Malignant mesothelioma in females: the institutional failure by WHO and IARC to protect public health

Author:

Baur Xaver1ORCID,Frank Arthur L.2ORCID,Magnani Corrado3,Oliver L. Christine4ORCID,Soskolne Colin L.5ORCID

Affiliation:

1. European Society for Environmental and Occupational Medicine, University of Hamburg, Berlin, Germany

2. Dornsife School of Public Health of Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

3. University of Eastern Piedmont, Italy

4. University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

5. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

Abstract

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is a highly aggressive and difficult-to-diagnose tumor that is almost always caused by asbestos or other asbestiform fibers. Chapter 2 in the Fourth (2015) and Fifth (2021) Editions of the WHO/IARC Classification of Tumours is devoted to the classification and pathologic diagnosis of MM. The authors of these Chapters state that most of the cases of MM in females do not show asbestos as the cause when, in fact, the epidemiologic literature shows that the risk of MM in females exposed to asbestos approaches that in males. While it is correct that the overall incidence of MM in females is lower than in males, the view that MM in females is not caused by asbestos is unsupported. This view results from an inadequate occupational history, the failure to recognize the importance of environmental exposures, and the misrepresentation of published literature by the selection of limited literature and biased bibliographies, often by authors with financial conflicting interests. In this article, we present an example of the institutional failure (1) to protect the public health by permitting the publication of inaccurate statements about the adverse health effects of exposure to asbestos among females, and (2) to make suggested corrections that more accurately reflect reality. Responsibility for correcting the misinformation lies, in our assessment, both with the authors of the erroneous statements and with the editors and publisher of the books that contain these statements. At issue is nothing less than scientific accuracy, the fate of at-risk females for whom early diagnosis could result in improved health outcome, a missed opportunity to promote primary and secondary prevention, and the social injustice of the loss of compensation for females so affected. We describe the steps that we took to correct the inaccuracies, and to expose the dereliction of duty among responsible parties based, at least in part, on what we believe to be undisclosed conflicting interests. Our efforts failed.

Publisher

Hamilton Publishing Inc

Subject

General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science

Reference69 articles.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3