The first wave included the miners; the majority of these miners came from the Wittenoom blue asbestos mine which was located in Pilbara, Western Australia. The mine was shut down in 1967, however the legacy of asbestos continues to resonate in our society today. The second wave was comprised of individuals who worked directly with asbestos – such as those who worked in factories, builders, plumbers, electricians or carpenters.
Presently, the number of “third wave” victims is becoming more evident. The third wave includes home renovators and family members of those who worked with asbestos. The recent discovery of asbestos in Telstra’s pits has reiterated the notion that the fight against asbestos is far from over. Despite the fact that the use of asbestos was phased out by the 1980s, and banned entirely in 2004, the long latency period of asbestos means that new cases of mesothelioma will continue to increase every year.

Following public pressure, the Australian government is currently removing asbestos and implementing national plans to deal with the issue at hand. For example, a new Australian Asbestos Safety and Education Agency has been implemented to remove asbestos from governmental and commercial buildings. This national plan also aims to increase asbestos awareness amongst the public and address illegal dumping of the poisonous material.

The number of cases of mesothelioma in Australia means that treatment of mesothelioma in Australia is becoming more of an issue that needs addressing.

The text message informed parents that the students had not been exposed to the asbestos, and as such, their safety was not at risk. The text also assured parents that the toxic substance had been safely secured by professionals. Parents were directed to the school’s website for any further relevant information.

According to Mr. Hastings, it is suspected that the asbestos was left over from the demolition of various houses from thirty years ago. Fortunately, over the thirty year period, the asbestos remained undisturbed and stagnant underground, as it was covered by soil and grass. This means that the students had not been exposed to this asbestos.

The asbestos was discovered during the excavation of the site in preparation for the new gymnasium. Fortunately the material discovered was the safest form of asbestos, and it was not disturbed upon discovery, due to its structure and the wetness of the soil. The asbestos has not posed a threat to any worker or student within the vicinity.

In the 1990s, a one million dollar asbestos removal program was carried out in ACT. This program took place after a business known as ‘Mr Fluffy’ imported pure amosite asbestos from South Africa, one of the most toxic forms of asbestos, and installed it into a number of houses in the 1970s as a form of roof insulation.

The NSW government, despite being aware of the asbestos issue at the time, failed to take any action. The toxic insulation is still present in an unknown number of houses in Queanbeyan and on the south coast. Dr Keith McKenry, the man who oversaw the removal of asbestos in ACT during the 1990s, described the lack of action by the NSW government as ‘criminally negligent’. He further states that although there was a large amount of evidence which demonstrated the detrimental effects of asbestos, the NSW government did not take any action to stop ‘Mr Fluffy’.

Residents often refuse to remove asbestos from their houses, as it costs roughly $40,000 to remove the toxic substance. In 2005 the Queanbeyan Council offered to pay twenty five percent of the remediation costs if the state or federal government were also willing to compensate the residents. Unfortunately, the state and federal government did not agree to this proposal.

Asbestos cases in New South Wales have affected many lives. Mesothelioma in New South Wales seems to be on the rise. Thus the reduction of asbestos exposure in NSW is a positive step to take, which will hopefully result in the number of mesothelioma cases in NSW dropping.

The $35 million renovation plan involves increasing the number of permanent cricket pitches on the ground, constructing infrastructure for the spectators and erecting a new boundary fence. However the first and foremost task of this redevelopment plan is to remove the asbestos piping.

The asbestos was discovered before the commencement of the other projects, and is not expected to delay the rest of the renovation. David Dawes, director general of the economic development directorate, states that cautionary steps have been taken to ensure the safety of the workers and of the public. According to Dawes, “The contractor will ensure any asbestos pipe found will be dug up, bagged, sealed and removed by licensed specialists in accordance with approved quality control and environment management plans.” Further, Dawes assures it is unlikely that the pipes will be found directly beneath the playing area. It is expected that the initial stage of redevelopment – that is, the clean-up process – will be finished by the end of 2020.

Coffey Environments Australia Pty Ltd has conducted a study of the Oval. Their report reveals that the soil in the playing area is not likely have been contaminated by the toxic particles, and is considered suitable for re-use in other areas.

Many residents of Canberra have been affected by asbestos conditions in the past. Mesothelioma in Canberra and asbestosis in Canberra have impacted on many. The removal of asbestos from the Australian Capital Territory is important to try and ensure less people in the future in Canberra are not diagnosed with asbestos conditions.

This call for help stems from the fact that two homeowners have refused to remove asbestos from their properties, despite being instructed to do so by the Council.

The Council has made progress with one particular Camden South property owner. Asbestos was found in the house after a fire. Once the Council was notified of the dangerous particles, a clean up order was issued, and the insurance company of the asbestos property paid to have the asbestos removed.

However it is more common for property owners to ignore the clean up orders. A house was burnt down last October at Catherine Field, and thereafter asbestos was discovered on the property. Lara Symkowiak, Mayor of Camden, states that the Council issued a clean up direction, however the owners have refused to take action. To this date, the toxic fibres have yet to be removed.

One possible method of addressing the asbestos issue is to have the Council remove it and recover the costs of the removal from the owner. According to Symkowiak, “The costs associated with the clean up of asbestos can be high and the responsibility for compliance should rest with the owner of the site.”

The Council is committed to protecting the health and safety of members of the public. They encourage the State or Federal government to enact legislation that would allow councils to clean-up asbestos and claim the costs as debt against the property.

Asbestos cases in Australia have affected many lives. Many Australians have been diagnosed with mesothelioma in Australia and asbestosis in Australia. Such asbestos conditions in Australia need to be prevented in the future, and the eradication of asbestos in such circumstances as described above is one step on this long process.

