The prevalence of asbestos, especially through the mid-1970s, has put millions of Americans at risk for mesothelioma, a painful, usually lethal cancer almost always related to asbestos exposure. Among the hardest hit are U.S. veterans who were exposed occupationally, especially in Navy ships and shipyards.

According to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, there are currently 25 million living individuals who have served in the United States’ armed forces. It is believed that a great number of them were exposed to toxic asbestos-containing materials during military service.

Every ship and shipyard built by the Navy before the mid-70s was fitted with numerous asbestos-containing materials. These materials were extensively used in engine and boiler rooms and other areas below deck for fire safety purposes, as well as in other areas of the ship. In fact, virtually no portion of a naval ship was asbestos-free between the 1930s and mid-1970s.

Unfortunately, veterans have little recourse when diagnosed with mesothelioma they believe to be the result of asbestos exposure during their time of service. Because asbestos use was so widespread before the first bans in the 1970s, it is very difficult for veterans to prove that asbestos exposure occurred only in military service.

Veterans are not legally allowed to seek compensation for mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases from the U.S. government through the court system. Ailing veterans must file a claim against the asbestos manufacturer, and they also have the legal option to seek assistance through The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

The VA is a government-run benefit system that is responsible for administering benefit programs to veterans, their families, and survivors. It is an incredibly complex system that comprises the second-largest federal department, after the Department of Defense. A search of the organization’s web site turns up no information about asbestos or mesothelioma. However, there are some organizations, such as Veterans Assistance Network (www.va-claim-help.com), that can help veterans wade through the VA benefits system.

Lung cancer is usually an indolent cancer that takes years to develop, thus the burden of treatment is falling most heavily on the VA. Late stage lung cancer is twice as costly to treat as early stage.

In February the Lung Cancer Alliance (LCA) announced that for the second year in row a coalition of top veteran organizations is calling for a screening program for veterans at high risk of lung cancer, to be included in the Independent Budget for Fiscal Year 2009 (FY09). This highly regarded comprehensive alternative budget addresses the most urgent needs of veterans, and urges Congress and the Department of Veterans Affairs to initiate a $3 million pilot screening program for veterans at high risk.

The AMVETS, Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America and the Veterans of Foreign wars are the four co-authors of this document. More than 50 organizations support the Independent Budget.

A research program carried out by the International Early Lung Cancer Action Program at 40 centers in 26 states and 6 foreign countries during the past 13 years indicates that CT screening can detect lung cancer at Stage 1 in 85 percent of cases, and those treated immediately had a 10-year survival rate of 92 percent. By partnering with these types of programs, the Veterans Administration could quickly implement a pilot screening program for veterans at high risk, with a broad geographic reach and significant cost savings.

Rear Admiral Philip J. Coady, USN, (Ret.), chairman of LCA’s Board of Directors said, “Lung cancer continues to kill more men and women every year than all the other major cancers – breast, prostate, and colon – combined, and our veterans are at even higher risk, especially those whose active duty service exposed them to Agent Orange, asbestos, spent nuclear fuels, propellant gases and other carcinogens.”

Admiral Coady, a 34-year Navy veteran who never smoked, was diagnosed with lung cancer three years ago.

“Because there are usually no specific symptoms, most people are diagnosed so late they die within a year,” he pointed out. “Yet advanced CT technology that can diagnose lung cancer at its earliest, most curable stage is available right now, and high-risk veterans not benefiting from this is wrong,” he said.

Sources: asbestos.com, VAWatchdog.org

• Mesothelioma – General Information
• Symptoms
• Diagnosis
• NEW Developments in Diagnosis
• Risk Factors
• Other Asbestos Related Cancer

(more…)

As I’ve been researching the topic of Mesothelioma and asbestos-related cancer and disease for this blog, I’ve been really disturbed by something.

Searches, news alerts, links – they invariably take me to stories written by the British media and posted to UK web sites and publications. The Press Association, the BBC, WebWire – just TODAY they had three stories about asbestos-related disease.

