The jury found Owens–Illinois guilty of negligence, products liability and fraud. It also concluded that Owens–Illinois was involved in a conspiracy dating to the 1930s whereby many manufacturers of asbestos products concealed facts regarding the dangers of their products and misrepresented the true nature of the hazards the products posed to unsuspecting workers.
Armstrong v. Asbestos Defendants, 1998, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 985289 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
An insulator who worked in refineries, power plants and shipyards during the 1960s and 1970s developed pleural mesothelioma from his exposure to the defendants’ asbestos–containing products. Raymark Industries, Inc. made asbestos cloth products. Another defendant, Pittsburgh Corning Corporation, made asbestos pipe covering products.
The jury returned a verdict of close to $4.5 million in favor of the insulator. It included $96,500 for medical expenses; $857,546 lost earnings; and $3,500,000 for pain and suffering.
Wilson v. John Crane Co., 1998, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 991085 and 312045 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A San Francisco jury awarded Mr. and Mrs. Wilson over $4.5 million in damages in their personal injury and products liability case. Mr. Wilson had developed pleural mesothelioma as the result of his exposure to asbestos during his work as a machinist. The defendant, John Crane, Inc., manufactured and supplied asbestos products, including packing and gaskets, which Mr. Wilson used throughout most of his career at Southwestern power plants.
The jury awarded Mr. Wilson $591,091.51 in economic damages and $3 million in non–economic damages, including pain and suffering. His wife was awarded $1 million for her loss of consortium claim.
Petrini v. Mohasco Corporation, 1998, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 961525 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A floor mechanic died of pleural mesothelioma that he developed from being exposed to asbestos at job sites. His widow suffered a loss of financial support as well as the love, companionship and moral support of her husband as a result of his premature death, according to the jury. It returned a verdict of $995,432.15 in her favor. The defendant was Mohasco Corporation (formerly William J. Volker Company), a distributor of asbestos–containing floor tile and sheet vinyl products.
Wiggins, et al. v. Owens–Corning Fiberglas, et al., 1996, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 954274 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
The wife and children of a man who died of pleural mesothelioma were awarded over $3.8 million in damages by a San Francisco jury. The mesothelioma victim, Mr. Wiggins, died at the age of 54. He had been exposed to asbestos while working as a boilerman and serving in the Navy for 30 months in 1957 to 1960. Asbestos dust was a serious problem during the overhaul of the ship on which he served in 1958. The defendant, Owens–Corning Fiberglas, manufactured and sold much of the asbestos pipe insulation that was used on board the ship during its overhaul.
Mitchell v. Asbestos Corporation Limited, et al., 1996, San Francisco Superior Court, Case Nos. 955576 and 975884 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A jury awarded $953,112.00 to Mr. Mitchell, who suffered from pleural mesothelioma. He had worked at Moore Dry Dock, a San Francisco shipyard, where he was first exposed to asbestos as a welder. He was also exposed to asbestos while a merchant marine in the 1940s. Defendant Asbestos Corporation Limited, a Canadian mining company located in the town of Asbestos, Canada, sold asbestos fibers to the makers of asbestos insulation used at the Moore Dry Dock. The company’s fiber was also used in the various ships on which Mr. Mitchell served as a merchant marine.
Suprenant v. 20th Century Fox Corporation, et al., 2005, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 271320 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Ms. Suprenant died from pleural mesothelioma, which she developed from exposure to asbestos brought home on her husband’s clothing. She did his laundry during the years he worked as a plasterer for the studios and was exposed to asbestos. The case was settled for an amount in excess of $2.5 million.
Holland v. U.S. Mineral; Douglas Insulation Co., 1999, San Francisco Superior Court, Case Nos. 993822 and 311885 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Ms. Holland had worked as a teacher in schools that were contaminated with asbestos, and may also have been exposed to asbestos in her home and from asbestos dust brought home on her father’s clothes. She contracted mesothelioma through direct and indirect exposure to asbestos–containing plasters, drywall compounds, tiles, insulation cements, textiles, pipe covering and fireproofing. The case was settled after opening trial statements for an amount in excess of $1 million.
Hopkins v. Union Carbide Corp., et al., 2003, San Francisco Superior Court, Case Nos. 408556, 446752, and 505544 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Mr. Hopkins was a carpenter who worked on new construction and developed pleural mesothelioma. He cleaned up dust, debris and packaging materials from various building products. These included floor tile, mastic, adhesives, sheetrock, joint compound, lath, plaster, stucco, ceiling tile, roofing materials, insulation, cements, gaskets, valve packing, asbestos cement pipe, asbestos cement board, and raw asbestos fiber. A settlement of over $5.5 million was reached at the conclusion of plaintiff’s case in chief.
Green v. Union Carbide Corp., et al., 2003, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 405718 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Mr. Green held jobs as a laborer and carpenter. He was also a seaman in the Navy where he worked around insulators, boilermakers, and welders. Mr. Green may have been exposed to asbestos in insulation, raw fiber, cloth, tape, pipe coverings, cement, lagging, gaskets, and valve packing. He developed pleural mesothelioma. A settlement of over $1.6 million was reached during the case in chief.
Ransdell v. Sequoia Ventures, et al., 2003, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 417266 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A pipefitter for most of his life, Mr. Ransdell developed pleural mesothelioma from his on–the–job exposure to asbestos. The case was settled during jury selection for an amount in excess of $2.5 million.
Ketchum v. Union Carbide Corporation, 2004, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 412550 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
An electrician while in the Navy and after he left the service, Mr. Ketchum worked with wire and electrical components. He developed pleural mesothelioma. The case was settled during jury selection for an amount in excess of $3.6 million.
Scandlyn v. Metalclad Insulation Corporation, et al., 2005, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 431122 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
As a nuclear refueling inspector/supervisor and receipt supervisor for the nuclear department at MINSY in the 1960s and 1970s, Mr. Scandlyn worked on all the nuclear submarines that came into Mare Island, CA, including USS Guitarro, USS Pintado, USS Hawkbill and USS Drum during new construction, refueling, and other occasions. The final defendant, Metalclad Insulation, supplied the amosite asbestos thermal insulation (Unibestos) that was used on those four submarines. Mr. Scandlyn developed pleural mesothelioma. The case was settled during pretrial motions for an amount in excess of $2 million.
Fisher v. D.B. Riley, et al., 2005, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 435202 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Mr. Fisher was a plant operator at various power stations for Nevada Power, Las Vegas, from 1957 through 1964. He supervised shutdowns on the power plants, including the repair and maintenance of asbestos–containing boilers manufactured by the final defendant, D.B. Riley. The case was settled for an amount in excess of $2 million.
Source
Todak v. Foster Wheeler L.L.C., 2002, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 320621 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A San Francisco jury returned the largest asbestos verdict in California, $33.7 million, in favor of a Navy electrician and his wife. The electrician had developed mesothelioma from his occupational exposure to asbestos. He was awarded $22.7 million in economic and non–economic damages. His wife was awarded $11 million for loss of consortium. The defendant, Foster Wheeler Corporation, designed, manufactured and supplied marine boilers with asbestos–containing components including refractory block insulation, roving material, and gaskets.
Garcia v. Duro Dyne Corporation, 2005, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 418098 (Peritoneal Mesothelioma)
A jury awarded over $1.9 million to a 71–year–old retired sheet metal worker who developed peritoneal mesothelioma from his prior on–the–job exposure to asbestos. Peritoneal mesothelioma is an aggressive form of cancer that first attacks the membranes lining the stomach.
The defendant, Duro Dyne Corporation, is a former manufacturer and distributor of asbestos–containing flex HVAC duct connectors and duct sealer used for sheet metal duct connections. Mr. Garcia worked with Duro Dyne Corporation’s asbestos–containing sheet metal products throughout his 48–year career.
Cadlo v. John Crane Inc. and Metalclad Insulation Corp., 2005, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 412325 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A 60–year–old Navy machinist and engineering officer was exposed to asbestos in products made by the defendants, John Crane, Inc. and Metalclad Insulation Corp., and developed pleural mesothelioma. The jury returned a verdict of over $8.6 million in his favor. During his naval career, Mr. Cadlo removed and installed pump and valve packing and gaskets, all of which contained asbestos. He was also routinely exposed to high levels of airborne asbestos from thermal insulation, packing, and gaskets in the engine rooms of ships.
Hoeffer v. Rockwell Automation, 2003, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 28817 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A San Francisco jury awarded $2,999,543 to a 74–year–old retired electrician who was terminally ill with pleural mesothelioma caused by occupational asbestos exposure. He had worked with asbestos–containing phenolic plastic compounds and asbestos–containing parts on electrical equipment.
