Asbestos Belum Diharamkan di Malaysia

Penggunaan Asbestos Belum Diharamkan lagi di Malaysia

Kerajaan, DOSH kaji henti penggunaan asbestos

ARKIB UTUSAN MALAYSIA : 29/07/2011

KUALA LUMPUR 28 Julai - Kerajaan melalui Jabatan Keselamatan dan Kesihatan Pekerjaan (DOSH) sedang menyediakan draf undang-undang bagi menghentikan sepenuhnya penggunaan bahan berasaskan asbestos di negara ini. Timbalan Menteri Sumber Manusia, Datuk Maznah Mazlan berkata, langkah menghentikan penggunaan bahan tersebut akan dibuat mengikut tiga fasa. "Untuk permulaan iaitu fasa pertama, kita merancang menghentikan kemasukan bahan mentah. Bagi fasa seterusnya menghentikan produk separa siap sehingga fasa terakhir iaitu menghentikan sepenuhnya penggunaan bahan tersebut," katanya. Beliau berkata demikian ketika menutup Forum Bahaya Penggunaan Asbestos di pejabat Kongres Kesatuan Sekerja Malaysia (MTUC) di sini hari ini yang turut dihadiri oleh Naib Presiden MTUC, A. Balasubramaniam dan Timbalan Setiausaha Agung, Samuel Devadasan. Sifat kandungan bahan asbestos yang ringan dan mudah diterbangkan angin menyebabkan orang ramai bukan sahaja terdedah kepada gangguan pernafasan, malah berisiko menghidap kanser paru-paru. Menurut Maznah, sebanyak 14 kilang memproses produk asbestos di negara ini mempunyai jumlah pekerja seramai 3,148 orang, bagaimanapun jumlah yang terdedah secara langsung adalah 600 orang iaitu 552 lelaki dan bakinya wanita. Katanya, 57 negara menghentikan sepenuhnya penggunaan asbestos termasuk Finland, Itali, Jerman, Australia, Jepun dan Thailand. Sementara itu Ketua Seksyen Higen Industri DOSH Selangor, Hazlina Yon berkata, sejak 2009 pihaknya membuat pemantauan di kilang-kilang pemprosesan asbestos di negara ini dan tujuh daripada 10 kilang yang dilawati didapati kurang memuaskan dari segi keselamatan pekerjaan. "DOSH telah memberi nasihat dan surat amaran kepada mereka. Tahun ini DOSH akan mengadakan lawatan sekali lagi ke kilang-kilang tersebut. "Jika dituduh di mahkamah dan disabitkan kesalahan, hukuman penjara setahun atau denda RM10,000 atau kedua-duanya boleh dikenakan terhadap pihak pengurusannya," katanya.

http://www.asbestoslegaljournal.com/

Texas Asbestos Lawyers Obtain $27.5 Million Verdict In Mesothelioma Lawsuit  Posted on February 08, 2011 by Justinian

In September of 2010, a Brazoria county jury awarded $27.5 million dollars to the widow of an asbestos worker.  The asbestos lawyers who handled this case did a great job.  Unfortunately, because Texas law is not particularly friendly to injured citizens, the actual amount the widow will recover is far less. Of the $27.5 million dollars, $20 million was in punitive damages.  Texas caps punitive damages, and the widow will therefore collect no more than $4 million in punitive damages.  This is still a great result for a mesothelioma lawsuit, but I'm always irritated whenever a plaintiff's jury award is reduced due to a one-size-fits-all statute. The remaining defendant in the lawsuit was John Crane, a company that made asbestos gaskets and packing.  Individuals who had to work with industrial equipment would become exposed to asbestos from John Crane's products. The case was Jerry Johnston, et al. v. Alfa Laval Inc., et al., No. 2008-36868, Texas Dist., Brazoria Co.