Stories urged workers likely to come in contact with asbestos to use precautions, wear protective clothing including filtered breathing units. Britain is having Mesothelioma Awareness Day Feb. 27.

Where is our news? Where is our information? The only time anyone in America has ever heard of Mesothelioma is when a loved one is shocked by a diagnosis.

Oh, and there is another time people hear about it. On commercials for law firms, which can tend to generate skepticism, scoffing, a sense that someone is trying to gain from someone else’s misfortune. Is that the truth?

The web site Asbestos.com recently talked to a professor of ethics at Washington University School of Law, Peter Joy. He said that asbestos lawsuits have, in fact, sparked many criticisms of the legal profession, and questions about the ethics of soliciting for clients.

But, he said, those who have suffered because of asbestos exposure have a different view of the situation. For many, faced with mounting medical costs, the right to bring suit against the companies responsible for their illness is their only recourse.

But shouldn’t they have known the danger their job might be posing? some ask.

Joy says no. He points out that the asbestos industry and others who knew and understood the dangers of asbestos to their workers and to the public showed complete callous disregard for general safety.

The Mesothelioma Information and Resource Group estimates that the connection between asbestos exposure and lung cancer was noted as early as 1925, and confirmed over the next 70 years. But, Joy says, the industry buried information about the dangers and hazards in the interest of maintaining higher profits.

Remember that the incubation period of Mesothelioma and other asbestos-related cancers is a long one, remaining latent in those exposed for 30 to 40 years. By the time the dangers of asbestos were told to the public, it was too late for many people.

Even now, asbestos is still not even completely banned in the U.S.

Asbestos litigators, Joy points out, have actually been responsible for raising public awareness about asbestos and mesothelioma. The result is that people have more information, and they are alert to their risk level. They seek early screening, which may save their life.

We certainly don’t see these stories in our media. Maybe a blip here, or a brief story here, then it’s gone again. People in the U.S. assume asbestos is yesterday’s worry. Surely that was years ago, right? That was fixed, wasn’t it?

Who else is going to help asbestos disease sufferers beat this drum, when the still-real danger has been so effectively swept under the rug?

Joy summarizes that it’s hard to fault methods and measures that bring about awareness, and help people in desperate need find a little bit of justice, whatever cold comfort that might bring.

I was excited to read a report today on www.asbestos.com (which, by the way, is an excellent source for news related to mesothelioma) (look for them in my blogroll) regarding a recently published report in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that has hope for new, earlier detection of mesothelioma.

One of the difficulties in diagnosing mesothelioma is that it affects the tissues of the lining between the chest wall and the lungs. As a result, often, by the time the mesothelioma is detected with more traditional methods such as physical exams, x-rays, CT scans and surgical biopsies, it’s in advanced and untreatable stages.

But three new, less invasive, endoscopic procedures are proving to have better results at identifying mesothelioma. The report explains that each of these new procedures uses an endoscope to remove tissues or fluids with a fine needle. The three procedures are listed as transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA), endobronchial ultra-sound guided fine needle aspiration (EBUS-FNA), and transesophegeal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNA).

Studies are now being done to compare the findings among these three methods to determine which is the most sensitive for detecting the presence of cancerous cells in the lymph nodes of the chest. The journal says tests involved 138 patients in the U.S. believed to have lung cancer, all of whom underwent all three procedures in sequence. According to the report, the results of the study show the following:

• 30 % (42) of the patients had malignant lymph nodes
• EBUS-FNA detected 29 of the cancers. TBNA detected 15.
• EUS-FNA and EBUS-FNA used in combination detected 93% of the cancers! The combination also was able to detect malignancies in patiens who would not have been identified by CT scans of the chest.

In addition to the better results, the less-invasive procedures tend to better overall for patients, presenting less risk than more traditional surgical methods.

This study is referenced under Wallace, M, Pascual, J, Raimondo, M, et al. Minimally invasive endoscopic staging of suspected lung cancer. Journal of American Medical Association. 2008. 299(5) 540-546

To read the article in its entirety, visit http://www.asbestos.com/news/endoscopy-shows-promise-for-detecting-mesothelioma.html