EPA is now allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

a reply to: angeldoll

Yeah.
Would not be out with the realms of possibilities ... that was at least one of the topics during their Helsinki tete a tete

a reply to: cosmickat

Hush money. " Buy our asbestos, and I'll keep my mouth shut."

HOW MUCH LONGER are the republicans going to tolerate this secret meeting?
I heard today the CIA will try to obtain information about that meeting though "other means".

CIA means. heh. They believe the Russians have a tape.

Off topic, but anyway. I've personally had enough of this secrecy, and it's obviously not good news, or he would have been gloating about it by now.

a reply to: angeldoll

I am of the same mind.
Normally...he just can't wait to get to flapping his big mouth and tiny hands ...heh.. about the amazing deals he has just made with [ insert appropriate world leader's name ] ....How fantastic it is gonna be for jobs/ economy / trade etc
But after meeting Putin...zip.
Doesn't follow his usual pattern of boasting and blabbing.
Makes you wonder.

Also....you just have to believe that there were recordings made of that meeting ! For sure !
KGB.CIA. NSA...jeezo..they will all have a copy.

a reply to: Zcustosmorum

In that instance, the dust from a myriad of products, some deemed dangerous and regulated and some not could pose a danger.

Asbestos is no longer mined in this country and products it is used in are regulated themselves. Thousands of products fall under the same what if type scenarios and some even more dangerous.

Looking in my garage right now, I know some chemicals I have stored for pool care could create danger for the entire neighborhood if disposed improperly or misused.

We just didn't know of all the dangers when asbestos first came in use. Now more precautions are taken and the products it used in are varied like fireproof clothes but controlled.

The courts ruled long ago that the ban was illegal for products that historically used asbestos and overturned EPA regulations almost 30 years ago. New products are regulated and asbestos cannot be used.

This is not just an American issue, asbestos is used worldwide and it is continued to be used. 55 countries have some sort of ban on it's use but all still import products that use it, and most every country that bans it has exceptions.

Notable exceptions that still permit asbestos use are China, Russia, India, Brazil, Canada and the United States.

www.asbestosnation.org...

a reply to: cosmickat

What exactly are you missing ? Has TDS harmed people so much that no longer can they even think. Trump has zero to do with asbestos remaining legal.

When we learned of the dangers of the product the EPA stepped in. Mining of this product inside the US is no longer occurring.

When the EPA established a ban, it was challenged in court. The 5th circuit in New Orleans overturned the ban on all product's which have a historical use of asbestos. Any new products cannot use asbestos.

The only change to EPA rules is that they will no longer evaluate asbestos currently in homes. Unless the product is damaged or there is a remodel, there is no need to evaluate it. It's expensive, unnecessary and dangerous.

Since some seem to live or die by Snopes, here is what they say.

www.snopes.com/fact-check/is-epa-allowing-asbestos-products/

And the review of new asbestos use in products started under President Obama and continues under the Trump administration.

a reply to: DJMSN

I think what you are missing is the fact that Russia....yeah those guys.....are shipping out sheets of abestos to the US on pallets printed with " Trump is on our side "

Do you not think that in itself is significant.

If Trump has nothing to fo with this deal...why is the Asbestos plant in Russia going to the trouble of printing his face all over their shipments ?

I already linked the article on the previous page.
I don't think my comment missed anything.


From your snopes quote :

The problem, according to critics, is twofold. The first, more generally, is that the EPA could have used the currently unfolding overhaul of the TSCA — which began at the end of the Obama administration and has continued along a very different path under Trump — to ban any new uses of asbestos, something that had been the case at the end of the last administration. Instead, they are explicitly allowing new uses,  but with the caveat that the EPA first evaluate possible potential new uses based on “risk evaluation, select studies, and use the best available science.”
The second problem, more specifically, concerns the way in which the EPA has proposed to evaluate that risk. In May 2018, the EPA published a document known as the “Problem Formulation of the Risk Evaluation for Asbestos,” which establishes the scientific approach the EPA will take in evaluating these new uses. Significantly, their approach will not include information from existing, or “legacy” uses of asbestos, despite the significant body of work around health risks stemming from those uses:

So basically..Trump's administration has changed the direction of abestos control and evaluation from that of the previous administration's direction. And not in a good way.
I think you forgot to read the snopes assessment.

fact check
ps
What is TDS ?

a reply to: cosmickat

Trump Derangement Syndrome. Seriously, did you even read about asbestos? It has been imported for years, Trump didn't have anything to do with that.