In response to this, an Australian review of asbestos was conducted by ACTU assistant secretary, Geoff Fary. The review reveals that up to 40,000 Australians are expected to be diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease, such as mesothelioma and lung-cancer, as a result of exposure to these dangerous particles. This toll is higher than the number of Australian lives lost in the battlefield at Flanders, according to Federal Minister for Workplace Relations Bill Shorten. The review also strongly encourages the Federal government to draft a national strategic plan for asbestos management.

Following this review, the Australian government has proposed a national plan to remove the poisonous material from all public buildings by 2030. Victoria is currently the only state that is refusing to sign this national plan.

Victoria claims that the national plan is an “ineffective Labor policy”. Apparently Victoria has already undertaken its own measures to address this pressing issue. According to Assistant Treasurer Gordon Rich-Phillips, Victoria has a memorandum of understanding between the Victorian WorkCover Authority, the Environment Protection Authority, and the Victorian Department of Health. Kristy McSweeney, spokeswoman for the Victorian government, has stated that although Victoria encourages continual cross-jurisdictional discussion on the issue, the most effective way of managing asbestos would be to address it on a state level.

Bill Shorten has accused Victoria of “grandstanding” and encourages Victoria to join in the nationwide attempt to “rid Australia of the fatal fibre”.

Mesothelioma in Australia and asbestosis in Australia is a major problem. Treatment of mesothelioma in Australia has made some inroads in the past few years, but many people in Australia are still passing away as a result of this condition. It is hoped asbestos in Australia can be removed to prevent asbestos conditions in Australia becoming an increasing problem.

This financial year, the average claim settlement in Australia for James Hardie victims was $231,000. This $12,000 increase is largely a result of an increase in mesothelioma claims in Australia, from 456 to 542 claims over 12 months.

James Hardie is now expected to pay $117 million extra to a special victims’ fund. This brings the company’s asbestos liability to approximately $1.7 billion.

Although certain parts of Australia have undergone clean-up programs, there is no doubt that asbestos is still present in a large number of homes.

This is alarming considering the toxicity of asbestos. When air-borne asbestos fibres are breathed in, they are potentially hazardous. Such exposure to asbestos is a known cause of diseases such as mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis, and other respiratory diseases.

Studies have shown that do-it-yourself home renovators are increasingly at risk, with growing numbers of diagnoses of malignant mesothelioma for this group. They warn of a ‘third-wave’ of mesothelioma victims. This group is more likely to have had a short-term and/or low-level exposure to products containing asbestos. The group is also expected to have a shorter latency period between exposure and diagnosis of mesothelioma.

As such, it is important that home-owners in Australia are aware of the dangers of asbestos. To stay protected, it is important to have a trained asbestos professional inspect any suspicious materials, and have them removed properly and safely. While mesothelioma is treatable through means such as surgery and chemotherapy, there is no known cure. For those who suffer mesothelioma, they may be able to receive mesothelioma compensation in Australia.

Mesothelioma can in some instances be treated through an operation known as a pleurectomy or decortication. Mesothelioma patients who undergo the treatment may be subject to varying degrees of such treatment. Mesothelioma patients may undergo ‘extended’ pleurectomy/decortication, which requires the removal of the entire pleural lining, or ‘partial’ pleurecotmy/decortication, which requires the removal of only part of the pleural lining. The treatments are aimed to give more space to the lungs, allowing them to expand, alleviating symptoms of mesothelioma such as shortness of breath.

Recent Australian studies on this form of mesothelioma treatment have shown that the more intense the treatment, the better results mesothelioma patients may receive, but at a higher risk. The study reports a trend in extended pleurectomy/decortication towards a higher number of complications and longer hospital stays, compared to mesothelioma patients who underwent partial pleurectomy/decortication. However, the studies showed that the mesothelioma patients that underwent extended pleurecotmy/decortication had more successful results, being more favourable to “overall and disease-free survival”.

Although mesothelioma has no known cure at present, treatments such as this have been shown to help those suffering mesothelioma. To support such treatments, mesothelioma compensation is also available to those whose disease came about due to exposure to asbestos in Australia.

It is critical that those suffering mesothelioma seek the advice of their medical specialists as to what, if any, mesothelioma treatment options in Australia should be undertaken. A particular treatment option for one person suffering mesothelioma in Australia may not be possible or helpful for another person suffering mesothelioma in Australia. It all comes down to the individual, thus you should seek specific and individual advice

Most recently, a home in Canberra showed to contain a significant amount of asbestos which is soon to be removed. The asbestos was discovered by a licensed assessor who was called in by the owners after they had found a suspicious substance in their home. This is the fourth home in ACT to be discovered to have missed the official screening process. The toxicity of asbestos and the threats it poses to those exposed to its fibres mean that the clean up of this home will require the Canberra home to be encapsulated in a giant pressurized plastic bubble. This will ensure that the asbestos fibres, which are known to cause diseases such as mesothelioma and asbestosis, are not spread to neighbouring areas.

A spokesperson for the Attorney General, Simon Corbell has stated, “While it is unfortunate that homes were missed, it is important to note that neither the Australian Capital Territory nor Commonwealth Government gave any assurances that all homes containing Mr Fluffy would be identified during the program.”

With this in mind, there are concerns that other houses that underwent the screen in the 1980s may still have remaining asbestos fibres in areas such as wall cavities. Homeowners should be cautious if undergoing even minor repairs to such homes. A series of internal reviews of the ‘Mr Fluffy’ program has begun.