The defendant, Rockwell Automation, was held liable for the defective products and negligence of its Allen Bradley division and a former division, Rostone Corporation. Rostone Corporation developed, manufactured and sold asbestos–containing phenolic plastic compounds and molded asbestos–containing parts for many of the major electrical equipment manufacturers. Allen Bradley also manufactured and sold asbestos–containing electrical equipment.
Vasen v. Exxon Mobil Corporation, 2001, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 312211 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
An insulator contracted mesothelioma from work around boilers at a refinery located in Benicia, California. A jury returned a verdict of $8 million in his favor and against the defendant, Exxon Mobil Corporation, the owner and operator of the oil refinery.
Clemmer v. John Crane, Inc. and Thorpe Insulation Company, 2006, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 434434 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A jury returned a verdict in favor of a retired machinist and his wife in their products liability and negligence trial against John Crane, Inc., a former manufacturer of asbestos–containing valve and pump packing, and Thorpe Insulation Company, a former supplier and distributor of asbestos thermal insulation. The defendants were negligent and failed to warn about defects in their products, which were defectively designed, according to the jury. It assessed over $550,000 in economic damages, $1.1 million in non–economic damages and $250,000 for loss of consortium.
Nagl v. Dowman Products Inc., 2004, Oregon Circuit Court, Multnomah County, Case No. 02–04–04227 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
An Oregon jury determined that a floor installer suffering from the cancer mesothelioma was entitled to over $659,000 due to his on–the–job exposure to asbestos. The plaintiff was first diagnosed with asbestos pleural disease, and then with malignant mesothelioma. He died from mesothelioma five months after the trial ended.
Mr. Nagl installed new floors in hundreds of homes in Northern Oregon. He used various hazardous asbestos–containing products, including vinyl asbestos floor tile, sheet flooring products, floor leveling compounds, and joint compounds. Dowman Fix–All patching compound, manufactured by the defendant, Dowman Products Inc., was one of these products.
Efstratios v. John Crane, Inc., 2001, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC226519 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A steamfitter diagnosed with mesothelioma was awarded over $4.4 million in damages. The defendant, John Crane, Inc., manufactured asbestos pump and valve packing and gaskets that the steamfitter used at a power plant during the 1950s and 1960s.
Traverso, et al. v. Lorillard Tobacco Company, 2000, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 990560 (Peritoneal Mesothelioma)
A jury awarded over $1 million to two children of a woman who died from abdominal mesothelioma caused by her exposure to asbestos when she smoked Kent Micronite asbestos–filtered cigarettes from 1953–1956. The defendant, Lorillard Tobacco Company, manufactured the cigarettes during this period.
Chavers v. Owens–Illinois, Inc.; Gatke Corporation, 2000, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 320851 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A San Francisco jury awarded over $4.6 million to a former Navy seaman afflicted with malignant mesothelioma caused by his occupational exposure to asbestos. The defendants were Owens–Illinois, Inc. and Gatke Corporation, former manufacturers of asbestos–containing insulation and friction products.
The jury found Owens–Illinois guilty of negligence, products liability and fraud. It also concluded that Owens–Illinois was involved in a conspiracy dating to the 1930s whereby many manufacturers of asbestos products concealed facts regarding the dangers of their products and misrepresented the true nature of the hazards the products posed to unsuspecting workers.
Armstrong v. Asbestos Defendants, 1998, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 985289 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
An insulator who worked in refineries, power plants and shipyards during the 1960s and 1970s developed pleural mesothelioma from his exposure to the defendants’ asbestos–containing products. Raymark Industries, Inc. made asbestos cloth products. Another defendant, Pittsburgh Corning Corporation, made asbestos pipe covering products.
The jury returned a verdict of close to $4.5 million in favor of the insulator. It included $96,500 for medical expenses; $857,546 lost earnings; and $3,500,000 for pain and suffering.
Wilson v. John Crane Co., 1998, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 991085 and 312045 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A San Francisco jury awarded Mr. and Mrs. Wilson over $4.5 million in damages in their personal injury and products liability case. Mr. Wilson had developed pleural mesothelioma as the result of his exposure to asbestos during his work as a machinist. The defendant, John Crane, Inc., manufactured and supplied asbestos products, including packing and gaskets, which Mr. Wilson used throughout most of his career at Southwestern power plants.
The jury awarded Mr. Wilson $591,091.51 in economic damages and $3 million in non–economic damages, including pain and suffering. His wife was awarded $1 million for her loss of consortium claim.
Petrini v. Mohasco Corporation, 1998, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 961525 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A floor mechanic died of pleural mesothelioma that he developed from being exposed to asbestos at job sites. His widow suffered a loss of financial support as well as the love, companionship and moral support of her husband as a result of his premature death, according to the jury. It returned a verdict of $995,432.15 in her favor. The defendant was Mohasco Corporation (formerly William J. Volker Company), a distributor of asbestos–containing floor tile and sheet vinyl products.
Wiggins, et al. v. Owens–Corning Fiberglas, et al., 1996, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 954274 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
The wife and children of a man who died of pleural mesothelioma were awarded over $3.8 million in damages by a San Francisco jury. The mesothelioma victim, Mr. Wiggins, died at the age of 54. He had been exposed to asbestos while working as a boilerman and serving in the Navy for 30 months in 1957 to 1960. Asbestos dust was a serious problem during the overhaul of the ship on which he served in 1958. The defendant, Owens–Corning Fiberglas, manufactured and sold much of the asbestos pipe insulation that was used on board the ship during its overhaul.
Mitchell v. Asbestos Corporation Limited, et al., 1996, San Francisco Superior Court, Case Nos. 955576 and 975884 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A jury awarded $953,112.00 to Mr. Mitchell, who suffered from pleural mesothelioma. He had worked at Moore Dry Dock, a San Francisco shipyard, where he was first exposed to asbestos as a welder. He was also exposed to asbestos while a merchant marine in the 1940s. Defendant Asbestos Corporation Limited, a Canadian mining company located in the town of Asbestos, Canada, sold asbestos fibers to the makers of asbestos insulation used at the Moore Dry Dock. The company’s fiber was also used in the various ships on which Mr. Mitchell served as a merchant marine.
Suprenant v. 20th Century Fox Corporation, et al., 2005, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 271320 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Ms. Suprenant died from pleural mesothelioma, which she developed from exposure to asbestos brought home on her husband’s clothing. She did his laundry during the years he worked as a plasterer for the studios and was exposed to asbestos. The case was settled for an amount in excess of $2.5 million.
Holland v. U.S. Mineral; Douglas Insulation Co., 1999, San Francisco Superior Court, Case Nos. 993822 and 311885 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Ms. Holland had worked as a teacher in schools that were contaminated with asbestos, and may also have been exposed to asbestos in her home and from asbestos dust brought home on her father’s clothes. She contracted mesothelioma through direct and indirect exposure to asbestos–containing plasters, drywall compounds, tiles, insulation cements, textiles, pipe covering and fireproofing. The case was settled after opening trial statements for an amount in excess of $1 million.
Hopkins v. Union Carbide Corp., et al., 2003, San Francisco Superior Court, Case Nos. 408556, 446752, and 505544 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Mr. Hopkins was a carpenter who worked on new construction and developed pleural mesothelioma. He cleaned up dust, debris and packaging materials from various building products. These included floor tile, mastic, adhesives, sheetrock, joint compound, lath, plaster, stucco, ceiling tile, roofing materials, insulation, cements, gaskets, valve packing, asbestos cement pipe, asbestos cement board, and raw asbestos fiber. A settlement of over $5.5 million was reached at the conclusion of plaintiff’s case in chief.
Green v. Union Carbide Corp., et al., 2003, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 405718 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Mr. Green held jobs as a laborer and carpenter. He was also a seaman in the Navy where he worked around insulators, boilermakers, and welders. Mr. Green may have been exposed to asbestos in insulation, raw fiber, cloth, tape, pipe coverings, cement, lagging, gaskets, and valve packing. He developed pleural mesothelioma. A settlement of over $1.6 million was reached during the case in chief.
Ransdell v. Sequoia Ventures, et al., 2003, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 417266 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
A pipefitter for most of his life, Mr. Ransdell developed pleural mesothelioma from his on–the–job exposure to asbestos. The case was settled during jury selection for an amount in excess of $2.5 million.
Ketchum v. Union Carbide Corporation, 2004, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 412550 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
An electrician while in the Navy and after he left the service, Mr. Ketchum worked with wire and electrical components. He developed pleural mesothelioma. The case was settled during jury selection for an amount in excess of $3.6 million.
