Machine Translated by Google

TECHNICAL ADVICE
About the continued illegal use of asbestos at Dow Brasil inCandeias, Bahia
The Center for Studies on Occupational Health and Human Ecology – CESTEH,
belonging to the National School of Public Health, a unit of the Oswaldo Foundation
Cruz, located on its campus in Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, has a strong
commitment and dedication to the cause of banning asbestos (synonymous withasbestos) in our country since the beginning of its activity in 1985.
The Brazilian Federal Supreme Court decided in 2017 for PROHIBITIONCOMPLETE of the use of asbestos in our country, after many years of struggle byhealth and human rights sectors, parliamentarians, and all
pro-health forces; Finally, Brazil became one of the 69 countries that have already banned theasbestos due to the severity of the diseases caused by this material, whateverwhatever your variety. Mineral exploration, distribution, trade,export, import, in the processing industry, and any other withoutexception.
However, a sentence handed down by the Labor Judge Head of the Court
Regional Labor Office of the 5th Region, in Bahia, Hon. Mrs. Maria de Fatima CaribeSeixas, on 10/11/2023, authorized the multinational Dow Brasil to continue
using asbestos diaphragm technology until 10/31/2024,
when the company should cease using this technology and the asbestos stock
existing must be banned. The sentence mentions the existence of approximately
115 tons of asbestos, in March 2023.
The judge's decision follows from the proposal of the PUBLIC MINISTRY OF
WORK on Incidental Precautionary Measure against DOW BRASIL
CESTEHCENTER FOR THE STUDY OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND HUMAN ECOLOGY
Rua Leopoldo Bulhões, 1480, 1º de Maio Building (CESTEH), Manguinhos.
Rio de Janeiro - RJ. ZIP code: 21041-210(21) 2598-2681/2598-2682 / (21) 2270-3219
contatocesteh.ensp@fiocruz.br

Machine Translated by GoogleINDÚSTRIA E COMERCIO DE PRODUTOS QUÍMICOS LTDA, for the facts and grounds
contained in the initial (ID 442055c) in which the Public Ministry ofWork in Bahia requires the ban on Dow's asbestos stock
Brazil. “The present action” adds the MPT:

“results from civil inquiry No. 00102.2018.05.000/7 initiated based on the Notice of Fact
brought by the Brazilian Association of Those Exposed to Asbestos (ABREA), which
reports that the defendant is the only
company in Brazil in the petrochemical sector that still uses asbestos diaphragmtechnology in its production process and that the collective agreement signed in 2017
creates a particular interpretation of the risks of asbestos, without any technical or legal
basis, supported by a mere agreement between the company and the union, intending tolegitimize
modulation of effects not foreseen in the STF decision that reaffirmed theunconstitutionality of article 2 of Federal Law 9,055/1995, of 11/29/2017, previously
declared incidentally in the judgment of ADI 3937. It states that the stock of asbestos
stored in the industrial plant of the defendant company does not have legal support
capable of legitimizing its economic use, either by the authority of the decision of theFederal Supreme Court, or by the state law ofprohibition, or due to the lack of registration with the Labor Inspectorate. In summary, it
states that the Federal Supreme Court declared article 2 of Law No. 9,055/95
unconstitutional on the basis of insufficient protection and violation of the constitutional
principles of health and environmental protection, nullifying the authorization

legislation for the economic use of carcinogenic raw materials. It states that Law No.
9,976/2000, which “chancelled” the obsolete and polluting technology of asbestos
diaphragms for chlorine production, is derivative legislation, subordinate and dependent
on the device declared unconstitutional by the concentrated control ofconstitutionality in charge of the Federal Supreme Court. Therefore, due to delay andattractiveness, Law No. 9,976/2000 must also be declared unconstitutional in its provisions
that “chancelled” the obsolete and polluting technology of asbestos diaphragms for chlorine
production. It emphasizes that the technological replacement ofasbestos diaphragms using plastic membrane technology, already successfully
implemented in the chemical sector, is a mandatory requirement established by ILO
Convention 162 and an international commitment made by the Federative Republic of
Brazil before international society. Thus, industrial stocks and processes

developed using asbestos diaphragm technology in subnational entities that published state lawsbanning CESTEH

CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND HUMAN ECOLOGY
Rua Leopoldo Bulhões, 1480, 1º de Maio Building (CESTEH), Manguinhos.
Rio de Janeiro - RJ. ZIP code: 21041-210(21) 2598-2681/2598-2682 / (21) 2270-3219
contatocesteh.ensp@fiocruz.br

Machine Translated by Google

use of asbestos, notably the State of Bahia, where the Ministry
Labor Public found industrial activities structured inobsolete and polluting technology are characterized as a violation ofRule of Law and serious and illicit violation of occupational health and the working
environment.

Judge Maria de Fatima Caribe Seixas repeats, in her analysis, the statement ofMinister of the STF Rosa Weber, as Rapporteur in ADI 3470, “was also
clarified that the prohibition of exploitation does not prevent, nor exempt, thecarrying out necessary measures for the correct closure of activities,
in compliance with relevant environmental legislation”. Furthermore, and as
expressly registered by the Minister Rapporteur on page 43 of your vote (ID301326d) “exposure to asbestos in the activity of chlorine production byelectrolysis method is carried out without exposing people to the material.”
We might ask, reading the argument, whether exposure to asbestos does not occur
toxic, because there would have been intense mobilization throughout the world, and evenin Brazil, to replace this criminal technology? Including “bothDow Química's largest competitors, in São Paulo and Alagoas, carried out thereplacement in the production process without eliminating jobs. "Thatcompany has already had enough time, more than 15 years, to adapt to this law”,
stated Fernanda Giannasi on the ABREA website on 04/25/2018 – 6 years ago!!