Jury Returns $1.6 million Verdict in Los Angeles Asbestos Lawsuit

Posted on February 07, 2011 by Justinian

On August 12th of 2010, a Los Angeles jury awarded $1,619,000 in an asbestos lawsuit filed against manufacturers of asbestos friction products.  Friction products is asbestos-lawyer shorthand for "clutches and brakes that contain asbestos.". Like many asbestos lawsuits, this one was filed against a variety of companies.  The following is a breakdown of which companies were found liable by the jury:

• Ford - 10%
• Navistar - 10%
• Exxon Mobil - 18%
• Pittsburgh Corning - 17%
• Safeway Scaffolding - 17%
• Econo Portable Builders - 7%
• Georgia-Pacific Corp. - 6%
• U.S. Gypsum - 6%
• Kentile Floors - 6%
• Napa - 1%
• Bendix - 1%
• Pete Green's Service Station - 1%

When a jury finds more than one defendant to be liable, it must apportion a percentage of fault.  The defendants often are then responsible for their percentage of the verdict.  Sometimes one defendant isn't able to pay its fair share of the verdict.  Some states will force other defendants to pay that portion, while other states do not.  This is one of many reasons why it is important for an asbestos lawyer to determine which state is the best state to file a specific person's asbestos lawsuit. The name of the case was William Harrell and Judith Harrell v. Allied Packing and Supply Inc., et al., No. BC423696, Calif. Super., Los Angeles Co.  If you have any questions about this blog post - or anything else on this site - please e-mail me at justinian@justinian.us

Union Pipefitter Wins West Virginia Mesothelioma Lawsuit

Posted on February 06, 2011 by Justinian

On November 3rd of 2010, a West Virginia jury found that a pipefitter's mesothelioma was caused by exposure to John Crane gaskets.  The attorneys for both parties entered into a confidential agreement in which John Crane would pay a specific amount of money if they were found liable by the jury.  Because that agreement was triggered, the jury did not need to decide how much money to award. The jury was made up entirely of women, which is unusual.  It's rare that a jury is made up entirely of one gender. The trial lasted for six days, and the jurors only needed about two hours to determine that John Crane was liable. John Crane made gaskets that contained chrysotile asbestos.  John Crane argued that the plaintiff's mesothelioma was actually caused by exposure to large amounts of amosite asbestos pipe covering.  The plaintiff worked for over 40 years as a union pipefitter, and it is therefore very likely that he was exposed to a large amount of amosite.  Amosite is generally considered to be more carcinogenic that chrysotile asbestos.  This case therefore had the same factual issue that many asbestos lawsuits have: determining which company's asbestos caused a person to develop mesothelioma when the individual was exposed to asbestos from multiple companies.  Although there may be a few quacks out there who claim otherwise, no reputable doctor claims to be able to determine which exposure caused a lung cancer to develop. Because science cannot answer that question, courts usually adopt some sort of a "substantial contributing factor" test in which multiple companies can be found liable if each of them made asbestos that substantially contributed to an individual's illness. The case was Robert L. Wood, et al. v. John Crane Inc., et al., No. 10-C-91, W.Va. Cir., Kanawha Co.). If you have any questions about this blog post - or anything else on this site - please e-mail me at justinian@justinian.us

New York Mesothelioma Lawsuit Ends In $1 Million Dollar Verdict

Posted on February 06, 2011 by Justinian

On November 12th of 2010, an Onondaga County jury returned a $1 million dollar verdict in a mesothelioma lawsuit filed against John Crane.  The lawsuit was filed by a gentleman who worked on tugboats as early as 1954.  During the years he worked on a tugboat, he was exposed to gaskets and packing material that contained asbestos. Asbestos lawsuits like this are fairly common.  For many years, gaskets and packing material used in marine valves and pumps contained asbestos.  Individuals who worked with those valves and pumps often became exposed to the asbestos by scraping or otherwise cleaning out older gaskets and packing material.  The confined areas of ships makes it even more likely that asbestos fibers will be recirculated for other crew members to breathe.

Unfortunately for the plaintiff in this lawsuit, the money came too late.  He died before the verdict, but his wife continued the lawsuit.  One of the things that I do as an asbestos lawyer is to talk to my clients and their families about whether they would like to continue their asbestos lawsuit if the injured person passes away before a jury can render a verdict.  It's always better to sort details like that out while the injured person is still alive and able to make decisions. The name of the case was Richard Schuderer, et al. v. John Crane Inc., et al., and the case number was 2008-8545. If you have any questions about this blog post - or anything else on this site - please e-mail me at justinian@justinian.us

1911 - 5 out of 40 asbestos workers died

Posted on January 30, 2011 by Justinian

In 1911, Dr. Collis described the experiences of a factory in which asbestos mattresses were made:

Asbestos. - Following up information received from the Registrar-General, it was found that five deaths of persons suffering from pthisis [ A type of tuberculosis. ] had occurred in five years among a staff of under 40 workers employed at a factory where asbestos is woven.  The process, which appeared most dangerous, is the production of asbestos mattresses.  These mattresses which are composed of bags of woven asbestos filled with short asbestos fiber, are placed on a table and beaten out flat by a man with a wooden flail when process much dust arises. Five deaths out of 40 people in five years.  Again, another early warning sign that asbestos dust kills.  Early reports such as this are used in asbestos and mesothelioma lawsuits to counteract the state-of-the-art defense. This citation for this article is: Collis, 1911.  Dusty Processes.  In: Factories and Workshops: Annual Report For 1910.  Great Britain. If you have any questions about this blog post - or anything else on this site - please e-mail me at justinian@justinian.us

1907 - Murray Publishes Autopsy of Asbestosis Victim

Posted on January 30, 2011 by Justinian

In 1899, Dr. H.M. Murray performed an autopsy on an asbestos worker who died in his mid thirties.  This man was the tenth individual in his work area to die at a young age due to a breathing impairment.  Dr. Murray noted that the man had interstitial fibrosis and "curious bodies" in his lungs.  In 1907, Dr. Murray published these findings. Let's put things in perspective.  In 1907, asbestos was still a relatively new substance.  Ten young men who worked with it all died of a mysterious respiratory problem that had never been seen before.  Shouldn't that have raised a few red flags?  Perhaps in some circles it did.  But those who ran asbestos companies had little interest in providing protection for asbestos workers because doing so would have implied to customers that asbestos was unsafe. The law terms the attitude of asbestos executives as conscious indifference.  They knew that asbestos was killing workers, yet they didn't care.  Perhaps nothing illustrates the dark nature of greed more than the story of asbestos.  Yet some of these same individuals who literally killed their workers for money complained of the greed of those who file asbestos lawsuits.  There might not have been any asbestos lawyers or lawsuits if asbestos companies had put safety ahead of profits. The citation for Dr. Murray's report is: Murray, H.M., 1907.  Statement before the committee in the minutes of evidence.  In: Report of the Departmental Committee on Compensation for Industrial Disease.  London: H.M. Stationery Office, P.127. If you have any questions about this blog post - or anything else on this site - please e-mail me at justinian@justinian.us

P/S : Dekat Malaysia, sapa-sapa yang terkena kanser paru paru mesothelioma kerana pendedahan asbestos samada di rumah atau tempat kerja semuanya mati katak jer... Doktor yang tukang rawat pun tak pernah mereport kematian sebagai kanser disebabkan pendedahan asbestos kerana julung julung kali seorang doktor bertanya sejarah bekerja semasa History taking... Mustahil di Malaysia tidak ada yang mati katak (mati katak = Mati tanpa dapat pembelaan dan pampasan sewajarnya seperti di US ne ) sebab pendedahan asbestos... Kalau di US, Jepun, Europe ada banyak kes kanser paru-paru mesothelioma mustahil di Malaysia takde kes kan? kan? kan?

Antara produk yang ada asbestos di Malaysia ne:

1. Brake disc pad kereta, motor dan basikal exercise anda.
2. Atap Ardec untuk rumah murah / kos rendah.
3. Siling untuk rumah kos rendah.
4. Alat penebat haba dalam wire letrik voltan tinggi dsbnya.
5. Sebagai pengukuh bahan binaan simen, dinding simen dan dalam paip bekalan air ke rumah anda.
6. Alat ganti kapal.
7. Dan lain lain benda korang google la sendiri yek...

Kalau di US, Korea, Jepun, Europe dan Australia, asbestos ne dah lama diharamkan dek gomen mereka masing masing...itulah namanya gomen bertanggungjawab terhadap wellfare rakyat.. Tapi Gomen sekarang ne tah kan bila nak diharamkan asbestos entah le.. Kalau buat demonstrasi bersih 3.0 pun semasa suruh bubarkan radioaktif lynas pun gomen tak kasi,, inikan pula soal haramkan asbestos... Pihak berwajib pun tutup mata jer untuk haramkan kilang asbestos di Malaysia sebab rakyat di Malaysia ne masih banyak yang dungu-dungu bodoh lagi... atau pening labi labi... Korang pikir la sendiri.....