Arctic drilling: UK 'complacent', say MPs

The MPs have renewed their calls for an Arctic environmental sanctuary Continue reading the main story Related Stories Arctic methane 'economic time bomb' Stop-gap action urged on climate Refusal over Arctic drilling ban The UK is "complacently standing by" as firms start drilling for oil and gas in the Arctic, a group of MPs has said. The Environmental Audit Committee said this was despite oil companies being unable to prove "they could clean up an oil spill in such harsh conditions". Members renewed their call for a halt to new drilling, saying it was risky for the climate and the environment. The government said it was not its place to tell Arctic states which resources they could extract. Last month, the International Energy Agency (IEA) warned that two-thirds of existing fossil fuel reserves cannot be burned before 2050 if global temperatures are to be kept within the projected danger threshold of a 2C rise. 'Corporate carve-up' Exploring for new reserves in the Arctic is therefore "needlessly risky", the MPs argued. Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote What happens in the Arctic will affect the UK, impacting our weather systems and biodiversity” EAC chairwoman Joan Walley The committee's report follows its call in September for a halt on drilling for oil and gas in the Arctic until safety is improved, citing fears that a spill could caused unprecedented environmental damage. MPs said they wanted to see a standard pan-Arctic spill response, unlimited liability for firms and an Arctic environmental sanctuary. "What happens in the Arctic will affect the UK, impacting our weather systems and biodiversity," committee chairwoman Joan Walley said. "Yet this government is complacently standing by and watching new oil and gas drilling in the region." She added: "The rapidly-disappearing Arctic sea ice should be a wake-up call for this government to tackle climate change, not pave the way for a corporate carve-up of the region's resources." A government spokesman said it disagreed with the call for a moratorium. "We are very aware of the possible environmental impact of an oil spill in the Arctic and support the use of the highest drilling standards," he said. "However, the UK is not an Arctic state and it is not for us to tell other countries which resources they can and cannot extract from their own sovereign territory." He stressed that the government believed "our approach to oil and gas exploration in the Arctic is consistent with our commitment to limit average global temperature increase to two degrees". And he added: "The UK does have strong environmental, economic, scientific and political interests in the Arctic and this summer we will be publishing an Arctic policy framework for the first time." 'Pristine environment' But Greenpeace UK political director Ruth Davis said drilling for oil in the Arctic was "incompatible with the UK's climate change goals and creates unmanageable risks to a unique and vulnerable ecosystem". She said that while minsters claimed "protecting this pristine environment is central to the UK's stance on the Arctic" a failure "to face up to the dangers of drilling in the far north suggests its real interests lie in promoting the irresponsible plans" of oil companies. Earlier this week, scientists said the release of large amounts of methane from thawing permafrost in the Arctic could have huge economic impacts on the world. The researchers estimated the climate effects of the release of this gas could cost $60 trillion (£39 trillion), roughly the size of the global economy in 2012.

Star Wars sequels to be scored by John Williams

John Williams has scored all six previous Star Wars films created by George Lucas Continue reading the main story Related Stories Star Wars city doomed by sand dune New Star Wars film to be shot in UK New Star Wars film yearly from 2015 Composer John Williams is to return to score Star Wars: Episode VII, it has been announced. The Oscar-winner, who has composed all six films in the sci-fi saga, said he was "happy to be continuing to be part of the whole fun" of the franchise. Lucasfilm president Kathleen Kennedy confirmed the news at a Star Wars fan event in Germany. In an interview with StarWars.com, Williams hinted he would likely use some of the music from previous films. "I haven't seen the script, so the story is still unknown to me, but I can't image there will not be some references to the existing stories that would make appropriate use of some of the earlier themes," he said. The composer has won five Oscars over his 60-year career for his famous film scores including Jaws, E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial and the first Star Wars film. He has also been nominated for more than 40 other Academy Awards for his work on movies including Superman, the Indiana Jones films, Saving Private Ryan and most recently, Lincoln. In April, Episode VII director JJ Abrams indicated he wanted Williams to score his film, but said it was "early days". In his latest interview, Williams praised the director saying he was "perfectly chosen to continue George Lucas's great odyssey". Star Wars: Episode VII is scheduled to be released in 2015.

