Report slams official complacency on UK work cancer epidemic

CANCER PREVENTION COALITION NEWS RELEASE

 [25 June 2007]

Work-related cancers will claim thousands of lives each year for a further working generation as a result of the “shocking complacency” of the government’s health and safety watchdog, a new report is warning. ‘Burying the evidence’ says the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has neither the resources nor the strategy to tackle the workplace carcinogen exposures killing at least 12,000 people each year.

The report, by Professors Andrew Watterson and Rory O’Neill of Stirling University’s Occupational and Environmental Health Research Group, says HSE’s action plan – unveiled at a London seminar on 25-26 June – omits a range of occupational cancers, grossly under-estimates the risks of others and excludes entirely some of the most high risk groups of workers.

“HSE’s recommendations for action range from complacent to non-existent,” says Professor Watterson. “Its evaluations on cancer causing substances including benzene, cadmium, diesel exhaust and wood dust are error-ridden, inadequate and outdated, whole categories of workers known to be at high risk are ignored, and HSE cannot quantify and continues to neglect the risk to women.”

Breast cancer, the major occupational and environmental cancer risk for women, “is entirely off HSE’s radar,” Professor Watterson says. “The net result of this shocking complacency will be needless exposures and avoidable deaths.”

The report puts the cost to the UK of occupational cancer deaths at between £29.5bn and £59bn a year. Preventing just 100 of these deaths a year would more than offset the entire annual HSE budget.

Report co-author Professor Rory O’Neill says: “HSE’s approach will do little or nothing to reduce either the volumes or the numbers of cancer-causing substances used in Britain’s workplaces. This guarantees a new working generation will face a preventable cancer risk.

“Asbestos still kills thousands every year and the epidemic has yet to peak. We are already seeing evidence of cancers in microelectronic workers, an industry just one working generation old, and it is anybody’s guess how work in the nanotech industry will impact on health.” Only a small proportion of industrial chemicals have been tested thoroughly for chronic health effects, he adds.

The report was prepared for the Cancer Prevention Coalition, an alliance of academics, trades unions and environmental and occupational cancer campaigners. Hilda Palmer of the Hazards Campaign, a member of the coalition, says: “Occupational cancer is not a disease of the boardroom – almost all the risk is borne by just one-fifth of the workforce. They are not told they are at risk, they are not provided health surveillance and they don’t get the early diagnosis that can be the difference between living and dying. They are not dying of ignorance; they are dying of neglect.”

‘Burying the evidence’ calls for “sunsetting” to phase out where possible many common workplace carcinogens, and a “Toxics Use Reduction” policy to help wean companies on to safer alternative substances and processes. These approaches have worked well elsewhere, and have been supported by both workplace and environmental health advocates and industry. The coalition says the UK government should recognise work-related cancers as a major public health priority.

Notes to editors

1. Burying the evidence: How the UK is prolonging the occupational cancer epidemic, by Professors Andrew Watterson and Rory O’Neill of Stirling University, can be viewed online at: www.hazards.org/cancer/hsecriticism

2. The Cancer Prevention Coalition is an alliance of safety campaign groups including the national Hazards Campaign www.hazardscampaign.org.uk, academics, unions and cancer and occupational disease support groups. It has produced an online Work Cancer Prevention Kit as part of a global “Occupational cancer/Zero cancer” campaign.

3. The Health and Safety Executive’s occupational cancer seminar is on 25-26 June 2007 at the Kensington Close Hotel, Wrights Lane, London W8 5SP

Advertisements

One Response to Report slams official complacency on UK work cancer epidemic

  1. Dannie Camburn says:

    Interesting to read this article, as not but a few weeks ago I wrote a letter to the Swindon Advertiser (after various letters about Health & Safety at work appered in their pages), which I mentioned that a certain engineering company in Swindon (No names mentioned) was using a certain toxic cleaning chemical, and many of the people who worked around this area, have either become seriously ill or died of strange cancer like diseases. I did complain to the management and the union at the time, but my claims were rubbished and my complaints were totally ignored. If I can I will add the letter under this one.

    Having read the letter of Mrs J Banks (SA 26/5/07) “You must speak up:” I feel that I would like to add a few comments as to why Mr Peter Barker might not have made any complaints about the hazardous conditions at his place of work. In the late 1980s, and early 1990s, I worked in a certain engineering factory in Cheney Manor Industrial Estate. In this factory they used a metal cleaning substance called TRICHLOROETHYLENE (TRIKE), and on many occasions you could breathe in a lung-full of this head-clearing noxious odour. So, being a person with a bit of a conscience, I made several complaints to the management and the union, who then completely dismissed my concerns about health and safety at work. I also tried to convince some of the workers that this wasn’t a good substance to be inhaling, and all they did was ridicule me. Well, here we are some 10 years or more later, and now it is well known that trichloroethylene can cause impaired heart-function. Nerve, liver, kidney damage, and even death, but to a fair number of these people who worked in and around the proximity of the trichloroethylene cleaning area, these facts will be of no use whatsoever, because they have already met their fate, and many of them were years off of their retirement.
    Now I’m not saying that this substance was the main cause for all of the illnesses and immature deaths of these people, but I can sympathise with Mr Peter Barker for not pursuing his complaints further, if all he would be met by is threats with the sack and ridicule by his work colleagues. After all, we’ve all got to die of something, whether it be asbestosis, intoxication, or even someone else’s cigarette smoke.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: