alogy, exposure assessment, public health, occupational safety and health, clinical medicine, industrial hygiene, biostatistics, and pulmonary medicine. The committee’s task was to provide a review of the scientific and technical quality of the January 2009 NIOSH revised draft document Asbestos Fibers and Other Elongated Mineral Particles: State of the Science and Roadmap for Research, with a focus on proposed research intended to clarify the relationship between health effects and the physical and chemical characteristics (e.g., mineralogy, morphology, dimensions, surface properties) of a wide range of elongate mineral particles.1 In particular, the committee was asked to address the following questions:

  • Is the document consistent with the state of scientific understanding of the toxicity, occupational exposures, epidemiology, and sampling or analytical methods? Should any of the content of this section be modified, based on the state of scientific understanding of these issues? Are there any significant studies that have been overlooked?

  • Does the document clearly and adequately explain the scientific rationale for research on the mineralogy, morphology, dimensions, and surface characteristics of elongate mineral particles, and is its treatment of this issue consistent with the state of scientific understanding of the toxicity, occupational exposures, and epidemiology of elongate mineral particles?

  • Does the document discuss the most significant issues regarding mineralogy, morphology, dimensions, and surface characteristics of elongate mineral particles? Should any of the discussed issues be omitted or revised, based on the state of scientific understanding of these issues? Are there any significant issues that should be added?

  • Is the research proposed likely to effectively address the most significant issues regarding mineralogy, morphology, dimensions, and surface characteristics of elongate mineral particles? Should any of the discussed research be omitted or revised, based on the state of scientific understanding of these issues? Is there any significant research that should be added?

1

The committee urges the use of the adjective elongate rather than elongated, so as to describe the physical appearance of the particles as opposed to implying that they have been actively lengthened by some means. The committee uses the term elongate hereafter in this report.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement