Slashdot Mirror
EPA Staff Objected To Agency's New Rules on Asbestos Use, Internal Emails Show (nytimes.com)
Top officials at the Environmental Protection Agency pushed through a measure to review applications for using asbestos in consumer products, and did so over the objections of E.P.A.'s in-house scientists and attorneys, internal agency emails show. From a report: The clash over the proposal exposes the tensions within the E.P.A. over the Trump administration's efforts to roll back environmental rules and rewrite other regulations that industries have long fought. Asbestos, a naturally occurring mineral and known carcinogen, was once common in insulation and fireproofing materials, but today most developed countries ban it. The United States still allows limited use in products including gaskets, roofing materials and sealants. The proposed new rule would create a new process for regulating uses of asbestos, something the E.P.A. is obliged to do under a 2016 amendment to a toxic substances law.
How about starting to toss some patents while we're creating solid rules on what not to use to keep people alive? Needn't limit it to 2 if you do it that way.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
No, no we don't ban asbestos. Never have, as it is naturally occuring. We ban synthetic substances all the time, but asbestos being banned is just silly, even if it makes a lot of sense to reduce our exposure to it. Asbestos is found in all sorts of things in trace (and higher) levels. Ever wonder why companies are moving away from talcum powder? Any idea what's in your brake linings?
>> new rule would create a new process for regulating uses of asbestos, something the E.P.A. is obliged to do under a 2016 amendment to a toxic substances law...Consumer groups say the agency should be looking for ways to prohibit asbestos entirely.
So...government agency is following the law instead of random/anecdotal citizen input. Generally, I'd think this is a good thing. (If you want to entirely ban asbestos...work on passing that law instead of whining on SlashDot.)
it gives me buzz?
Yeah, who give a shit about things like peoples health or the environment we live in. Lets just do whatever the fuck we want!
However, a company harms one person - just one - its existence is forfeit.
A multi billion dollar company somehow harms someone, it goes on trial like a person -corporations are people! - and if found guilty executed with it's management.
So back when the Ford Pinto killed those people.
Ford would have been liquidated and Lee Iococa (the executive in charge at the time) sent to the electric chair.
And Tesla with its "autopilot" well, let's just say that Tesla wouldn't exist anymore and Musk would be dead now.
Tax exemptions hurt the real wealth creators to benefit the parasite class. What's wrong with a flat 40% for the high income bracket, why split out investment income? see it could all be so much simpler.... (and suddenly most of the proponents of "simplicity" change their tone)
The racist news.
When the 85/87 interchange was being built in Silicon Valley, small hills on a lot were scraped down to become landfill for the freeway. Construction workers found a boulder-sized deposit of abestos. Caltrans picked up the tab for cleaning up that up. That lot became the future home of an auto dealership because it was so large and flat.
All these articles are complete fear mongering. Asbestos is still completely banned in consumer products. All that this does is allow them in a regulated fashion to allow on a case by case basis some use of asbestos if required by industry. For example the chlorine industry heavily utilizes asbestos as filters in the creation of chlorine based products (PVC materials) and there really is no substitute material that can do the job. This is allowing companies like this not to be hurt economically where its outsourced to other countries.
Make Russia Great Again!
Yet another pro-Russia move from Trump... no, those laws that passed forcing actions against Russia he just does them half-ass for now.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Let's bring back lead-based paints and gasoline.
It creates jobs you know.
Trump claims asbestos is "safe". Trump has a lot of real estate. Hmm...
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Ah yes, the stereotypical right-wing attacks on experts who have data and know what they're talking about.
I sometimes wonder how many of these ACs actually believe the nonsense they spout or whether they're some loser sitting at a desk in China or Russia being paid peanuts
We need to get rid of 2 regulations for every new one we create.
Drain the swamp!
BUT, do you have any idea how many permits it takes to drain a swamp?
Asbestos is nasty stuff, dying of Asbestos-related diseases is a horrible way to die. What's next bringing back DDT and PCB's?
Cannot find REALITY.SYS. Universe halted.
I sometimes wonder how many of these ACs actually believe the nonsense they spout or whether they're some loser sitting at a desk in China or Russia being paid peanuts
Don't worry, they can easily be both.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I whish that anyone who thinks asbestos is a matter of opinion or alternate-fact-bussines does not have to see a loved one go down with the type of cancer this stuff is known to cause...
Maybe not destroying our environment is more important than your commute. If you don't like how long your drive is, move somewhere else.
-SaNo
Quiz : What's the best way to be poisoned in the US of A ?
Answer : Support Trump's E.P.A the Extra Poison Agency.
EPA brought to you courtesy of the fucktards that voted for the orangutan.
Hey let's bring back arsenic-treated lumber, trans fats and CFCs
What do you mean "bring back" all of those things still exist, and are in use to this day, hell mills pump out CCA lumber but the metric fucking shit ton. Remember all those studies that said CCA was bad, it'd kill ya, cause all sorts of problems and there was a mad rush to restrict and ban it? Yeah, and guess what? Nothing, not a damn thing to show that it actually caused problems in wildlife or even humans. What was the solution when CCA was being restricted, well shit we'll just SOAK IT IN OIL(creosote) far worse for the environment, especially since it leeches as it's broken down. Should note that in north america rail road ties are still creosote soaked because it's cheaper then concrete and survives the environmental swings and abuse better then say concrete ties. At least ACQ, you've only got to worry about introducing copper into the environment. Of course, this can lead to copper poisoning in lakes as they discovered, and occasionally copper poisoning in humans if the water source people use to drink is already high in copper.
Trans fats are still everywhere, and CFCs are used in nearly every industry in the world still. The difference is, there's regulations on how it can all be used. Hell asbestos is an amazing fire stop, highly non-conductive, and makes excellent insulation. The problem has to do with the fibers that come off of it when a wire is broken, pipes coated with it have it break off and so-on.
Before someone goes hur-dur-dur, ur and ididot. Yeah, look. I was apprenticing when asbestos was still used in truck and automotive brakes. I spent the better part of 8 years breathing the dust from it, chances of me developing something from it? Low. More likely the shit in automotive fluids(brakes, transmission, oil, gasoline) will be what kills me, providing the general hereditary diseases or old age don't get me first. But even at that, I still believe that we should be researching ways to make asbestos safer and use it, rather then letting it sit in the ground doing nothing while we spend twice or four times the energy to make a synthetic that degrades three times as quickly.
Om, nomnomnom...
More asbestos! More asbestos! More asbestos!
Seriously, we literally elected Bart Simpson. What's wrong with my country?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
In the US money is king, actually it is more than king, it is a religion. All other considerations are null and voided. This is the natural consequence of late stage capitalism. Enjoy living in a poisoned country with a destroyed environment.
If you don't die from fires, tornadoes or flooding, poison sanctioned by the government will kill you.
Make America Great Again hell yeah.
So, I assume there are strict regulations in place to enforce safe installation then, right?
OK, so then there would have to be regulation on the proper use of installation, but no let's just blindly trust that ciompanies will do things in our best interest and not their bottom dollar.
There are basically two things you can do with your money after you've bought groceries and paid the water and electric bills, the basic necessities. You can spend the rest, buying things like lattes and Air Jordans, or you can save / invest it. Spending means the money is basically gone, saving means you'll have it when you need it later. You won't be homeless when you get hurt, sick or old.
Most saving is also investing - the money is used to build something, such as a semiconductor fab or a ship, which produces useful things. The saver gets back their money as chips are sold, plus more money. A LOT more, if they save for retirement while they are young. Having things like semiconductor fabs, next-gen battery research labs, etc is good for a country. A country with no investment is a tribal society living in tents.
One very important example of the spend / invest decision is housing. I was renting an apartment, which meant I was spending over $1,000 / month, $12K per year was just going away from my bank account. Now I spend about the same amount to BUY a house, meaning I'll get most of the money back when I sell the house. Over time, I'll be $300,000 better off buying (investing in the house) than I would renting (spending).
(Getting a house three times as expensive as you need can be a bad idea, whether renting or buying - still renting is generally worse.)
Anyway saving and investing is really good, for the individual doing the investing and for the country. As Barak Obama said, "if you want people to do less of something, tax it". A high tax on investment tends to get people to invest less, which is bad for them and bad for the country. That's why most developed countries tax investment at a much lower rate than the US does. They WANT their people to save an invest, because it's good for them individually and good for the country overall.