I get it you don't like Trump. The rule proposal is a continuation of an Obama era EPA overhaul. The only real difference I can see is that some new products will be allowed to use asbestos after a review.

These new products are actually improvements to older products that still use asbestos. Nothing to do with Russia. They are the largest producer but the US is far from the largest user, that title falls to Thailand.

Asbestos was never banned from use in the US only new products made using asbestos. Read the Snopes article about it, it still rips Trump so you will enjoy it

a reply to: DJMSN

I just did read it ! Heh
You clearly still did not. Or you are in denial

Half of my reply to you even included quotes from it ! Haha

Yeah
One of us has TDS
It's not me ! Lol

Just to say..I didnt see any claim..anywhere ...that US was the biggest importer of Russian asbestos

a reply to: cosmickat

Well to be clear, it was a joke about TDS, no offense intended. And I did read the Snopes article as it was included in one of my post as well.

Didn't mean to imply you claimed that the US was the largest importer, just trying to show that the US really doesn't import much, about 700 metric tons per year.

The biggest user is some company that uses it in making chlorine. Trump has a plethora of other items he could have traded with Putin, like uranium but someone beat him to that already.

Yes, there is a rule proposal but really doesn't change a whole lot, mostly standards. Still a very regulated product and it has never been banned as some have said. They tried but the courts said nope. And perhaps why the new rules or eval will not include the info on legacy use is that it's not really used like use to be so those figures could distort outcomes, just a thoughtn

There are so many things that one could hang on Trump that this proposal is just really not the big one.

I don't agree with everything he has said or done, but have yet to agree with a President on everything. Not really looking for a big political spat over this one just think it's kind of silly to tie this to Putin's meeting. And really was only joking about the TDS so don't hate me

a reply to: DJMSN

I don't hate you ...not at all.

I am not at all offended..mot even slightly.
ATS over the last couple of years has made us all grow thicker skins.

It's in our nature to try and connect the dots..follow the money etc that is why most of us landed on this particular forum !
We don't always have to fall all the way into the rabbit hole. Just like most ..I am interested in where these crazy days are going to lead us.

I try not to get into political spats. But I do have opinions...and I will express them from time to time

Thanks you #ers. Give the big cheetoh an extra dick sucking for me.

You lot should all be forced to go live on fracking zones or something similar. But keep blaming Obama.

a reply to: dug88

THIS IS SICKENING,

LISTEN BACK IN THE DAY MY HUSBAND DID ALL THEY NAVY SHIPS ECT . THEY THE GOV HAS A FIX FOR THIS. THEY CAME UP WITH THIZSTUFF YOU SPRAY OVER THE ASBESTOS , THAT NETRALIZES THE # FROM BEING LETHAL, AND THEY WOULDNT ALLOW IT . THERE IS A FIX SO ITS NOT LETHAL TRUST ME , ILL ASK MY HUBBY WHAT IT WAS EXACTLY AND REPOST! ALSO THE GOV. WASHED THEIR HANDS OF ANY LIABILITY TO RLATED DEATHS ECT. SO MY HUSBANDS COMPANY INSURANCE IS THE ONE , WELL THERE ARE A FEW INS. COMPANIES WHO ARE THE ONES PAYING THESE PEOPLE FOR THE LOSS OF LOVED ONES NOT THE DANG GOV. THOS E ADS U SEE THAT SAY YTHE GOV HAS SET ASIDE , BULLSNAPS ! THAT # TOOK MY HUSBANDS FATHER AND GRAND DAD WHO STARTEX BUSINESS 88 YRS AGO.. MY HUSBAND IS 67 YRS OLD AND AS OF NOW HAS NOT BEEN EFFECTED WITH ASBESTOS. THANK YOU .....IT CREATOR 😆

originally posted by: Zcustosmorum
a reply to: dug88

My mother died of mesothelioma, and this decision proves to me just how far the greedy scum will go in order to make more $$$. When we have a society that values cash more than human life, well I shouldn't need to tell you

I wonder why we dont just allow companies to use depleted uranium for making baby food formula containers. What could possibly go wrong.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: SlapMonkey

This is a knee jerk reaction from people that have no clue what they are talking about. I have used and handled the product in the past and it can be done safely. Now that we know what the danger is there are procedures for using it safely.