Scandlyn v. Metalclad Insulation Corporation, et al., 2005, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 431122 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
As a nuclear refueling inspector/supervisor and receipt supervisor for the nuclear department at MINSY in the 1960s and 1970s, Mr. Scandlyn worked on all the nuclear submarines that came into Mare Island, CA, including USS Guitarro, USS Pintado, USS Hawkbill and USS Drum during new construction, refueling, and other occasions. The final defendant, Metalclad Insulation, supplied the amosite asbestos thermal insulation (Unibestos) that was used on those four submarines. Mr. Scandlyn developed pleural mesothelioma. The case was settled during pretrial motions for an amount in excess of $2 million.
Fisher v. D.B. Riley, et al., 2005, San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. 435202 (Pleural Mesothelioma)
Mr. Fisher was a plant operator at various power stations for Nevada Power, Las Vegas, from 1957 through 1964. He supervised shutdowns on the power plants, including the repair and maintenance of asbestos–containing boilers manufactured by the final defendant, D.B. Riley. The case was settled for an amount in excess of $2 million.
Source
Surgery Plus Chemotherapy May Help Peritoneal Mesothelioma Patients
WASHINGTON, DC — June 2, 2006 — The length of survival for peritoneal mesothelioma patients who have undergone surgery as well as chemotherapy may be several years, according to a recent study at the Washington Cancer Institute (Eur J Surg Oncol., 2006 Apr 15). This is in contrast to those patients with peritoneal mesothelioma who have been treated with chemotherapy only or with radiation and who generally survive for one year or less.
Mesothelioma is an aggressive cancer that first attacks the membranes surrounding the lungs (pleural mesothelioma) or the stomach (peritoneal mesothelioma). Peritoneal mesothelioma is the rarer form of the cancer, making up about one–quarter of mesothelioma cases.
Surgery involving the abdominal membranes was performed on 65 patients at the Washington Hospital Center in order to remove mesothelioma cancer cells. This is called cytoreductive or debulking surgery, a procedure that can last several hours. Sometimes it is necessary to also remove segments of the stomach.
During surgery, the patients received the standard chemotherapy drugs cisplatin and doxorubicin. The drug solution was warmed and administered into their abdominal cavities, a procedure known as “hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy” or HIIC.
After surgery, the mesothelioma patients were treated for five days with paclitaxel (TAXOL®), a chemotherapy drug that is generally used by breast cancer patients. Cisplatin and doxorubicin are platinum–based compounds that are thought to inhibit the growth of cancer cells. TAXOL® also slows or stops cancer cell growth.
Survival Time Increased for Peritoneal Mesothelioma Patients
The median length of survival among the 65 peritoneal mesothelioma patients was 79 months, and they were also freed from the build–up of excess fluid in their stomach cavities. When surgeons were able to remove most of a mesothelioma tumor (“adequate cytoreduction”), the patient had a better chance of survival than did a patient who had a larger remaining tumor after surgery (“suboptimal cytoreduction”). The researchers pointed out that a patient with a mesothelioma tumor greater than five centimeters in the upper abdominal area would not be a good candidate for surgery, as the result would likely be suboptimal cytoreduction. They suggested using CT scans to determine tumor size when selecting patients for the surgery/chemotherapy treatment procedure.
The Washington Cancer Institute researchers also reviewed other peritoneal mesothelioma reports from Maryland, New York, Italy and France. In these studies, about half the patients with peritoneal mesothelioma were alive after five years if they were treated with surgery as well as chemotherapy using HIIC techniques.
Learning More About Surgery and Peritoneal Mesothelioma
For more detailed information about peritoneal mesothelioma surgery, see the web site, Peritonectomy.com. In addition, an article by Dr. Paul Sugarbaker, one of the authors of the Washington Cancer Institute study, describes cytoreductive surgery and provides illustrations.
Please feel free to contact us at Brayton Purcell if you have mesothelioma and would like legal information. We have been handling cases involving mesothelioma and asbestos exposure for over 20 years and can provide support, information, and excellent advocacy.
Source
Mesothelioma is an aggressive cancer that first attacks the membranes surrounding the lungs (pleural mesothelioma) or the stomach (peritoneal mesothelioma). Peritoneal mesothelioma is the rarer form of the cancer, making up about one–quarter of mesothelioma cases.
Surgery involving the abdominal membranes was performed on 65 patients at the Washington Hospital Center in order to remove mesothelioma cancer cells. This is called cytoreductive or debulking surgery, a procedure that can last several hours. Sometimes it is necessary to also remove segments of the stomach.
During surgery, the patients received the standard chemotherapy drugs cisplatin and doxorubicin. The drug solution was warmed and administered into their abdominal cavities, a procedure known as “hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy” or HIIC.
After surgery, the mesothelioma patients were treated for five days with paclitaxel (TAXOL®), a chemotherapy drug that is generally used by breast cancer patients. Cisplatin and doxorubicin are platinum–based compounds that are thought to inhibit the growth of cancer cells. TAXOL® also slows or stops cancer cell growth.
Survival Time Increased for Peritoneal Mesothelioma Patients
The median length of survival among the 65 peritoneal mesothelioma patients was 79 months, and they were also freed from the build–up of excess fluid in their stomach cavities. When surgeons were able to remove most of a mesothelioma tumor (“adequate cytoreduction”), the patient had a better chance of survival than did a patient who had a larger remaining tumor after surgery (“suboptimal cytoreduction”). The researchers pointed out that a patient with a mesothelioma tumor greater than five centimeters in the upper abdominal area would not be a good candidate for surgery, as the result would likely be suboptimal cytoreduction. They suggested using CT scans to determine tumor size when selecting patients for the surgery/chemotherapy treatment procedure.
The Washington Cancer Institute researchers also reviewed other peritoneal mesothelioma reports from Maryland, New York, Italy and France. In these studies, about half the patients with peritoneal mesothelioma were alive after five years if they were treated with surgery as well as chemotherapy using HIIC techniques.
Learning More About Surgery and Peritoneal Mesothelioma
For more detailed information about peritoneal mesothelioma surgery, see the web site, Peritonectomy.com. In addition, an article by Dr. Paul Sugarbaker, one of the authors of the Washington Cancer Institute study, describes cytoreductive surgery and provides illustrations.
Please feel free to contact us at Brayton Purcell if you have mesothelioma and would like legal information. We have been handling cases involving mesothelioma and asbestos exposure for over 20 years and can provide support, information, and excellent advocacy.
Source
Friday, October 26, 2007
Exam Results Successful Examinees - 2007 Licensure Examination for Teachers
Exam Results
Successful Examinees - 2007 Licensure Examination for Teachers
• ELEMENTARY LEVEL (A - D)
• ELEMENTARY LEVEL (E - M)
• ELEMENTARY LEVEL (N - Z)
• SECONDARY LEVEL (A - D)
• SECONDARY LEVEL (E - N)
• SECONDARY LEVEL (O - Z)
Top 10 highest places:
ELEMENTARY LEVEL
1.Angelo Aniag Unay (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Macy Marie Mendoza Valdez (Philiipine Normal University Manila)
2.Mark Gleen Ocasla Cidro (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Ma. Luisa Odi Marcelo (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
3.Gerry Cabrera Areta (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Babylen Abaja Arit (Philippine Normal University-Lopez, Quezon) Grace Ann Sauquillo Estores (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
4.Candy Pearl Nacario Cabag (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Pinky Laser Escalona Ilaga (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Jenny Carlos Paguyo (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Joseph Randolph Pino Palattao (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
5.Jonalee Cataquiz Bandoquillo (University of the Philippines - Diliman) Ruby Rose Rodriguez Briones (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Maria Ursula Gabon Caturan (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Hernilyn Veric Pelarco (Mindanao State University-Gen. Santos City) Raychel Hipolito Punsalan (Assumption College-Makati)
6.Nenita Balando Cabidog (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Phoebe Cesar Ocampo (University of Mindanao-Davao City) Ma. Lovena Veladiez Moneva (University of the Philippines- Diliman)
7.Janess Marie Caberte Encarnado (Holy Name University (Divine Word Tagbilaran) Kristine Frances Alcantara Muni (Universidad de Santa Isabel) Vannie Jill Estrella Samonte (Bicol University-Legazpi)
8.Nowell Santos Torres (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Nympha Dumaya Villanueva (Philippine Normal Univesity-Isabela)
9.Glyna Jamila Acenas (Andres Bonifacio College) Rhodaline Fajardo Escala (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Anita Cua Lim (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Hannah Mia Abrenica Navidad (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Alberto Urmeneta Rañin (Leyte Normal University) Louwell Ted Jayson Sevilla (University of Southeastern Philippines-Davao City)
10.Shiela Marie Perandos Castro (University of the Philippines -Diliman) Anna Renissa Sta Tersa Cuneta (Assumption College-Makati) Arthur Ronald Juinio Dayrit (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Christyn Amargo Escurzon (University of Mindanao-Davao City) Grizchelle Villanueva Odtuhan (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
SECONDARY LEVEL