You may say "that's not fair that people who save up do better than people who spend all their money as soon as they get it!" Waa. Reality is, not every course of action gets the same results. Your choices matter. Doing smart things, like saving, gets better results. That's why those things are called "smart".
And yet the death rate by fire has steadily fallen since asbestos was banned in 1970.
You didn't actually read the article, did you?
The problem with Asbestos isn't that some strains cause cancer (only a tiny percentage of all possible strains). The problem is that it's a total headache to deal with if you open up the walls in your house and discover some.
First of all, how do you know it's Asbestos or stuff that looks like it?
Second of all, how do you know which strain it is?
You have to send a sample to a lab and wait a few weeks every time. Do you know what a nightmare this is when you are doing renovations?
We would all be better off banning the use of this substance in construction. It's just not worth the headache.
Yep. That's right, pardner. The government shouldn't stop god fearing corporations from using whatever the hell they want, however the hell they want to. Who care if they put asbestos into every God-damned thing. Slap a warning sticker on it and move on.
It's not like every damned fool in the world would do something as stupid as, say, remove a floor that might have asbestos in it, or shingles, or ceiling tiles, or insulation.
Hell, if you are too stupid to know that every thing in the world could potential kill you in the most painful, drawn-out way, then maybe you don't deserve to live.
Also, fuck you. Both of my maternal grandparents died from Asbestosis. My grandfather dragged home asbestos fibers on his clothes from his work in a steel mill. Those two gentle people suffered for years and then died coughing blood.
Maybe you should, too.
Someone needs to tear this Magarity faggot's head clean off, dip it in "clean, wonderful asbestos" and shove it up HIS TREASONOUS FAGGOT ASS,
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What's next? Bring back DDT? Deregulate formaldehyde? Radium jars? Start letting tobacco companies advertise that smoking is healthy?
What do you mean "bring back" all of those things still exist, and are in use to this day,
You're right about CCA. You're mostly wrong about CFCs which have largely been eliminated in most of the world, and are severely restricted. Trans fats were just banned by the FDA as a food additive, and largely have disappeared from food. So I'd rate the OPs statement "mostly accurate".
. Remember all those studies that said CCA was bad, it'd kill ya, cause all sorts of problems and there was a mad rush to restrict and ban it? Yeah, and guess what? Nothing, not a damn thing to show that it actually caused problems in wildlife or even humans.
Arsenic has been a known toxin for hundreds of years. The lumber doesn't appear to be a huge problem because mostly the arsenic gets attached to soil particles. it's more a problem if you burn the stuff.
Yeah, look. I was apprenticing when asbestos was still used in truck and automotive brakes. I spent the better part of 8 years breathing the dust from it, chances of me developing something from it? Low.
Not really the answer I'd want. Low? I'd want zero.
Yes, Big Giant Orange Head wants to bring all those back again! MAGA, remember? It's strong doses of DDT, formaldehyde, radium and tobacco that MAG in the first place. Look, those things were around "when America was Great", so obviously they Made America Great. Get with it!
However it's not because they are healthy, it's because they are cheaper. When you kill your population off with those substances, you don't have to worry about "healthcare", "insurance", "old folks homes", all that loser stuff. We want winners!
So MAGA and bring on the toxins!!!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Fuck me, you win
https://blogs.biomedcentral.co...
In GOD we trust, all others we monitor.
Each new one we create will be 3 times as complicated.
It isn't the number of regulations but the complexity of existing ones.
Starting a business if the local government came in and offered free guidance to businesses on what to do and not do. It would make things easier.
You business deals with hazardous chemicals. There should be guidance telling how to properly dispose of them, so they can include it in their business plan.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
So, I assume there are strict regulations in place to enforce safe installation then, right?
It's right there in the summary, never mind having to go to the article: " The proposed new rule would create a new process for regulating uses of asbestos"
Does anyone know what is actually going on here?
From TFA I expected to see text replaced or removed but all it seems to do is add Asbestos and a specific list of uses to substance list of 40 CFR 721.
Does the presence of this text somehow weaken existing new use restrictions of Asbestos? Or is it just that the text added while intentionally nerfed does not in any way reduce existing regulations/laws/whatever governing use of Asbestos?
I'm so confused...
