Elongate mineral particles (EMP) characteristics and mesothelioma: Summary and resolution for session I of the Monticello II conference.

The summary contains a consensus opinion regarding the current state of the science about the dimensions of Elongate Mineral Particles (EMPs) as a factor impacting their carcinogenicity.

Measurement of elongate mineral particles: What we should measure and how do we do it?

The length distributions of single fibrils of Coalinga, UICC-B and wet dispersed chrysotile were measured by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). It was found that the distributions significantly diverged above approximately 10 µm (µm) in length, corresponding to differences in published results of animal experiments. This result is in contrast to published data in which counting of an insufficient number of fibers resulted in an erroneous conclusion that the length distribution of Coalinga chrysotile fibrils was indistinguishable from those of other sources of chrysotile. The size distributions of the respirable particle size fractions from acknowledged tremolite asbestos samples were found to be dominated by elongate particles longer than 5 µm that are within the dimensional range of non-asbestiform amphiboles. Prior studies have shown that these elongate particles obscure a correlation between a specific size range of particles and results of animal implantation studies that used tremolite of various morphologies. In the prior studies, a reference protocol was developed from four crushed non-asbestiform amphiboles to differentiate the size range of amphibole particles that correlates with the mesothelioma frequencies observed in the animal studies. In the work reported here, this correlation was tested with TEM analyses of amphiboles from Libby, MT, Sparta, NJ and Homestake mine, Lead, SD, which represent known environmental/occupational situations. Further TEM analyses of the tremolite samples used in the original animal implantation studies have also shown that the numbers of elongate tremolite particles with lengths ≤5 µm implanted into the animals are not correlated with the observed mesothelioma frequencies.

Cross-Sectional Survey of Physicians on Providing Volunteer Care for In-Flight Medical Events.

BACKGROUND: Airline carriers have equipment, procedures, and protocols in place to handle in-flight medical events (IFMEs). Community physicians may be asked for aid during IFMEs. Cross-Sectional Survey of Physicians on Providing Volunteer Care for In-Flight Medical Events surveyed self-assessed awareness and knowledge, perceived barriers, and suggestions for improving responses to IFMEs. METHODS: We composed a survey regarding clinicians' self-assessed understanding of in-flight resources, procedures, flight environmental issues, and Good Samaritan protections. The survey was distributed primarily via electronic mail to medical staff list serves to a total of approximately 1300 physicians representing 2 health networks that serve urban, suburban, and rural areas in both inpatient and outpatient settings. RESULTS: Total number of responses was 418. Physician response rate was 29.2% (379/1300). In 3% (39/1300), the responder either failed to indicate their background or was another type of health care professional (e.g., dentist, medical student, physician assistant). Of the physicians, 37.5% (142/379) were primary care and 42% (177/418) of responders reported at least one experience of being asked to volunteer. When asked how well they understand the protocols with which medical events are handled, 64% (262/412) responded "not at all" and 23% (94/412) reported "a little" knowledge. Only 56% (223/397) answered that 75% or more of U.S. flights have ground medical support available. There were 73% (298/411) who believed airlines were required to have medical supplies, but 54% (222/410) reported no knowledge of supplies available. A total of 69% (279/403) believed or were sure that the U.S. has a Good Samaritan law that applies to IFMEs. DISCUSSION: Many physicians lack basic knowledge about IFMEs. Responders may assist more effectively if better informed about protocols and the availability of ground medical support. Education and timely information support are recommended.Chatfield E, Bond WF, McCay B, Thibeault C, Alves PM, Squillante M, Timpe J, Cook CJ, Bertino RE. Cross-Sectional Survey of Physicians on Providing Volunteer Care for In-Flight Medical Events. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2017; 88(9):876-879.