1.Joel Lising Adamos (University of Santo Tomas) Manuel Tablante Eusebio (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Aaron Dalisay Galamgam (University of the Philippines-Diliman)
2.Virgo Mamaclay Gulan (Philippine Normal University-Isabela) Melissa Elinore Manuel Wang (Ateneo de Manila University -QC)
3.Sherwin Barrete Iñigo (Mindanao State University-Marawi City) Missy Dazzle Molinyawe Olea (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Blessilda Perez Rapoza (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
4.Eisha Vienna Maliksi Fernandez (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Julius Abel Bicos Galpao (Centro Escolar Unversity-Manila)
5.Rommel Ambal Ramos (University of Batangas)
6.Jorge JR Salvador Baclor (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Tom Ng Chu (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Celina Punzalan Sarmiento (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
7.Nestor Gonzales Acala (Mindanao State University-Marawi City) Ferdinand Licup Aguila (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Rachel Edita Oñate Roxas (University of the Philippines-Los Baños) Mona Lisa Pardilla Siacor (Central Philippine University)
8.Gissella Bahoyo Lebron (De La Salle University-Manila) Helma Yusa Mesa (University of the Philippines-Diliman)
9.Agripina Lagasca Arboleda (Saint Louis University) Oliver Garejo Daitol (University of the East-Caloocan) Angeli Soledad Roque Echiverri (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Angelita Profeta Radiel (University of the Philippines-Los Baños)
10.Krystal Dianne Masangkay Dolarte (Polytechnic University of the Philippines-Sta. Mesa) Glaiza David Tarine (Holy Angel University)
Successful Examinees - 2007 Licensure Examination for Teachers
• ELEMENTARY LEVEL (A - D)
• ELEMENTARY LEVEL (E - M)
• ELEMENTARY LEVEL (N - Z)
• SECONDARY LEVEL (A - D)
• SECONDARY LEVEL (E - N)
• SECONDARY LEVEL (O - Z)
Top 10 highest places:
ELEMENTARY LEVEL
1.Angelo Aniag Unay (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Macy Marie Mendoza Valdez (Philiipine Normal University Manila)
2.Mark Gleen Ocasla Cidro (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Ma. Luisa Odi Marcelo (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
3.Gerry Cabrera Areta (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Babylen Abaja Arit (Philippine Normal University-Lopez, Quezon) Grace Ann Sauquillo Estores (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
4.Candy Pearl Nacario Cabag (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Pinky Laser Escalona Ilaga (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Jenny Carlos Paguyo (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Joseph Randolph Pino Palattao (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
5.Jonalee Cataquiz Bandoquillo (University of the Philippines - Diliman) Ruby Rose Rodriguez Briones (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Maria Ursula Gabon Caturan (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Hernilyn Veric Pelarco (Mindanao State University-Gen. Santos City) Raychel Hipolito Punsalan (Assumption College-Makati)
6.Nenita Balando Cabidog (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Phoebe Cesar Ocampo (University of Mindanao-Davao City) Ma. Lovena Veladiez Moneva (University of the Philippines- Diliman)
7.Janess Marie Caberte Encarnado (Holy Name University (Divine Word Tagbilaran) Kristine Frances Alcantara Muni (Universidad de Santa Isabel) Vannie Jill Estrella Samonte (Bicol University-Legazpi)
8.Nowell Santos Torres (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Nympha Dumaya Villanueva (Philippine Normal Univesity-Isabela)
9.Glyna Jamila Acenas (Andres Bonifacio College) Rhodaline Fajardo Escala (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Anita Cua Lim (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Hannah Mia Abrenica Navidad (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Alberto Urmeneta Rañin (Leyte Normal University) Louwell Ted Jayson Sevilla (University of Southeastern Philippines-Davao City)
10.Shiela Marie Perandos Castro (University of the Philippines -Diliman) Anna Renissa Sta Tersa Cuneta (Assumption College-Makati) Arthur Ronald Juinio Dayrit (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Christyn Amargo Escurzon (University of Mindanao-Davao City) Grizchelle Villanueva Odtuhan (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
SECONDARY LEVEL
1.Joel Lising Adamos (University of Santo Tomas) Manuel Tablante Eusebio (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Aaron Dalisay Galamgam (University of the Philippines-Diliman)
2.Virgo Mamaclay Gulan (Philippine Normal University-Isabela) Melissa Elinore Manuel Wang (Ateneo de Manila University -QC)
3.Sherwin Barrete Iñigo (Mindanao State University-Marawi City) Missy Dazzle Molinyawe Olea (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Blessilda Perez Rapoza (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
4.Eisha Vienna Maliksi Fernandez (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Julius Abel Bicos Galpao (Centro Escolar Unversity-Manila)
5.Rommel Ambal Ramos (University of Batangas)
6.Jorge JR Salvador Baclor (Philippine Normal University-Manila) Tom Ng Chu (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Celina Punzalan Sarmiento (Philippine Normal University-Manila)
7.Nestor Gonzales Acala (Mindanao State University-Marawi City) Ferdinand Licup Aguila (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Rachel Edita Oñate Roxas (University of the Philippines-Los Baños) Mona Lisa Pardilla Siacor (Central Philippine University)
8.Gissella Bahoyo Lebron (De La Salle University-Manila) Helma Yusa Mesa (University of the Philippines-Diliman)
9.Agripina Lagasca Arboleda (Saint Louis University) Oliver Garejo Daitol (University of the East-Caloocan) Angeli Soledad Roque Echiverri (University of the Philippines-Diliman) Angelita Profeta Radiel (University of the Philippines-Los Baños)
10.Krystal Dianne Masangkay Dolarte (Polytechnic University of the Philippines-Sta. Mesa) Glaiza David Tarine (Holy Angel University)
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Asbestos Removal
By the time the EPA and OSHA began issuing dire warnings about the use of asbestos in the 1970s, millions of individuals worldwide had been working in buildings containing asbestos materials for decades. With the issuance of the warnings and the eventual ban, health officials began thinking about the best way to end daily exposure to asbestos, with the hopes of saving many lives in the years to come.
Asbestos RemovalSince the time the warnings were issued, there have been a number of schools of thought when it comes to eliminating asbestos from factories, commercial buildings, shipyards, schools, and homes. In the early years, widespread panic prompted the thought that complete removal was the only way to go while others maintained the “if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it” attitude. Because asbestos doesn’t present a problem unless it is compromised and fibers become airborne, many inspectors and other officials correctly maintained that if the material was intact and in good condition, there was no need to remove it.
Indeed, there are really four options when it comes to controlling asbestos exposure in a building where it could potentially affect the health of those who work, play, study, or live there.
* Remove – if the surface of the asbestos is crumbling or damaged, or is likely to be damaged in the future, it is best to remove it. If a building which contains asbestos is scheduled for demolition, proper removal is essential before the wrecking ball moves in.
* Deep-seal – if the asbestos is in good condition and isn’t likely to be damaged or disturbed due to construction, etc., many choose to encapsulate or “deep-seal” it.
* Enclose – enclose the area affected by asbestos with new construction so that no one can enter and the asbestos is not disturbed.
* Label and Monitor - if the asbestos is in good condition and unlikely to be damaged, label it, leave it “as is”, and monitor its condition regularly.
While all these may appear to be suitable solutions to a serious challenge, problems arise when asbestos is not treated properly, especially during the removal procedure. Often, removal is NOT the best option, but if it is, it must be accomplished by a licensed asbestos-removal company and according to OSHA procedures. Asbestos removal does indeed tend to elevate levels of airborne fibers, thus putting those in the building at higher risk.
Unscrupulous owners may attempt to “cut corners”, hiring a company that does not possess the proper credentials and, therefore, saving money. If you’re in a building where asbestos is being removed, be sure that the area is enclosed with sheets of plastic, that all materials removed are disposed of properly, and that air quality is constantly monitored during removal. If you suspect that things are being done improperly, leave the building immediately.
If you work in a building where the owners have chosen to “wait and see”, you’ll also want to be sure that a proper monitoring system is in place to assure continued safety. Asbestos should never be totally ignored, even after it’s recognized and labeled, especially if it’s at risk of becoming damaged for one reason or another.
Deciding whether or not to remove asbestos is a major financial concern for building and/or company owners. Hasty removal or improper monitoring should always be a concern for those who may be potentially exposed to airborne asbestos. To learn more about the particulars of asbestos removal and non-removal, sign up for our free information packet.
Source
Asbestos RemovalSince the time the warnings were issued, there have been a number of schools of thought when it comes to eliminating asbestos from factories, commercial buildings, shipyards, schools, and homes. In the early years, widespread panic prompted the thought that complete removal was the only way to go while others maintained the “if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it” attitude. Because asbestos doesn’t present a problem unless it is compromised and fibers become airborne, many inspectors and other officials correctly maintained that if the material was intact and in good condition, there was no need to remove it.