Not of regression (well, yes, that, too), but of Russia.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/russian-asbestos-trump_face
On 25 June 2018, a Russian mining company named Uralasbest, which is one of the world’s largest producers of asbestos, posted a message of support for President Trump on their official Facebook and VK (a Russian version of Facebook) pages. The post included photographs of packed asbestos material adorned with the face of Trump and the text “Approved by Donald Trump, 45th President of the United States.”
They aren't even trying to hide it anymore.
Die in a fire, troll.
Russia has some large (maybe the largest?) asbestos mines, so they can use the same trolls they use on political stuff.
It's like we've elected a cartoon villain for president. Where's Captain Planet when you need them.
You are right in the sense if we can get more people to die sooner, less burden on social security, traffic, etc. Problem is you will not like it if you or your loved ones were selected to die sooner than others.
mfwright@batnet.com
Is anyone surprised that a Russian asbestos company is putting Trump's face on their packaging? And is anyone surprised that the company is Russian?
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/russian-asbestos-trump_face/
The sad part is that such people will move to mess up something pristine once they tarnished where they lived.
Yeah, who give a shit about things like peoples health or the environment we live in. Lets just do whatever the fuck we want!
People's health? Asbestos is hands down the greatest fire retardant ever discovered; it's only cancer causing when breathed in shredded microfiber form. Banning it everywhere no matter what is wild overreaction. More asbestos installed safely would prevent fires and improve heath.
Maybe. But it is the removal of the asbestos -- in a fire where particles form an aerosol -- or when the building is torn down -- that it gets into the air. I've been in plenty of buildings with asbestos. They were built long ago, and the stuff is fine while it remains undisturbed.
US buildings are primarily 'throw-away', meaning that the building will probably come down within 50 years, creating an asbestos problem.
There is a persistent error even experts make in nutrition: attributing the effects of a particular compound to a wider class of compounds to which it belongs for classification purposes. Not all saturated fats are bad, not all unsaturated fats are good. Trans fats (which by definition are unsaturated) are not all bad; the ones that are reasonably common in nature like CLA are good for you. It's when hydrogenation creates products with very high quantities of stuff like elaidic acid, which is rare in nature, that you have problems. Elaidic acid looks enough like the more common vaccenic acid that your body tries to process it, but with subtle differences in the long term.
As for CFCs, global production is much, much lower than it was in 1987. The global goal is a complete eradication by 2030, and in general most of the world has been making steady progress in reduction, but evidence shows somebody in East Asia has been cheating since around 2012. Since it is unlikely to be Japan or Korea, I leave it up to you to figure out who has a large enough economy to hide the emission of 13,000 tons of bootleg CFCs annually. It's probably not Mongolia.
Asbestosis usually requires heavy and regular exposure. However it's not the absestos directly that causes problems, but the long-term effects of chronic low-level inflammation. It takes twenty to fifty years for symptoms to manifest. If I'd had moderate occupational exposure I wouldn't freak out, but I'd take extra good care of my lungs to keep that inflammation down. That means not smoking, getting your flu shots, an anti-inflammatory diet and living somewhere with low air pollution -- all things that are good for you anyway.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Hate-filled A/Cs are really bringing down this site.
I absolutely, positively, 100% agree. But...
Is your dad proud of your dialog or do you not know who he is?
In this case I don't think the GP was out of line. Well, maybe at the very end with the "you deserve to die coughing blood" part. There's never any cause for that in a civilized discussion.
Yes, they are doing it to my country now.
My grandfather dragged home asbestos fibers on his clothes from his work in a steel mill.
These Trumplodytes would have it so that he would be charged with theft for bringing those fibers home and fired so they could get him off of their health insurance.
it's only cancer causing when breathed in shredded microfiber form.
Then why did people at every step of the supply chain, from miners to end-users, suffer from exposure to it?
go fuck yourself you piece of shit putin cock sucking faggot
Look on the bright side. The asbestos is instant death to all Trump Supporters because they will buy this dangerous evil cancerous substance. Liberals are too smart to touch this stuff. Also our lungs are so advanced that we are less susceptable to mesothelioma. There might be a few liberal deaths, but many more Republicans will die. I mean how can we establish our people loving liberal utopia that values human life unless we kill all the evil old white republicans.
"Greatest" =! "only".