Some people will take any opportunity to attack something simply because Trump stole their lunch money or some other pathetic reason.

And we know from the history of man that there will be many cases where it will not be handled properly and many will pay the price.

a reply to: Metallicus

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's only harmful if airborne, correct? Knowing that, it seems as if the manufacturing process could negate the ability (or easy ability) for it to become airborne, therefore mitigating the vast majority of its danger.

Our technologies have advanced by leaps and bounds since the last time that asbestos was used for construction (and other) equipment. If it can be manufactured safely into a product that is, when used correctly, safe for the worker to handle, then I don't see the issue anymore.

Asbestos related cancers kill 12,000 to 15,000 people every year in the U.S.

www.asbestosnation.org...

a reply to: angeldoll

According to its estimates, 40,200people died in accidents involving motor vehicles in 2016, a 6 percent rise from the year before.

www.nytimes.com...

Ban cars I guess. Asbestos is used in break pads so I guess we can tie asbestos to the car deaths too.

originally posted by: DJMSN
a reply to: angeldoll

According to its estimates, 40,200people died in accidents involving motor vehicles in 2016, a 6 percent rise from the year before.

www.nytimes.com...

Ban cars I guess. Asbestos is used in break pads so I guess we can tie asbestos to the car deaths too.

A Strawman counter-argument of no value to the discussion. Angeldoll's link specifically states 'Those figures are based on a review of federal records of deaths from diseases caused exclusively by asbestos, plus a calculation using a formula developed by international cancer researchers to estimate the number of lung cancer deaths likely caused by asbestos (CDC 2015, McCormack 2012).'

originally posted by: DJMSN
a reply to: angeldoll

According to its estimates, 40,200people died in accidents involving motor vehicles in 2016, a 6 percent rise from the year before.

www.nytimes.com...

Ban cars I guess. Asbestos is used in break pads so I guess we can tie asbestos to the car deaths too.

They no longer use asbestos in brake linings and have not for over 15 years

asbestos in motor vehicles

a reply to: Wayfarer

Not claiming that asbestos does not cause deaths. Every product causes deaths, as my point with how cars are responsible for more deaths than asbestos exposure. Since cars cause more death so should we not ban cars too ?

The title of the thread is wrong since asbestos has never been banned before. As i have already posted, the EPA attempted to ban abestos products but those rules were overturned by a circuit court in New Orleans.

It is and will continue to be a highly regulated product. We did not know of the danger abestos presented when the mineral first came into use, largely as an insulator in ship building.

What the EPA is proposing is to no longer use the earlier statistics on asbestos use but to instead adopt newer and more relevant information and how asbestos is still used today, under tough regulations and with much more knowledge.

Believe it or not, the court ruling allowed products which used asbestos historically to continue its use but no new products could make use of asbestos properties. The EPA continues to regulate asbestos and has continued to publish new regulations on it's use.

This was another attempt to sledge hammer the Trump administration as the bad guy. The changes started during Obama's administration and while they are regulations going different directions, they are only proposals and based on the new information and statistics instead of 35 to 40 year old information.

There are some safe uses of asbestos such as in cement fiber board where it is contained in the product itself. This is for fireproofing. There are other uses as well. Nothing is 100% and I know people who died from exposure to the product when we didn't know as much.

So it is not my intention to defend a dangerous product but instead correct the record. It was never banned by the EPA and it's not another evil move by Trump in some secret deal with the Russians as others have stated. It is a proposal to update regulations with new guidelines, and to yes continue regulations