Indeed, there are really four options when it comes to controlling asbestos exposure in a building where it could potentially affect the health of those who work, play, study, or live there.
* Remove – if the surface of the asbestos is crumbling or damaged, or is likely to be damaged in the future, it is best to remove it. If a building which contains asbestos is scheduled for demolition, proper removal is essential before the wrecking ball moves in.
* Deep-seal – if the asbestos is in good condition and isn’t likely to be damaged or disturbed due to construction, etc., many choose to encapsulate or “deep-seal” it.
* Enclose – enclose the area affected by asbestos with new construction so that no one can enter and the asbestos is not disturbed.
* Label and Monitor - if the asbestos is in good condition and unlikely to be damaged, label it, leave it “as is”, and monitor its condition regularly.
While all these may appear to be suitable solutions to a serious challenge, problems arise when asbestos is not treated properly, especially during the removal procedure. Often, removal is NOT the best option, but if it is, it must be accomplished by a licensed asbestos-removal company and according to OSHA procedures. Asbestos removal does indeed tend to elevate levels of airborne fibers, thus putting those in the building at higher risk.
Unscrupulous owners may attempt to “cut corners”, hiring a company that does not possess the proper credentials and, therefore, saving money. If you’re in a building where asbestos is being removed, be sure that the area is enclosed with sheets of plastic, that all materials removed are disposed of properly, and that air quality is constantly monitored during removal. If you suspect that things are being done improperly, leave the building immediately.
If you work in a building where the owners have chosen to “wait and see”, you’ll also want to be sure that a proper monitoring system is in place to assure continued safety. Asbestos should never be totally ignored, even after it’s recognized and labeled, especially if it’s at risk of becoming damaged for one reason or another.
Deciding whether or not to remove asbestos is a major financial concern for building and/or company owners. Hasty removal or improper monitoring should always be a concern for those who may be potentially exposed to airborne asbestos. To learn more about the particulars of asbestos removal and non-removal, sign up for our free information packet.
Source
Asbestos Legislation
Asbestos legislation has long been a volatile issue, in and out of the courtroom. Many companies and individuals have a stake in swinging the pendulum one way or the other. The utmost concern, of course, is for the true victims of asbestos-related Mesothelioma and many senators, congressmen, and other government officials have gone to bat for those who’ve become sick or died from asbestos inhalation, hoping to be sure that their medical expenses can be met and that their surviving families will not be left unable to cope financially.
Asbestos legislation began in the 1970s, and since that time, more and more bills have been either passed or proposed in order to assist Mesothelioma victims. Others have been proposed in favor of the asbestos companies. Some highlights are listed below.
1970s – During this decade, Congress first became aware of asbestos-related injuries and diseases.
1977 to 1981 – The first bills to offer compensation for victims of asbestos-related diseases appeared on the Congressional docket. These were meant to create funds for victims, and required contributions from both asbestos and tobacco companies. Bills regarding guidelines for workers’ compensation for asbestos-related disabilities were also introduced at this time.
Mid 1980s – Both the Asbestos Workers Recovery Act and the Occupational Disease Compensation Act were introduced. For the former, compensation was based on injuries that cause disability and excluded unimpaired non-malignant cases. The latter bill federalized state workers’ compensation for occupational diseases.
1999 – The Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act was introduced. It would create a formal procedure for federal asbestos cases and would establish the Office of Asbestos Compensation and form an Asbestos Compensation Fund. A decision to pass was tabled.
2000 – A bill is introduced to amend the IRS code of 1986 to provide relief for payment of asbestos-related claims.
2003 – The Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act is passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Without making use of taxpayer dollars, the federal government would “establish a national trust fund privately financed by asbestos defendant companies and insurers.”
2005 – The Senate Judiciary Committee approves the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Act of 2005 which would require asbestos companies to pay into a fund with which victims would be compensated. The act would potentially block lawsuits. This bill is still being debated.
Asbestos legislation is a long and complicated process and one that is confusing to most laypersons. In order to learn more about your legal rights as a victim of malignant mesothelioma, it is often wise to consult an attorney who’s experienced in the rights of asbestos-related cancer victims. He or she can properly review your case and access your possibilities for compensation.
For more information about asbestos legislation and the legal rights that accompany your Mesothelioma diagnosis, send for our free Mesothelioma Resource Kit.
Source
Asbestos legislation began in the 1970s, and since that time, more and more bills have been either passed or proposed in order to assist Mesothelioma victims. Others have been proposed in favor of the asbestos companies. Some highlights are listed below.
1970s – During this decade, Congress first became aware of asbestos-related injuries and diseases.
1977 to 1981 – The first bills to offer compensation for victims of asbestos-related diseases appeared on the Congressional docket. These were meant to create funds for victims, and required contributions from both asbestos and tobacco companies. Bills regarding guidelines for workers’ compensation for asbestos-related disabilities were also introduced at this time.
Mid 1980s – Both the Asbestos Workers Recovery Act and the Occupational Disease Compensation Act were introduced. For the former, compensation was based on injuries that cause disability and excluded unimpaired non-malignant cases. The latter bill federalized state workers’ compensation for occupational diseases.
1999 – The Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act was introduced. It would create a formal procedure for federal asbestos cases and would establish the Office of Asbestos Compensation and form an Asbestos Compensation Fund. A decision to pass was tabled.
2000 – A bill is introduced to amend the IRS code of 1986 to provide relief for payment of asbestos-related claims.
2003 – The Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act is passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Without making use of taxpayer dollars, the federal government would “establish a national trust fund privately financed by asbestos defendant companies and insurers.”
2005 – The Senate Judiciary Committee approves the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Act of 2005 which would require asbestos companies to pay into a fund with which victims would be compensated. The act would potentially block lawsuits. This bill is still being debated.
Asbestos legislation is a long and complicated process and one that is confusing to most laypersons. In order to learn more about your legal rights as a victim of malignant mesothelioma, it is often wise to consult an attorney who’s experienced in the rights of asbestos-related cancer victims. He or she can properly review your case and access your possibilities for compensation.
For more information about asbestos legislation and the legal rights that accompany your Mesothelioma diagnosis, send for our free Mesothelioma Resource Kit.
Source
Asbestos in the Workplace
Though the use of asbestos was banned nearly three decades ago, many are still suffering the residual affects of exposure, including the development of such diseases as asbestosis and mesothelioma. Millions of workers worldwide were, at one time, exposed to asbestos for prolonged periods of time, even though many employers had suspected for decades that such exposure was dangerous.
Some workplaces were virtual breeding grounds for airborne asbestos fibers and employers didn’t always take proper precautions to protect workers from inhaling these fibers. Decades later, workers in these industries are paying with their health and with their lives. Industries that are at highest risk for asbestos exposure are as follows:
* Asbestos product manufacturers – these include factories that produced building materials, insulation, floor and ceiling tiles, roofing, fiber cloth, tape, rope, and yarn.
* Automotive repair – mechanics were often exposed to the asbestos used in brakes and clutch linings. Some old cars still contain such parts.
* Contractors or construction workers – those who were employed building factories, schools, offices, or even homes probably handled materials such as those mentioned above. (see asbestos product manufacturers) Materials that were compromised in some way during construction most likely emitted airborne fibers.
* Firefighters – when an old building or factory containing asbestos collapses due to fire, firefighters may be exposed to airborne fibers.
* Oil refineries – many products used in oil refineries contain asbestos and the rate of pleural Mesothelioma among refinery workers is higher than the norm.
* Power plants – many pieces of equipment in power plants contain asbestos, including boilers, turbines, and generators, lined with asbestos for protection from heat and fire.
* Railroads – steam locomotives, and later diesel trains, made use of asbestos as a fire retardant; first in boilers, fireboxes, and steam pipes and later in rope, cement, gaskets, and heavy duty tiles for passenger cars. Railroad brakes and clutches, like automobiles, were lined with asbestos.
* Shipyards – shipyard workers, particularly those who were employed during World War II when asbestos use was at its heaviest, have an extremely high rate of Mesothelioma. At one point during the war, more than 4 million Americans worked in the nation’s shipyards. Asbestos was used to insulate incinerators, boilers, steam pipes, hot water pipes, and many other ship components. Those who overhauled old ships were especially exposed as parts containing asbestos were torn out and replaced. It is also believed that longshoremen probably handled asbestos-laden materials as they loaded ships.
* Mines – those who’ve worked in talc or vermiculite mines have probably been exposed to asbestos dust, contained in both of those minerals.
* Steel Mills – thermal insulation materials used in steel mills may contain asbestos.