He's right btw. Asbestos is an excellent fire retardant to use in insulation layers. We have nothing even close to it. Nowadays we use various mineral wools and fibreglass instead. Those are much worse in terms of their ability to retard fire.
Problem is, it costs a lot to actually dismantle structures with asbestos, because of cancer risks from breathing in the microfibre form. And if something does go seriously wrong, such as for example building collapse, there's no way to contain the asbestos dust from spreading. Now if there's strict regulation, there are places where asbestos may be used safely. Military applications where maximum ability to retard fire is critical come to mind.
But for general use, it's unlikely that asbestos will ever become usable in Western world again. This move for example, suggests that new regulations must be put in place for using it instead of blanket ban. Such regulations would likely place strict limits, enabling usage in some areas where fire retarding ability is critical at a great cost, and nowhere else.
Trump will have children's toys made from asbestos in no time.
Water works pretty well. As in sprinkler systems.
Unfortunately the asbestos used in insulation was also the most friable form and dangerous to health that we used. I live in an asbestos house. But I wouldn't be caught... errr. alive near an asbestos fire blanket, or a place with asbestos insulation.
If you think you can just shove water into the isolation layer and that will prevent fires, you're beyond stupid.
Correct. But nowadays, asbestos when used in building insulation is typically used in self-contained panels (as far as I have seen). These would be safe until you break them apart, and breaking apart a self contained panel would require quite severe efforts.
Also, I'm fairly certain that you would in fact be caught alive near asbestos fire blanket in a raging fire. See, dying of fire is a very painful way to go, and at that point you will choose "possible, potential lung damage that may materialise in many tens of years" over "immediate and excruciatingly painful death". The issue isn't that this is a dichotomy however, because it isn't. And while I would consider an asbestos fire blanket to be a good thing if it's properly sealed when not in use, it's not like I wouldn't prefer something that would be significantly more expensive that would be almost as good of a job and that wouldn't be a hazard to long term health to my lungs.
Notably, I put my money where my mouth is on this one. I paid for a decent fire blanket for my home. Of course, I also don't smoke, and generally avoid smoker-filled areas, because I like to have my lungs working long term in general.
Asbestos insulation, depends on how it's done. Properly contained panels are safe. You should probably be more worried about radon in the air if you live at ground level, and street dust and smog if you live in a big city. Those will give you much worse lung problems than properly contained asbestos insulation ever will.
But if it's one of those older constructions which are nowadays torn down specifically because you have asbestos fibres flaking off, we're in total agreement. Luckily it's exceedingly unlikely that many (and in most places in Western world, any) such buildings are still standing. Most of the current asbestos problems are about condemned buildings being torn down safely, not about safety of people living in intact ones.
I don't believe you understand the casual factors for Asbestos and Cancer. 1 fiber of Asbestos in your lungs will eventually cause cancer. you will probably just die of something else first. It is a very small sharp item that can cut the DNA in the cells. eventually it will cut something important. enough fibers and the odds of it happening become sooner rather than later.
MAGA!
Also, I'm fairly certain that you would in fact be caught alive near asbestos fire blanket in a raging fire.
Nope, because they are banned and the alternatives are equally as effective. ;-)
But yes we are generally in agreement in contained panels. I think the hysteria has exposed more people to asbestos than would otherwise have been exposed. I decided last time I inspected my roof (corrugated asbestos) to get it re-sealed. My local school on the other hand closed a building off for a month and had a borderline hazmat bubble built around it (think of the children) because the perfectly fine condition panels was made of asbestos. Just coat the thing in paint if you're worried, but in generally don't be. That stuff lasts a really long time.
It doesn't "cut the DNA in cells" - it interferes with chromosome segregation during cell division, leading to chromosome abnormalities in the divided cells.
And no, asbestos is worse than "something that will kill you after you're dead". It's not just an initiator of cancer, but also a promoter. If you have asbestos in your lungs and smoke, it will also significantly raise the cancer risk from smoking, more so than either risk taken on their own, for example.
America is a nation whose national religion is the worship of the demon Mammon. You can see this from their fake priests "send money now!" to their warped morality (dollars is the only value that exists in their world)
They're only banned in small amount of Western countries. Worldwide, overwhelming majority of countries does not ban them.
Reminder: do not project Western values upon the world. We're a tiny minority.
