You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 254 No. 10, September 13, 1985 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  LETTERS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (4)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Asbestos-Related Diseases

Howard Frumkin, MD, MPH
Cambridge Hospital Cambridge, Mass

David Egilman, MD, MPH; Michael Kelly, MD, MPH
Greater Cincinnati Occupational Health Center

David Christiani, MD, MPH
Norfolk County Hospital South Braintree, Mass

Lewis Pepper, MD; James Cone, MD
San Francisco General Hospital

Nancy Sprince, MD, MPH
Massachusetts General Hospital Boston

Jay Himmelstein, MD, MPH
University of Massachusetts Medical Center Worcester

JAMA. 1985;254(10):1307-1308.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

As members of the Diagnostic Criteria Committee of the American Public Health Association's Occupational Health Section, we were pleased to see published the report on asbestos-related diseases of the Council on Scientific Affairs.1 We were especially pleased at the disclaimer, which states that the report "is not intended as a standard of medical care" (p 2593), because a series of inaccuracies, omissions, and biases makes the report unsuitable for any such use. Specifically, we would like to address seven points.

  1. The diagnosis of asbestosis. As practitioners of occupational medicine, we strongly maintain that asbestosis should be diagnosed in any patient with a significant exposure history and with characteristic findings on physical examination (rales), pulmonary function testing (restrictive lung disease), and chest roentgenography (interstitial disease). In fact, not all three findings are always necessary. In this regard, the report is unrealistic for two reasons. First, it
. . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Footnotes

Edited by Drummond Rennie, MD, Senior Contributing Editor.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1985 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.