Source
Some workplaces were virtual breeding grounds for airborne asbestos fibers and employers didn’t always take proper precautions to protect workers from inhaling these fibers. Decades later, workers in these industries are paying with their health and with their lives. Industries that are at highest risk for asbestos exposure are as follows:
* Asbestos product manufacturers – these include factories that produced building materials, insulation, floor and ceiling tiles, roofing, fiber cloth, tape, rope, and yarn.
* Automotive repair – mechanics were often exposed to the asbestos used in brakes and clutch linings. Some old cars still contain such parts.
* Contractors or construction workers – those who were employed building factories, schools, offices, or even homes probably handled materials such as those mentioned above. (see asbestos product manufacturers) Materials that were compromised in some way during construction most likely emitted airborne fibers.
* Firefighters – when an old building or factory containing asbestos collapses due to fire, firefighters may be exposed to airborne fibers.
* Oil refineries – many products used in oil refineries contain asbestos and the rate of pleural Mesothelioma among refinery workers is higher than the norm.
* Power plants – many pieces of equipment in power plants contain asbestos, including boilers, turbines, and generators, lined with asbestos for protection from heat and fire.
* Railroads – steam locomotives, and later diesel trains, made use of asbestos as a fire retardant; first in boilers, fireboxes, and steam pipes and later in rope, cement, gaskets, and heavy duty tiles for passenger cars. Railroad brakes and clutches, like automobiles, were lined with asbestos.
* Shipyards – shipyard workers, particularly those who were employed during World War II when asbestos use was at its heaviest, have an extremely high rate of Mesothelioma. At one point during the war, more than 4 million Americans worked in the nation’s shipyards. Asbestos was used to insulate incinerators, boilers, steam pipes, hot water pipes, and many other ship components. Those who overhauled old ships were especially exposed as parts containing asbestos were torn out and replaced. It is also believed that longshoremen probably handled asbestos-laden materials as they loaded ships.
* Mines – those who’ve worked in talc or vermiculite mines have probably been exposed to asbestos dust, contained in both of those minerals.
* Steel Mills – thermal insulation materials used in steel mills may contain asbestos.
Source
The History of Asbestos
Asbestos is not a miracle of modern times but rather a mineral that has been in use for centuries and has long been recognized for its useful properties, such as the ability to resist heat and provide insulation.
In fact, the word “asbestos” dates back to ancient Greece and is thought to have derived from a Greek word meaning indestructible or inextinguishable. The first asbestos quarry was believed to have been located on the Greek isle of Evvoia as early as the first century A.D.
Written information documents the use of asbestos as early as during the years of the Roman Empire, though many experts indicate that it may have been used long before that - perhaps as early as 3000 BC - as is evidenced by archaeological digs in areas of Scandinavia where asbestos was found in pottery and similar objects.
Early society found many uses for asbestos, thanks to what they often referred to as its “miraculous” qualities. Building materials usually contained asbestos as did cloth and women’s clothing. There is documentation that Romans used tablecloths made of asbestos in their restaurants and homes, due to the fact that they could be thrown into the fire in order to remove food and other crumbs or debris that may have adhered to the cloth. When they were removed, of course, the tablecloths were unscathed and rumored to be whiter than ever!
History shows that the ancient Egyptians embalmed their pharaohs with asbestos and other civilizations wrapped or “mummified” their dead in materials that contained this substance. Later, it was used to insulate suits of armor. At one point, asbestos was made into crosses and due to its weathered, wood-like appearance, many deceived the public by stating that the crosses were made from the wood of the cross on which Christ was crucified.
The Industrial Revolution brought about even more widespread use of asbestos. In the late 1800s, in the early years of commercial asbestos mines, the U.S. found that the mineral was perfect for insulating pipes, boilers, and fireboxes in steam locomotives, a burgeoning mode of transportation in North America. Refrigeration units, boxcars, and cabooses were also lined with asbestos insulation and the use of the material continued even after diesel railroads were introduced.
Trains weren’t the only form of transportation that made use of this incredible insulating material. Shipyards were full of asbestos and shipbuilders used the mineral to insulate steam pipes, boilers, hot water pipes, and incinerators, not unlike the railroad industry. Many who built ships, especially during World War II, were exposed to this dangerous material.
The automotive industry made extensive use of asbestos as well. Clutch and brake linings usually contained asbestos and many cars on the road today still contain parts made with this dangerous substance.
The industry that boasted the most widespread use of asbestos was, by far, the building and construction industry. Its insulating and flame-retardant properties made asbestos the perfect material for keeping buildings warm and safe. Not only was asbestos used for insulation in walls but also in such materials as siding, floor and ceiling tiles, roofing tars and shingles, cement pipes, gutters and rainwater pipes, mud and texture coats like stucco, plaster, putty, caulk, and even stage curtains in theaters and schools.
The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that, in all, as many as 3,000 products may, at one time or another, have contained asbestos, including a number of household items that would otherwise seem innocuous, such as hand-held hairdryers, coffee pots, toasters, irons, ironing board covers, electric blankets, and burner pads.
Because asbestos is often found in mined talc and vermiculite, products containing those two substances may contain asbestos as well. Talc-containing products might include cosmetics, baby powder, and feminine hygiene products. Trace amounts of asbestos have also been found in fertilizers, pesticides, potting mixes, and composts, which often employ the use of vermiculite, due to its drainage and aeration properties.
Sadly, the recognition of the dangerous properties of asbestos goes back to the Roman Empire when concerned citizens and doctors noticed that those who worked in asbestos mines were dying very early or becoming quite ill with lung-related diseases. Records show that by the turn of the 20th century, insurance companies were already charging higher premiums or refusing coverage to those who had jobs that exposed them to asbestos.
It wasn’t until the 1970s, unfortunately, that government agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) began to regulate asbestos and its uses. By that time, many had been exposed to asbestos and asbestos-containing products for a vast number of years.
Did you or a loved one work in an industry that used products or processes that involved asbestos? Have you or someone you know been diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease like Mesothelioma? If so, perhaps we can help. Be sure to sign up for your free packet of information at this site to learn more about the history of asbestos and those industries that put workers at high risk for asbestos-related illnesses.
Source
In fact, the word “asbestos” dates back to ancient Greece and is thought to have derived from a Greek word meaning indestructible or inextinguishable. The first asbestos quarry was believed to have been located on the Greek isle of Evvoia as early as the first century A.D.
Written information documents the use of asbestos as early as during the years of the Roman Empire, though many experts indicate that it may have been used long before that - perhaps as early as 3000 BC - as is evidenced by archaeological digs in areas of Scandinavia where asbestos was found in pottery and similar objects.
Early society found many uses for asbestos, thanks to what they often referred to as its “miraculous” qualities. Building materials usually contained asbestos as did cloth and women’s clothing. There is documentation that Romans used tablecloths made of asbestos in their restaurants and homes, due to the fact that they could be thrown into the fire in order to remove food and other crumbs or debris that may have adhered to the cloth. When they were removed, of course, the tablecloths were unscathed and rumored to be whiter than ever!
History shows that the ancient Egyptians embalmed their pharaohs with asbestos and other civilizations wrapped or “mummified” their dead in materials that contained this substance. Later, it was used to insulate suits of armor. At one point, asbestos was made into crosses and due to its weathered, wood-like appearance, many deceived the public by stating that the crosses were made from the wood of the cross on which Christ was crucified.
The Industrial Revolution brought about even more widespread use of asbestos. In the late 1800s, in the early years of commercial asbestos mines, the U.S. found that the mineral was perfect for insulating pipes, boilers, and fireboxes in steam locomotives, a burgeoning mode of transportation in North America. Refrigeration units, boxcars, and cabooses were also lined with asbestos insulation and the use of the material continued even after diesel railroads were introduced.
Trains weren’t the only form of transportation that made use of this incredible insulating material. Shipyards were full of asbestos and shipbuilders used the mineral to insulate steam pipes, boilers, hot water pipes, and incinerators, not unlike the railroad industry. Many who built ships, especially during World War II, were exposed to this dangerous material.
The automotive industry made extensive use of asbestos as well. Clutch and brake linings usually contained asbestos and many cars on the road today still contain parts made with this dangerous substance.
The industry that boasted the most widespread use of asbestos was, by far, the building and construction industry. Its insulating and flame-retardant properties made asbestos the perfect material for keeping buildings warm and safe. Not only was asbestos used for insulation in walls but also in such materials as siding, floor and ceiling tiles, roofing tars and shingles, cement pipes, gutters and rainwater pipes, mud and texture coats like stucco, plaster, putty, caulk, and even stage curtains in theaters and schools.
The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that, in all, as many as 3,000 products may, at one time or another, have contained asbestos, including a number of household items that would otherwise seem innocuous, such as hand-held hairdryers, coffee pots, toasters, irons, ironing board covers, electric blankets, and burner pads.