Classification

Lung cancers are classified according to histological type.^[8] This classification has important implications for clinical management and prognosis of the disease. The vast majority of lung cancers arecarcinomas—malignancies that arise from epithelial cells. Lung carcinomas are categorized by the size and appearance of the malignant cells seen by a histopathologist under a microscope. The two broad classes are non-small cell and small cell lung carcinoma.^[12]

Lung cancer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lung cancer
Classification and external resources
3D volume rendering of a thorax CT showing a tumor in the lung (marked by arrow)
ICD-10	C33-C34
ICD-9	162
DiseasesDB	7616
MedlinePlus	007194
eMedicine	med/1333 med/1336emerg/335 radio/807radio/405 radio/406
MeSH	D002283

Lung cancer is a disease characterized by uncontrolled cell growth in tissues of thelung. If left untreated, this growth can spread beyond the lung in a process calledmetastasis into nearby tissue and, eventually, into other parts of the body. Most cancers that start in lung, known as primary lung cancers, are carcinomas that derive from epithelial cells. The main types of lung cancer are small cell lung carcinoma(SCLC), also called oat cell cancer, and non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). The most common cause of lung cancer is long-term exposure to tobacco smoke.^[1]Nonsmokers account for 15% of lung cancer cases,^[2] and these cases are often attributed to a combination of genetic factors,^[3] radon gas,^[3] asbestos,^[4] and air pollution^[3] including secondhand smoke.^[5][6]

The most common symptoms are coughing (including coughing up blood), weight loss and shortness of breath.^[7] Lung cancer may be seen on chest radiograph andcomputed tomography (CT scan). The diagnosis is confirmed with a biopsy.^[8] This is usually performed by bronchoscopy or CT-guided biopsy. Treatment and prognosisdepend on the histological type of cancer, the stage (degree of spread), and the patient's general wellbeing, measured by performance status. Common treatments include surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. NSCLC is sometimes treated with surgery, whereas SCLC usually responds better to chemotherapy and radiotherapy.^[9]

Survival depends on stage, overall health, and other factors. Overall, 15% of people in the United States diagnosed with lung cancer survive five years after the diagnosis.^[10]Worldwide, lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer-related death in men and women, and is responsible for 1.38 million deaths annually, as of 2008.^[11]

Credibility of Asbestos Study Questioned

ility of Asbestos Study Questioned July 5, 2012, by Jeffrey S. Glassman inShare | More Sharing ServicesShare A 40-year study that downplays the health effects of asbestos exposure for miners and mill workers has drawn the ire of several mesothelioma advocacy groups. Our Boston mesothelioma attorneys know that a hallmark of solid science is objectivity. This particular study, conducted by Dr. John Corbett McDonald of the McGill University's School of Occupational Health, based in Canada, has been criticized for lacking transparency and for being biased toward the industry. It is a fact that the Chrysolite Institute, which is a lobbying group established to promote the use of asbestos in overseas products, uses the 40-year McGill study to bolster its claims of asbestos safety. But why would a reputable scientist risk that reputation in order to show the asbestos industry in a favorable light? According to an investigation by CBC News, it all boils down to money. Back in the 1960s, the dangers of asbestos were becoming more widely known and understood. The industry, however, didn't want to risk government regulation. That would have meant huge profit losses and lawsuits (which later ended up happening anyway, but they were trying to avoid it at the time). So it took its cues from the tobacco industry, with the overarching view that industry is always best suited to look after its own issues. (Of course, as we now see clearly, that's not true when it comes to preserving public health; industry is out for industry.) Just look at the tobacco industry. There were in fact many scientists on big tobacco's payroll who attested to the fact that cigarettes were simply a healthy stress-reliever - an account we now see as so blatantly false as to be laughable, if the consequences of those lies weren't so devastating. But in this vein, it hired a scientist to begin research on the issue. Who did they hire? According to CBC, it was none other than Dr John Corbett McDonald of McGill. The news station produced documents showing that McDonald and other researchers at the school accepted checks form the Quebec Asbestos Mining Association between 1966 to 1972, for amounts that today would translate into several million dollars. The results of the McGill study seem to indicate it was exposure to another chemical, tremolite, that caused mesothelioma more frequently than did the asbestos. McGill researchers reportedly refused to give the raw data to CBC reporters, but said it would be conducting an internal investigation regarding the integrity of the results. That investigation is ongoing. Now, without seeing the raw results of this study ourselves, it's hard to make a conclusion one way or the other about whether the study was flawed. However, there is a great appearance of impropriety, whether or not the research itself remained untainted. What we do know is this: The World Health Organization has concluded that all types of asbestos cause lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis, and further that there is absolutely no safe level of exposure. While the substance has been widely shunned by U.S. manufacturers since the 1970s, people continue to learn they have been sickened by mesothelioma, as the disease has an extremely long latency period. People who have been exposed to the airborne asbestos toxins don't learn until decades later that they are ill. Continue reading "Credibility of Asbestos Study Questioned " » Permalink | Email This Post Posted In: Boston Mesothelioma

