1970
DOI: 10.1038/227445a0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New Dust Standards for British Coal Mines

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0

Year Published

1976
1976
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although the major types of asbestos used commercially differ both physically and chemically, the legislation in many countries lays down one standard which is applied to several or all forms (Zielhuis, 1977). For coal dust, the work of Jacobsen et al (1970) has shown that the mass of respirable airborne duist corresponds more closely with radiological change than does particle number. Unfortunately similar data do not exist for asbestos.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the major types of asbestos used commercially differ both physically and chemically, the legislation in many countries lays down one standard which is applied to several or all forms (Zielhuis, 1977). For coal dust, the work of Jacobsen et al (1970) has shown that the mass of respirable airborne duist corresponds more closely with radiological change than does particle number. Unfortunately similar data do not exist for asbestos.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A good deal of work has been done to document the effects of coal mine dust on respiratory disease (25,(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36). Results of a study of dust exposure in surface coal mines suggest these observations may apply to comparable dust levels experienced in other coal handling situations.…”
Section: Health and Safety Aspects Of Coal-fired Power Plants Health mentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Epidemiological studies in Great Britain have been of major importance in developing the current U.S. 2 mg/m3 respirable dust standard (30). Too little time, however, has passed since implementation of this standard, to assess its effectiveness in controlling CWP.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But did it also cause what had become the predominant lung disease in industrialised countries, COPD, then called chronic bronchitis and emphysema? In spite of the fact that Osler in the 1895 edition of his textbook had taught that coal dust was a cause of this,8 that Cummins in the 1930s had shown the breakdown of the lung's elastic tissue in miners and thus provided a plausible explanation for the development of emphysema6 and that the MRC had published a relationship between dust exposure and disablement,2 many doctors and scientists opposed the view that coal caused COPD. Part of the reason for this was that by then smoking had become almost universal in men and this was regarded as a more likely cause in miners.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%