Because asbestos is often found in mined talc and vermiculite, products containing those two substances may contain asbestos as well. Talc-containing products might include cosmetics, baby powder, and feminine hygiene products. Trace amounts of asbestos have also been found in fertilizers, pesticides, potting mixes, and composts, which often employ the use of vermiculite, due to its drainage and aeration properties.
Sadly, the recognition of the dangerous properties of asbestos goes back to the Roman Empire when concerned citizens and doctors noticed that those who worked in asbestos mines were dying very early or becoming quite ill with lung-related diseases. Records show that by the turn of the 20th century, insurance companies were already charging higher premiums or refusing coverage to those who had jobs that exposed them to asbestos.
It wasn’t until the 1970s, unfortunately, that government agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) began to regulate asbestos and its uses. By that time, many had been exposed to asbestos and asbestos-containing products for a vast number of years.
Did you or a loved one work in an industry that used products or processes that involved asbestos? Have you or someone you know been diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease like Mesothelioma? If so, perhaps we can help. Be sure to sign up for your free packet of information at this site to learn more about the history of asbestos and those industries that put workers at high risk for asbestos-related illnesses.
Source
Asbestos Industry and the Cover-up
The dangers of asbestos were recognized and documented long before the Environmental Protection Agency stepped in the 1970s to ban the use of the material in the United States. In Roman times, historian Pliny the Elder and geographer Strabo pointed out that workers exposed to asbestos were often ill and were dying at a very young age. They even went as far as to recommend that no one purchase slaves who had previously worked in the asbestos quarries.
Asbestos DangersBy the late 1800s, as more and more individuals began working in factories, physicians began attributing pulmonary problems to the inhalation of asbestos dust, and by 1906, the first documented case of asbestos-related death was reported. Because such disease and its accompanying symptoms often did not develop until approximately 10-40 years after exposure, it wasn’t until the early 20th century that many cases came to light. By 1928, the name Asbestosis became the tag for lung diseases thought to be caused by asbestos inhalation.
It was shortly after this that companies began to cover up the suspected effects of asbestos and the dangers of working with this material. Companies that produced asbestos or asbestos products began circulating “internal memos” as to suspicious worker fatalities and had private discussions about the medical reports that documented their employees’ asbestos-related deaths. Such information was concealed from other employees who may have been at risk.
By the mid-1930s, large corporations were settling lawsuits brought about by victims of Asbestosis by demanding that their lawyers never again participate in the bringing of new actions against them on behalf of other asbestos-related disease sufferers. Furthermore, it’s been documented that corporate officials in the 1930s and 1940s altered warnings that were issued by insurance companies to employees, downplaying the dangers of asbestos inhalation.
When major asbestos companies did agree to conduct health studies in regards to the effects of working with asbestos, they took it upon themselves to once again alter the results, erasing any information that related asbestos to serious pulmonary disease before these reports were released to their employees and/or the general public.
By this time, physicians began noticing that their asbestos-exposed patients had not only contracted asbestosis - characterized by such symptoms as difficulty breathing, an enlarged heart, and persistent dry cough – but many appeared to also be suffering from lung cancer. The “c” word further alarmed asbestos companies and an extensive cover-up became all the more important in preserving their profits.
Factory supervisors and others that attempted to expose risks or to implement safety precautions were usually stopped in their tracks. Finally, in 1964, those who had long touted the dangers of working with asbestos were backed by a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association, penned by Dr. Irving Selikoff, stating that, among those who work with asbestos-containing materials, there was an abnormal incidence of asbestosis, lung cancer, and Mesothelioma. Still, asbestos company owners attempted to negate or alter the facts found in this article and other such reports.
At last, in 1971, the first OSHA asbestos-exposure standard was issued. By 1973, the EPA banned spray-on asbestos insulation, noting that it was an air pollution hazard. Towards the end of the 1970s, documentation began to surface which proved that many large corporations had suppressed information about the dangers of exposure to asbestos, hoping to avoid lawsuits by affected employees and/or their families.
In 1979, the U.S. EPA announced their intention to issue a ruling that banned all uses of asbestos. Many other countries followed suit within the next decade. Still, there are countries, many in South America, that have not yet banned the use of asbestos in construction and other products. Furthermore, the decades-long cover-up will long affect those who worked with asbestos prior to the 1980s.
Were you or someone you love the victim of the asbestos industry cover-up? Have your rights been compromised? To learn more about your options, sign up for our free information packet on asbestos and asbestos-related diseases. It’s never too late to learn more about this deadly material that has affected the lives of thousands upon thousands of hard-working individuals throughout the last century.
Source
Asbestos DangersBy the late 1800s, as more and more individuals began working in factories, physicians began attributing pulmonary problems to the inhalation of asbestos dust, and by 1906, the first documented case of asbestos-related death was reported. Because such disease and its accompanying symptoms often did not develop until approximately 10-40 years after exposure, it wasn’t until the early 20th century that many cases came to light. By 1928, the name Asbestosis became the tag for lung diseases thought to be caused by asbestos inhalation.
It was shortly after this that companies began to cover up the suspected effects of asbestos and the dangers of working with this material. Companies that produced asbestos or asbestos products began circulating “internal memos” as to suspicious worker fatalities and had private discussions about the medical reports that documented their employees’ asbestos-related deaths. Such information was concealed from other employees who may have been at risk.
By the mid-1930s, large corporations were settling lawsuits brought about by victims of Asbestosis by demanding that their lawyers never again participate in the bringing of new actions against them on behalf of other asbestos-related disease sufferers. Furthermore, it’s been documented that corporate officials in the 1930s and 1940s altered warnings that were issued by insurance companies to employees, downplaying the dangers of asbestos inhalation.
When major asbestos companies did agree to conduct health studies in regards to the effects of working with asbestos, they took it upon themselves to once again alter the results, erasing any information that related asbestos to serious pulmonary disease before these reports were released to their employees and/or the general public.
By this time, physicians began noticing that their asbestos-exposed patients had not only contracted asbestosis - characterized by such symptoms as difficulty breathing, an enlarged heart, and persistent dry cough – but many appeared to also be suffering from lung cancer. The “c” word further alarmed asbestos companies and an extensive cover-up became all the more important in preserving their profits.
Factory supervisors and others that attempted to expose risks or to implement safety precautions were usually stopped in their tracks. Finally, in 1964, those who had long touted the dangers of working with asbestos were backed by a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association, penned by Dr. Irving Selikoff, stating that, among those who work with asbestos-containing materials, there was an abnormal incidence of asbestosis, lung cancer, and Mesothelioma. Still, asbestos company owners attempted to negate or alter the facts found in this article and other such reports.
At last, in 1971, the first OSHA asbestos-exposure standard was issued. By 1973, the EPA banned spray-on asbestos insulation, noting that it was an air pollution hazard. Towards the end of the 1970s, documentation began to surface which proved that many large corporations had suppressed information about the dangers of exposure to asbestos, hoping to avoid lawsuits by affected employees and/or their families.
In 1979, the U.S. EPA announced their intention to issue a ruling that banned all uses of asbestos. Many other countries followed suit within the next decade. Still, there are countries, many in South America, that have not yet banned the use of asbestos in construction and other products. Furthermore, the decades-long cover-up will long affect those who worked with asbestos prior to the 1980s.
Were you or someone you love the victim of the asbestos industry cover-up? Have your rights been compromised? To learn more about your options, sign up for our free information packet on asbestos and asbestos-related diseases. It’s never too late to learn more about this deadly material that has affected the lives of thousands upon thousands of hard-working individuals throughout the last century.
Source
Asbestos Types
Individuals who don’t know a lot about asbestos but have heard much about its many dangers may be surprised to learn that asbestos is a natural substance, found in various places on the planet, not a man-made substance developed for commercial use. Indeed, asbestos is mined in many countries throughout the world and was, at one time, widely used in many commercial products, usually for a number of reasons including its high resistance to heat and chemicals, its low electrical conductivity, and its strength and flexibility.
AsbestosThis natural material was first used in 1828 as a lining material for steam engines. For many years, vinyl-asbestos tiles were used for floor coverings and automobile clutch facings and brake linings also contained asbestos. Alarmingly, asbestos was even used in toothpaste, as artificial snow for Christmas trees, and as incision thread for surgery patients.
A total of six different types of asbestos are found in the earth and they’re categorized into two separate groups: 1) serpentine, with a layered form and curly fibers, and 2) amphibole, with straight fibers and a chain-like structure. The latter has been determined to be the most dangerous type of asbestos to which human beings can be exposed.
The serpentine group has just one member…Chrysotile. This is the most common type of asbestos, still found in buildings in nearly every developed country throughout the world. As a matter of fact, figures show that between 90% and 95% of all asbestos found in buildings and other commercial products that contain asbestos is of the Chrysotile variety. Furthermore, this is the only type which is still mined, primarily in Canada, Africa, and the former Soviet Republic. Because of its rampant use, Chrysotile accounts for most asbestos-related health problems.
