International Chrysotile Association #conspiracy #dunning-kruger #mammon chrysotileassociation.com

[From "Rotterdam Convention"]

On September 18th 2004, the Member States of the Rotterdam Convention refused, as was proposed, to include chrysotile in the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure. Numerous countries, representing more than 3 billion people, expressed their views on this subject and stated that the Rotterdam Convention was not the appropriate vehicle to protect the health of workers involved in the commerce, transformation and use of chrysotile

This is a resounding failure for the European Union, Chile and others dedicated to the banning of chrysotile and leading the battle to force this fibre to join a list of environmentally dangerous pesticides and chemicals. Some of these special interest groups expressed their frustration at having lost the battle by accusing countries, such as Russia and Canada, of having prioritized the economic interests of a few to the detrimental health risk of many

These gratuitous insinuations should not make us lose sight of the fact that the primary objective of the countries and groups, which supported the inclusion of chrysotile in the Rotterdam Convention; it is the prohibition of the trade of chrysotile in order to benefit replacement fibres[…]
There is no scientific or medical reason to justify the classification of chrysotile fibre with pesticides and the most dangerous chemicals[…]The use of chrysotile does not pose an environmental problem[…]
Inclusion of chrysotile is inappropriate because it is widely recognized that chrysotile fibre can be used safely and responsibly. The safe use policy implemented by the Governments’ of Canada and of Quebec has proven to be effective[…]
Canada must not fall into the trap laid by the European Union and Chile. We are well aware that these countries are spearheading an aggressive international campaign against chrysotile, to ensure the lion’s share of a lucrative market[…]This is a trade war

International Chrysotile Association #dunning-kruger chrysotileassociation.com

[From "The controversy"]

To banish or not to banish?
Still today and this, in spite of the studies proving that it can be without danger when used in a safely manner, people preach the banishment of chrysotile. They say[…]that chrysotile kills thousands of people. They however forget to tell the small history behind[…]the story where it is explained that chrysotile was often mixed with amphiboles[…]
If people preaching the banishment were really well informed and were using their contacts with the media[…]to make public the good and true news about chrysotile, people would not panic any more. On the contrary, they would be reassured of knowing that many cities of the planet were built, irrigated and supplied out of drinking water thanks to chrysotile[…]
{b]Chrysotile situation in the United States today[…]
In the mid-1980's, public panic over asbestos in buildings - which was later discovered to have been unwarranted - prompted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to propose a ban on all asbestos-containing products[…]Based on this comprehensive record, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found such a ban unwarranted. Although the Court allowed EPA to require its prior approval before new products were developed, it found all existing uses must be allowed to continue[…]
Congress is once again debating asbestos reform legislation[…]« Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act »[…]a national fund of US $140 billion will be put in place to pay off asbestos claimants, with the money of course industry-funded[…]
Even before knowing the results of an exhaustive study, currently underway and headed by the US EPA on asbestos risk assessment, ban asbestos supporters have taken advantage of the exasperation of the people faced with the scandal in the system, to soflty bypass the role of EPA and attain their goal of an international ban of chrysotile

International Chrysotile Association #dunning-kruger #mammon #pratt #crackpot chrysotileassociation.com

[From "Overview"]

Chrysotile and Asbestos Amphiboles: Two Different Fibre Types

"Asbestos" is not a mineral in itself. It is a collective term given to a group of minerals whose crystals occur in fibrous forms. The term "asbestos" was adopted for commercial identification

The six minerals commonly referred to as asbestos come from two distinct groups of minerals. One group is known as serpentines (chrysotile, white asbestos); while the other group is the amphiboles[…]While both are silicate minerals, the two groups are chemically and mineralogically distinct
Chrysotile is a sheet silicate which is formed as a very thin rolled sheet[…]
Chrysotile has been known for over 2000 years, being used initially for cremation cloths, oil lamp wicks and other textiles[…]
This is in contrast to the amphibole asbestos fibers which are formed as solid rods/fibers. The structure of an amphibole is a double chain of silicate tetrahedral which makes it very strong and durable[…]
In contrast with amphiboles, chrysotile does not persist in the lungs after inhalation; it is quickly eliminated by the body. A prolonged exposure to high concentrations of chrysotile fibres is required for a clinical manifestation of pulmonary damage to appear[…]
Chrysotile: controlled use = safety
Chrysotile is a less dusty material and is more easily eliminated from the human body than amphiboles. The manufacture and use of modern products are safe as demonstrated by studies of workers exposed to much higher dust levels than in today's controlled factories which show no excess lung cancer or mesothelioma (cancer of the pleura)[…]
Chrysotile and its non-friable products[…]can be used safely[…]This is the position taken by the governments of Canada and Québec, regarding not only chrysotile asbestos, but all minerals and metals