A Risk Assessment for Exposure to Glass Wool

• Published in: Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology Vol. 30; no. 2; pp. 96 - 109
• Main Authors: Wilson, Richard, Langer, A.M., Nolan, R.P.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: San Diego, CA Elsevier Inc 01.10.1999; Elsevier
• Subjects: Animals; Biological and medical sciences; Carcinogens - adverse effects; Chemical and industrial products toxicology. Toxic occupational diseases; Construction Materials - adverse effects; Glass; glass wool; Humans; Inhalation Exposure; Inorganic dusts (pneumoconiosises) and organic dusts (byssinosis etc.); Medical sciences; Mineral Fibers - adverse effects; Occupational Diseases - epidemiology; Occupational Diseases - etiology; Occupational Exposure; Risk Assessment - methods; synthetic vitreous fibers; Toxicology; Human; Evaluation; Artificial fiber; Toxicity; Legislation; Synthetic fiber; Risk; Glass wool; Malignant tumor; Mineral fiber; Epidemiology; Carcinogen; Animal; Insulating material
• ISSN: 0273-2300; 1096-0295
• DOI: 10.1006/rtph.1999.1344

Synthetic vitreous fibers (SVFs) have been widely used as insulation material in places where asbestos was used many years ago and therefore the hazards have been compared. Since the three principal types of asbestos fibers types have caused lung cancer at high exposures, there is a widely held belief that all fibers are carcinogenic if inhaled in large enough doses. Hence, on a morphological basis, SVFs have been studied for their carcinogenic potential. However, there is considerable evidence that differences exist among fibers in their potency to produce a carcinogenic response. In this attempt to carry out a numerical risk assessment for the installers of blown glass wool (fiber) insulation, we start with a characterization of the material; then we review the exposures both in manufacturing and installation. Neither the epidemiological studies of human exposure nor the animal studies have shown a marked hazardous effect from glass wool and we can therefore be sure that any effect that might exist is small. But in this case, as in many other situations where there is a potential hazard, society desires further reassurance and therefore we have made a mechanistic calculation. There are good estimates of the risk associated with exposure to chrysotile asbestos at high exposures and doses. We have therefore taken these numbers and discussed how much less risky an exposure to glass wool fibers might be. We conclude that for a given fiber count, glass wool is five to ten times less risky (and of course the risk might be zero). The risk for a nonsmoking installer of glass wool fiber insulation who wears a respirator is about 6 in a million (and might be zero) per year. This means that out of a million installers there might be six lung cancers from this cause every year or out of 10,000 installers there might be one in 16 years. The low risk of 6 in a million per year of a worker blowing glass wool is consistent with the fact that no one has found any of cancer attributable to the manufacture or installation of glass wool fibers in spite of diligent searches. This is compared with several other occupational risks. Nonetheless common prudence suggests that any installer of blown glass wool fiber insulation wear a respirator.