An asbestos fiber is gigantic in relation to a DNA molecule. It's the inflammation, not mechanical damage.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Yeah, so you've got two workers who were exposed to LIQUID CCA. Seriously, I worked at a mill that made pressure treated lumber with CCA, you suited up when handling it. Your entire study has to do with direct exposure to CCA, not surface contact. You get more arsenic from eating hot dogs.
Not nearly as prevalent as they once were, although this was primarily market-driven.
True and give it another 10 years and they'll discover that maybe they weren't really as bad as they thought, just like butter, milk, eggs, bacon, and various other fats.
Correct. But remind me why R12 and R22 are being phased out? The Trump EPA could just as well allow the mass-manufacture of this stuff again because, you know, the destruction of the ozone layer is fake like global warming.
Well that's easy, because they were more damaging to the environment. Problem though, because the "replacement coolants" are smaller in size then R12 and R22 the devices they're used in(fridges, AC and so on), tend to have more leaks. Half a dozen of one, half a dozen of the other right? Don't forget that various cutting fluids also count as CFC and they're still in use in everything from milling to machining.
I'm not going to take a chance on something so easily avoidable. Wouldn't you?
It's not easily avoidable though, the stuff is everywhere. If you live within 70-200 miles of any type of open-pit mining you've probably been breathing in trace amounts all your life. There are ways to make it safer though.
Agreed. But until then keep that crap away from me. It's a known carcinogen when inhaled and I'm not going to sign up to take such a silly risk.
Then don't breath broken fibers, simple enough right? That's the thing, it has amazing, absolutely amazing industrial properties far beyond anything that we make right now. It's the decades of improper handling followed up by massive lawsuits that have caused issues. There's a very good reason it was used as a fire-stop between connected buildings, for example. Even the manufactured board that we use now that's absolutely permeated with an assload of toxic chemicals is shit compared to it. Oh and the chemical residue from it burning? More toxic and has more immediate health issues then asbestos, by more toxic I mean will cause immediate and permanent scaring of lungs, and can kill an unprotected person in 20 minutes. That's what we replaced asbestos with, which is perfectly fine unless you start hammering away at it.
Om, nomnomnom...
Not really the answer I'd want. Low? I'd want zero.
Then don't go outside. You're more likely to die from melanoma(skin cancer) then I'd die from mesothelioma(asbestos cancer).
Om, nomnomnom...
Asbestos is only not-important to those who didn't have to live with a close family member dying from it.
carcinogens are bad, and we as humans should work very hard to avoid using them, because it's the right thing to do, not because it's easy or hard or cheap. Its Right.
Verily, he is a son of Trump. Ready to be thrown under the bus when needed. Because buses are so un-American.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Thatâ(TM)s really stupid if our government is now telling Americans that itâ(TM)s safe to use dangerous materials such as Asbestos along with artificial colors and flavors including high fructose corn syrup when itâ(TM)s at not! You see these ingredients and materials to build houses are banned in most parts of the world! But there jumping to conclusions with it would hurt jobs and the creators of the jump market ðYðYââ(TM)ïðY¦ðYââ(TM)ï
It's banned in the EU, Switzerland, Norway, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand and quite a few other countries. Some of the countries that still allow its use are Western: tge USA and Canada, for example.
Did you notice that every country you listed falls within "Western" umbrella, and their totality is indeed a small fraction of the world?
Because new always equals safer, especially where the Trump administration is concerned.
Goit.
South Korea and Japan - and their values in particular - are not Western. Industrialized, sure. Modern, you betcha. But Western? Nope.
Actually both are considered "hybrid Western".
That's as embarrassing as a Birther seeing a picture of Obama eating humus and using it as proof that the man is a Muslim who was born in Kenya.
Because asbestos (and DDT, and leaded gasoline, etc) are only health problems in western countries. Insert eyeroll emoji here.
FTFY
Because the incredibly unproductive risk aversion of Western countries doesn't really exist outside them. Case for DDT vs malaria for example is clear. Take DDT if you're sane. Same for leaded gasoline vs billions of people not being able to afford fuel.
As for your last statement, there's an old quote: "If you're not communist when you're young, you have no heart. If you're not capitalist when you're old, you have no brain".
Hopefully you're still young. No one likes edgy and ignorant adults.