Chrysotile is usually white or green in color and is most often used in insulation and fireproofing products. It can also be woven into asbestos tapes and clothes and is used in the manufacture of cement in the form of sheets, shingles, and pipes. This type of asbestos is also used in a number of friction materials, largely due to its high resistance to heat. These products include automobile brake shoes, disk pads, clutches and elevator brakes. In addition, roof sealants, textiles, plastics, rubbers, door seals for furnaces, high temperature caulking, paper, and components for the nuclear industry contain Chrysotile.
Five kinds of asbestos are members of the amphibole variety. Only two of them were consistently used in commercial applications – Amosite and Crocidolite. These two forms, possessing strong and stiff fibers, are highly dangerous when airborne fibers are inhaled or ingested.
The commercial production of Amosite, also known as “brown asbestos”, was halted within the last decade. Most often used as an insulating material, the use of Amosite has been banned in most countries for several decades. However, at one time, it was the second most-commonly used type of asbestos, accounting for about 5% of the asbestos used in factories and buildings and was sometimes included for anti-condensation and acoustical purposes.
Crocidolite is a rare form of asbestos, bluish in color, and is highly resistant to chemicals. It’s believed to be the most lethal form of asbestos and was often used as a reinforcement material for plastics. In the mid-twentieth century, Crocidolite was also used in pre-formed thermal insulation and, prior to that, some yarns and rope lagging contained this form of asbestos.
Though the use of most asbestos products has long been banned in most developed countries, many buildings may still contain some form of this dangerous mineral. To learn more about the various types of asbestos and their uses, be sure to sign up for a free information packet, available from this site.
Source
AsbestosThis natural material was first used in 1828 as a lining material for steam engines. For many years, vinyl-asbestos tiles were used for floor coverings and automobile clutch facings and brake linings also contained asbestos. Alarmingly, asbestos was even used in toothpaste, as artificial snow for Christmas trees, and as incision thread for surgery patients.
A total of six different types of asbestos are found in the earth and they’re categorized into two separate groups: 1) serpentine, with a layered form and curly fibers, and 2) amphibole, with straight fibers and a chain-like structure. The latter has been determined to be the most dangerous type of asbestos to which human beings can be exposed.
The serpentine group has just one member…Chrysotile. This is the most common type of asbestos, still found in buildings in nearly every developed country throughout the world. As a matter of fact, figures show that between 90% and 95% of all asbestos found in buildings and other commercial products that contain asbestos is of the Chrysotile variety. Furthermore, this is the only type which is still mined, primarily in Canada, Africa, and the former Soviet Republic. Because of its rampant use, Chrysotile accounts for most asbestos-related health problems.
Chrysotile is usually white or green in color and is most often used in insulation and fireproofing products. It can also be woven into asbestos tapes and clothes and is used in the manufacture of cement in the form of sheets, shingles, and pipes. This type of asbestos is also used in a number of friction materials, largely due to its high resistance to heat. These products include automobile brake shoes, disk pads, clutches and elevator brakes. In addition, roof sealants, textiles, plastics, rubbers, door seals for furnaces, high temperature caulking, paper, and components for the nuclear industry contain Chrysotile.
Five kinds of asbestos are members of the amphibole variety. Only two of them were consistently used in commercial applications – Amosite and Crocidolite. These two forms, possessing strong and stiff fibers, are highly dangerous when airborne fibers are inhaled or ingested.
The commercial production of Amosite, also known as “brown asbestos”, was halted within the last decade. Most often used as an insulating material, the use of Amosite has been banned in most countries for several decades. However, at one time, it was the second most-commonly used type of asbestos, accounting for about 5% of the asbestos used in factories and buildings and was sometimes included for anti-condensation and acoustical purposes.
Crocidolite is a rare form of asbestos, bluish in color, and is highly resistant to chemicals. It’s believed to be the most lethal form of asbestos and was often used as a reinforcement material for plastics. In the mid-twentieth century, Crocidolite was also used in pre-formed thermal insulation and, prior to that, some yarns and rope lagging contained this form of asbestos.
Though the use of most asbestos products has long been banned in most developed countries, many buildings may still contain some form of this dangerous mineral. To learn more about the various types of asbestos and their uses, be sure to sign up for a free information packet, available from this site.
Source
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Mesothelioma Treatment | Other Sources
American Cancer Society
The "Cancer Information" section includes practical information on psychosocial issues affecting cancer patients. Topics range from home health care to pain control to managing grief.
CancerNet
Information from the National Institute of Health's PDQ database covers many specific cancers, featuring overviews and treatment options.
Center for Disease Control & Prevention
This Web site offers visitors a comprehensive database of data and statistics.
Oncolink
Created and maintained by the University of Pennsylvania, Oncolink offers information about all aspects of cancer for patients and families, from specific types of cancer to ways of coping to the newest information on treatments.
Mesothelioma and Cancer Books
Amazon.com
We have compiled a selection of the top 11 ranking cancer books based on research done through the American Cancer Society, IntelliHealth.com, Johns Hopkins University, Barnes & Noble and Amazon.com.
Source
The "Cancer Information" section includes practical information on psychosocial issues affecting cancer patients. Topics range from home health care to pain control to managing grief.
CancerNet
Information from the National Institute of Health's PDQ database covers many specific cancers, featuring overviews and treatment options.
Center for Disease Control & Prevention
This Web site offers visitors a comprehensive database of data and statistics.
Oncolink
Created and maintained by the University of Pennsylvania, Oncolink offers information about all aspects of cancer for patients and families, from specific types of cancer to ways of coping to the newest information on treatments.
Mesothelioma and Cancer Books
Amazon.com
We have compiled a selection of the top 11 ranking cancer books based on research done through the American Cancer Society, IntelliHealth.com, Johns Hopkins University, Barnes & Noble and Amazon.com.
Source
Articles & Abstracts
In an effort to answer the questions arising from having a diagnosis such as mesothelioma, this section provides abstracts and links to the most recent medical literature on mesothelioma. We are in the process of performing a systematic review of the literature between 1993 - 2004. We have excluded articles that were restricted to animal subjects and were not published in the English language. The criteria used in selecting studies were determined by an internal medicine epidemiologist. We will organize the articles according to their content in the categories described below.
Review Studies
These are articles reviewing the extensive literature on mesothelioma in an attempt to offer the most up-to-date answers on cause and diagnosis of mesothelioma and the most recent treatment options. While they are an excellent way to start an inquiry, they may not answer more specific questions, pertinent to the individual case.
Case Studies
A number of rare presentations of mesothelioma have been observed. Mesothelioma occurring in children, or mesothelioma affecting sites such as the heart, scrotum or the ovaries will be reviewed in case studies in this section. The rare issue of benign mesothelioma is also discussed.
Etiological Studies
This research attempts to define factors causing mesothelioma, such as most importantly, asbestos. They also analyze other environmental and occupational factors that affect the individual susceptibility for the development of mesothelioma.
Diagnostic studies
These articles may offer a comprehensive review of current diagnostic tools for mesothelioma, or they may analyze specific diagnostic approaches separately. They will also cover topics such as markers for the early recognition of the disease or its recurrence following therapy.
Therapy studies
This category will be the broadest, including articles describing new therapies for mesothelioma, comparing various types of therapies and discussing the outcomes following therapy. The most important aspects of the studies which will be highlighted in the commentary shall be: the type of patients analyzed, the form of therapy used and the outcome pursued by the investigators.
Source
Review Studies
These are articles reviewing the extensive literature on mesothelioma in an attempt to offer the most up-to-date answers on cause and diagnosis of mesothelioma and the most recent treatment options. While they are an excellent way to start an inquiry, they may not answer more specific questions, pertinent to the individual case.
Case Studies
A number of rare presentations of mesothelioma have been observed. Mesothelioma occurring in children, or mesothelioma affecting sites such as the heart, scrotum or the ovaries will be reviewed in case studies in this section. The rare issue of benign mesothelioma is also discussed.
Etiological Studies
This research attempts to define factors causing mesothelioma, such as most importantly, asbestos. They also analyze other environmental and occupational factors that affect the individual susceptibility for the development of mesothelioma.
Diagnostic studies
These articles may offer a comprehensive review of current diagnostic tools for mesothelioma, or they may analyze specific diagnostic approaches separately. They will also cover topics such as markers for the early recognition of the disease or its recurrence following therapy.
Therapy studies
This category will be the broadest, including articles describing new therapies for mesothelioma, comparing various types of therapies and discussing the outcomes following therapy. The most important aspects of the studies which will be highlighted in the commentary shall be: the type of patients analyzed, the form of therapy used and the outcome pursued by the investigators.
Source
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