Illegal Massachusetts Asbestos Storage Leads to Criminal Charges

That said, not all mesothelioma attorneys are the same - do your research and don't commit until you've found a firm with a record of success!) In this case, we were pleased to learn about a case out of Southern California, in which a retired cement contractor/construction superintendent and his wife were awarded nearly $50 million by jurors following a six-week trial. Media reports indicate that the 86-year-old, who also served as a former local city councilman, was given $30 million in compensatory damages and another $18 million in punitive damages. Compensatory damages are monies that the jury believes will compensate the victim for his or her injuries. Punitive damages are enacted for the purpose of punishing the defendant. This verdict is reported to be the largest of its kind in the country this year. The lawsuit, which was filed last year, had alleged negligence against a number of companies, including Union Carbide, Riverside Cement and California Portland Cement Co. According to court documents, the plaintiff had worked as a construction superintendent and cement contractor between 1947 and 1980 at a number of locations in the Southern California, Los Angeles-area. Part of that work meant that he was involved in building hundreds of commercial buildings and residential structures and even a few churches. In doing all of this work, he claimed that he was using asbestos-containing products, manufactured by the above-mentioned companies. Additionally, he was involved in remodeling a number of those structures, and was using those same products in the course of those projects as well. Although he hadn't been doing that type of work since the early 1980s, he only last July learned that he is suffering from mesothelioma, due to the exposure to asbestos. His wife was also named in the suit, alleging loss of consortium, or companionship. The couple's attorney said the not only were the named companies responsible for selling dangerous products, but they spent millions of dollars trying to hide the fact that they were dangerous. One of the companies, Union Carbide, reportedly put numerous "expert" witnesses on the stand, claiming that their brand of asbestos was not cancer-causing. However, there was documentation and internal memos that suggested the company's staff doctors chastised those in the marketing departments for telling customers that their asbestos wasn't dangerous, when in fact it was. Continue reading "$48M Mesothelioma Verdict Won Against Numerous Companies in CA Case" » Permalink | Email This Post Posted In: Mesothelioma Case

Illegal Massachusetts Asbestos Storage Leads to Criminal Charges

Illegal Massachusetts Asbestos Storage Leads to Criminal Charges

July 15, 2012, by Jeffrey S. Glassman

inShare|More Sharing ServicesShare

A Massachusetts asbestos case has been gaining attention, as a business owner accused of illegally - and dangerously - storing the deadly compound seeks to have her statements stricken from court.

Our Boston mesothelioma lawyers believe the truth should come out. If this woman and her company were jeopardizing public safety to save a few bucks, they should absolutely be held accountable.

According to the Salem News, the 52-year-old ran an asbestos abatement company. This is a company that builders, contractors, homeowners and property mangers might call to come in and properly remove asbestos from old structures. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection has specific guidelines under Massachusetts 310 CMR 4.00. This is the code that stipulates the required notification and work practices for asbestos handling, removal, storage and disposal in order to minimize or avoid releasing fibers into the air, and thereby causing a hazard to workers and the public at-large.

In this case, investigators learned that this particular asbestos abatement company (which we won't name here, because as of yet, they haven't been convicted) wasn't properly storing the asbestos it was hired to remove from schools, hotels and libraries. Rather than following state regulations regarding disposal, officials with the DEP say the business was instead storing asbestos in bags in a self-storage unit.

And we're not talking a few bags. We're talking hundreds of trash bags, packed into two self-storage containers.

One official was quoted as saying that the business owners knew that they weren't properly disposing of the asbestos, but chose to illegally stash it anyway because they couldn't afford to do it the right way.

When the 52-year-old business owner arrived at the storage locker, in the midst of a search being carried out by state environmental officials, she reportedly began going on about how customers weren't paying, there had been a lapse in asbestos removal certificates and that a number of contracts had dropped her services.

It's those statements that are at the heart of the issue before a court right now. The business owner and her attorney are imploring a judge to suppress those statements from the trial because she was reportedly upset that investigators were going through her property. Apparently, some of the items in that storage unit belonged to her late mother. They were alongside the asbestos.

Her lawyer has argued the emotional distress of that ordeal prevented her from making a rational decision.

Additionally, her lawyers argue she should have been read her Miranda rights. While she was not immediately under arrest for the asbestos violation, she was reportedly not free to go because she had an active warrant out for her arrest for prior driving offenses.

Prosecutors, however, argued that she in fact was free to leave - just not in her vehicle, as she had a suspended driver's license. Plus, they contended it was more likely she was upset that investigators were looking into her illegal asbestos storage rather than them looking through her mother's belongings. If they were so important, the state argued, why would they be stuffed alongside the deadly compound?

There is no indication from the media reports thus far that anyone suffered a dangerous exposure to the asbestos. Of course, it may be years before anyone truly knows, as the latency period for mesothelioma cancer is typically decades.

The bottom line is that when you don't follow the removal guidelines, there is the potential for someone to become exposed and become ill.

The judge has yet to make his ruling. The trial is slated to take place sometime in the next few months.