Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Asbestos and other fibrous minerals remain significant occupational and environmental concerns worldwide. Despite being effectively banned from commercial utilization in the Western world, asbestos is still produced and utilized in many countries. Exposure to so called “legacy” asbestos, still present in buildings and other objects and products, also causes concerns. This Professional Development Course (PDC) will present a framework for exposure assessment and risk characterization based on the most advanced methods and recently published models. We will show the applications of quantitative risk assessment for different situations that occupational and environmental health professionals worldwide may encounter. Examples will include potential exposure to erionite fibers during forestry activities; exposure to legacy asbestos in buildings with partially disturbed asbestos-containing materials; exposure of populations near current or former mines or other point sources such as former asbestos cement plants and shipyards; exposure during recreational activities at sites containing naturally occurring asbestos (NOA), and others. Participants will review the most recent scientific approaches to the pathogenesis and pathology of asbestos-associated diseases, important for hazard identification and a proper understanding of the health effects of asbestos. The most innovative approaches to asbestos exposure assessment will be characterized, including real time monitoring instruments, artificial intelligence tools, and exposure reconstruction from the lung burden levels. The PDC will be presented by the leading scientists in the area of asbestos risk assessment, known for their numerous peer-reviewed publications. As an added value, participants will be provided with copies of some of the most recent papers authored by the presenters, and the asbestos “risk calculator” for practical utilization.
Korchevskiy et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: