From the News

Micro Plastic in our Homes

Click HERE for the latest research showing that the micro plastics are not just in our water but also in the air in our homes.


Asbestos main cause of rising workplace deaths

Eric Beauchesne
The Ottawa Citizen

Nearly five Canadians, on average, died every working day last year from a work-related accident or illness, according to a report that expresses “grave concern” that such deaths are rising, not falling, as they are in most other industrialized countries.

“We have also linked the increase in workplace deaths in Canada to asbestos exposure,” says the Centre for the Study of Living Standards report, released today, which is critical of Canada’s continued mining, use, and export of a substance many countries have banned.

Canada earlier this year reportedly blocked efforts by other nations to have asbestos placed on an international list of banned substances. Quebec is the only province that still produces asbestos and that output is mostly exported to underdeveloped countries.

Asbestos-related deaths accounted for 62 per cent of those from occupational diseases and 30 per cent of total workplace fatalities in 2004, the most recent year for which there are full figures, the report says.

“The increased fatality rate from asbestos, up from 0.4 per 100,000 workers in 1996 to 1.8 in 2004, accounted for the lion’s share of the increased incidence from occupational disease,” it says.

It warns that while most of the deaths due to asbestos date back to exposure before the implementation of stricter controls, the number of work-related deaths due to the substance has still not likely peaked.

NDP MP Pat Martin, a former asbestos miner, expressed shock at the increase in workplace deaths and the role of asbestos in that increase, and anger at the Canadian government’s support for the asbestos industry.

“Asbestos is the greatest industrial killer the world has ever known,” said the Manitoba MP, who still undergoes annual tests on his scarred lungs.

“And Canada is in complete denial of the health risks.”

The Quebec asbestos mines are mostly located in economically depressed areas.

“We’re still the second-largest producer and exporter of asbestos in the world but we won’t say ‘boo’ because all the mines are in Quebec,” Mr. Martin said. “It’s appalling.”

The industry is a money loser but is subsidized by the federal government, a subsidy which Mr. Martin said was just doubled. According to government documents, federal payments to the Asbestos Institute rose to $250,000 this fiscal year from $125,000 last year.

The contribution is to “foster the international implementation of the safe and responsible use of chrysotile asbestos.” A call to the office of Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn was not returned yesterday.

The report, meanwhile, notes that 557, or 50.8 per cent of the deaths, were from occupational diseases, and 491 or 44.8 per cent were from accidents.

Information collected by the Association of Workers’ Compensation Boards of Canada reveals 1,097 workplace fatalities in Canada in 2005, up from 758 in 1993, the report says. The incidence of such work-related deaths has also increased over that period to 6.8 per 100,000 last year from 5.9 in 1993.

“This upward trend is disturbing,” it says. “It lies in contrast to a decline in the rate in the 1976-1993 period in Canada and to a fall in almost all other OECD countries over the 1993-2003 period.”

“As Canadians work on average 230 days per year, this means that there were nearly five work-related deaths per work day in this country,” it said.

The rate is “unacceptably high,” it says, adding that “Canada can do much better.”

The increase in the incidence of workplace deaths was almost entirely driven by an increase in occupational diseases, although workplace fatalities also rose, which may reflect an increase in the proportion of workers in high-risk industries such as construction, it says.

International figures are not fully comparable because, unlike Canada, some countries don’t include occupational deaths, or put time limits on the ones they include, and some don’t include traffic accidents while on the job.

“Nevertheless, even if one fully adjusted for definitional differences, it is very unlikely that Canada would emerge as a low workplace fatality country relative to its peers,” it says.

If one compares only the workplace fatality rate from accidents, the latest figures suggest the United States, with 4.0 per 100,000, has a higher rate than Canada’s 3.0, it says.

“However, a comparison of trends … shows greater improvement in the United States than Canada,” it says, noting the rate in the U.S. has fallen while the rate here has edged up.

And the rate in Canada was well above that in nine other industrial countries, it adds.

Other findings include:

– The most dangerous industry is fishing and trapping with 52 fatalities per 100,000 workers, followed by mining, quarrying and oil rigging at 46.9; logging and forestry at 33.3; and construction at 20.2.

– The least dangerous industry was finance and insurance with only 0.3 fatalities per 100,000.

– The most dangerous occupations are the trades, transport and equipment operators, and related occupations with 21.3 workplace deaths per 100,000 workers, followed by those unique to the primary industries, at 16.9, and those involved in processing, manufacturing, and utilities at 8.2, while all other major group occupations had a fatality rate less than three per 100,000.

– Men, with 12.4 deaths per 100,000 workers, are 30 times more likely to die on the job than women.

– Older workers are also much more likely to experience a workplace-related fatality (114.8 per 100,000 for those aged 65 and over) than younger workers.

– Newfoundland has by far the highest provincial rate of workplace fatalities with 11.7 per 100,000, which is nearly double the national average, and a situation which prevailed throughout the 1993-2005 period. British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Alberta had the next highest rates, while Prince Edward Island, Manitoba, and New Brunswick had the lowest.

© The Ottawa Citizen

Most Polluted Metropolitan Areas and Counties

Table 1: People at Risk In 25 U.S. Cities Most Polluted by Short-Term Particle Pollution (24-Hour PM2.5)

2005 Rank Metropolitan
Statistical Areas
Total Population
1 Los Angeles
Long Beach
Riverside, CA
17,262,730
2 Fresno-
Madera,CA
850,325
3 Bakersfield,CA 713,087
4 Pittsburgh-
New Castle,PA
2,503,738
5 Eugene-
Springfield,OR
330,527
6 Salt Lake
City-Ogden-
Clearfield,UT
1,536,187
7 Sacramento-
Arden-Arcade-
Truckee, CA-NV
2,115,019
8 Cleveland-
Akron-
Elyria,OH
2,944,276
9 Visalia-
Porterville,CA
390,791
10 Birmingham-
Hoover-Cullman,AL
1,150,916
11 Detroit-
Warren-
Flint,MI
5,415,338
12 Washington-
Baltimore-
Northern
Virginia,DC-
MD-VA-WV
7,910,633
13 Louisville-
Elizabethtown-
Scottsburg,KY-IN
1,323,199
13 Chicago-
Naperville-
Michigan
City,IL-IN-WI
9,549,014
15 Provo-
Orem,UT
406,851
15 Hanford-
Corcoran,CA
138,564
17 Weirton-
Steubenville, WV-OH
128,569
18 Cincinnati-
Middletown-
Wilmington,OH-KY-IN
2,089,089
19 Modesto,CA 492,233
20 Philadelphia-
Camden-
Vineland,PA-
NJ-DE-MD
5,922,253
20 San Diego-
Carlsbad-San
Marcos,CA
2,930,886
22 Allentown-
Bethlehem-
Easton, PA-NJ
768,036
23 San Jose-San
Francisco-
Oakland,CA
7,154,350
24 Harrisburg-
Carlisle-
Lebanon,PA
640,120
25 New York-
Newark-
Bridgeport,NY-
NJ-CT-PA
21,766,731

Table 2: People at Risk In 25 U.S. Cities Most Polluted by Year-Round Particle Pollution (Annual PM2.5)

2005 Rank Metropolitan
Statistical Areas
Total Population
1 Los Angeles-
Long Beach-
Riverside,CA
17,262,730
2 Bakersfield,CA 713,087
3 Visalia-
Porterville,CA
390,791
4 Pittsburgh-New
Castle,PA
2,503,738
5 Fresno-
Madera,CA
850,325
6 Detroit-Warren-
Flint,MI
5,415,338
7 Hanford-
Corcoran,CA
138,564
8 Cleveland-Akron-
Elyria,OH
2,944,276
9 Atlanta-Sandy
Springs-
Gainesville,GA
4,929,880
10 Weirton-
Steubenville,
WV-OH
128,569
10 Cincinnati-
Middletown-
Wilmington,
OH-KY-IN
2,089,089
12 New York-
Newark-
Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA
21,766,731
12 Chicago-
Naperville-
Michigan City,IL-IN-WI
9,549,014
14 St. Louis-St.
Charles-
Farmington,MO-IL
2,793,856
15 Canton-
Massillon,OH
407,118
15 Birmingham-
Hoover-Cullman,AL
1,150,916
17 Charleston,WV 306,836
18 York-Hanover-
Gettysburg,PA
491,375
18 Merced,CA 231,574
18 Lancaster,PA 482,775
21 Louisville-
Elizabethtown-
Scottsburg,KY-IN
1,323,199
22 Indianapolis-
Anderson-
Columbus,IN
1,912,560
22 Columbus-
Marion-
Chillicothe,OH
1,900,497
24 Washington-
Baltimore-
Northern
Virginia,DC-MD-VA-WV
7,910,633
24 Huntington-
Ashland,WV-KY-OH
286,517

Table 3: People at Risk In 25 Counties Most Polluted by Short-Term Particle Pollution (24-Hour PM2.5)

2005 Rank County State Total Population
1 Riverside CA 1,782,650
2 Fresno CA 850,325
3 Kern CA 713,087
4 Los Angeles CA 9,871,506
5 Allegheny PA 1,261,303
6 San Bernardino CA 1,859,678
7 Lane OR 330,527
8 Orange CA 2,957,766
9 Salt Lake UT 924,247
10 Sacramento CA 1,330,711
11 Cuyahoga OH 1,363,888
12 Tulare CA 390,791
13 Jefferson AL 658,141
14 Klamath OR 64,769
15 Wayne MI 2,028,778
16 Baltimore City MD 628,670
17 Lake IN 487,476
17 Jefferson KY 699,017
19 Kings CA 138,564
19 Utah UT 398,059
21 Jefferson OH 71,888
21 Cook IL 5,351,552
23 Hamilton OH 823,472
24 Stanislaus CA 492,233
25 Philadelphia PA 1,479,339
25 San Diego CA 2,930,886

Table 4: People at Risk In 25 Counties Most Polluted by Short-Term Particle Pollution (24-Hour PM2.5)

2005 Rank County ST Total Population
1 Riverside CA 1,782,650
2 San Bernardino CA 1,859,678
3 Los Angeles CA 9,871,506
4 Kern CA 713,087
5 Tulare CA 390,791
6 Allegheny PA 1,261,303
7 Fresno CA 850,325
8 Wayne MI 2,028,778
9 Orange CA 2,957,766
10 Kings CA 138,564
11 Cuyahoga OH 1,363,888
12 Fulton GA 818,322
13 Hamilton OH 823,472
13 Jefferson OH 71,888
15 Lake IN 487,476
15 New York NY 1,564,798
17 Madison IL 261,689
18 Hancock WV 31,742
19 Cook IL 5,351,552
19 Jefferson AL 658,141
19 Stark OH 377,519
22 Scioto OH 77,453
23 Kanawha WV 195,413
24 Merced CA 231,574
24 Lancaster PA 482,775
24 York PA 394,919