The Honorable Judge adds that the company Dow proposed a schedule for thetechnology replacement by the year 2023. However, the company usedof the COVID-19 epidemic to postpone the deadline by another 2 and a half years, i.e.
until December 2025. It does not clarify why. Furthermore, Dow argues,
which, according to Exma, has been operating in the activity for over 40 years “adopting strictmeasures to protect workers and, in this long period ofperformance, no case or record ofillness due to exposure to chrysotile asbestos, not even in relation toretired employees.
Regarding this statement, we have a lot to say: Bahia is one of the states with thehighest record of deaths from malignant mesothelioma, the so-called breast cancer
CESTEHCENTER FOR THE STUDY OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND HUMAN ECOLOGY
Rua Leopoldo Bulhões, 1480, 1º de Maio Building (CESTEH), Manguinhos.
Rio de Janeiro - RJ. ZIP code: 21041-210(21) 2598-2681/2598-2682 / (21) 2270-3219
contatocesteh.ensp@fiocruz.br

Machine Translated by Google

asbestos, throughout the country, despite the immense difficulties under which the diseasehide. We even found a death in Candeias, Dow's headquarters,
registered in the Mortality Information System of the Ministry of Bahia;
finding proof of this person's exposure in Dow activities istask that the SUS will undertake. Brazilian science has promoted
great advances in revealing this iceberg of hidden diseases and deaths, whether
because symptoms take 40 to 50 years to appear, or because
workers and even doctors are intimidated into not complaining or informing thecorrect diagnosis due to fear of pressure of all types, or due to the precariousness of the care provided
to patients. It is easy to understand thatsick patients who live in places with few care resources,
They seek medical help in often distant cities. But we arein action, and managing, as dozens of countries have managed, to fend off
curtains, in some cases criminal, that conceal or contribute to concealing,
the sick and those killed by asbestos. We are directly committed tothis task, we and a group of excellent health professionals from SUS andof Brazilian science that unfolds in defense of the population.

At the international level, a solid consensus was also reached by all
health agencies, such as the WHO, the ILO, the Specialty Societies
Medical, work environment and environmental regulatory agencies ingeneral, in the sense that asbestos fibers are confirmed to causeof some cancers, and other non-malignant diseases, AT ANY DOSE
fiber that is vacuumed. That is, there is no safe dose for humans, asThis is the case for all substances classified by the International Agency forCancer Research (IARC, its acronym in French), a specialized institution of theWorld Health Organization, as belonging to Group 1A: Substances
Proven to be Carcinogenic1 .

1

IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Man. Volume 14.
1977.
CESTEHCENTER FOR THE STUDY OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND HUMAN ECOLOGY
Rua Leopoldo Bulhões, 1480, 1º de Maio Building (CESTEH), Manguinhos.
Rio de Janeiro - RJ. ZIP code: 21041-210(21) 2598-2681/2598-2682 / (21) 2270-3219
contatocesteh.ensp@fiocruz.br

Machine Translated by Google

Such diseases are very serious, cause a lot of suffering, incurable, andin several cases, with very short survival, as is the case with mesothelioma
malignant, the emblematic cancer of asbestos, which causes 90% of mesotheliomas,
which reaches the lining membranes of the lung (pleura), heart(pericardium), and the intestine (peritoneum): death occurs only 12 months after
the onset of symptoms and signs of illness, regardless of any type oftreatment that is applied. Alone, asbestos is the main cause ofcancers of work in the world.
The company claims, and the court ruling supports it, that only 4 workers
they act directly in contact with asbestos! Who would these candidates be?
to cancer? The owner of the company, or someone in your family? An engineer
or administrator? They even claim that they are outsourced!!! As if the lives
human beings had different value. The “effectiveness” of the PPE used, if indeed it is, isprecarious, as already documented. We doctors and other health professionals,
we defend human lives one by one. Every life counts.
The sentence of the TRT-5th Region, Dow Brasil, and the then Minister Rosa Weber, if
supported law no. 9,976, of July 3, 2000, which provides in its Article 2 “Staytechnologies currently in use in the country for the production of chlorine are maintainedby the electrolysis process, as long as the following practices are observed byproducing industries.” While in its Article 3, the installation ofnew factories for the production of chlorine using the electrolysis process with technology
mercury and asbestos diaphragm.
The argument would be that law 9,976 is subsequent to law 9,055/95, considered
unconstitutional by the STF, based on the “scientific consensus in relation to thehealth problems caused by exposure to asbestos” (cf. Minister Rosa Weber),but due to its publication after law 9,055 it would be outside the decision of theSTF that completely banned asbestos.
It is worrying to think that something banned could be used with the argument that the work process,the product technology, or the product itself,CESTEH
CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND HUMAN ECOLOGY
Rua Leopoldo Bulhões, 1480, 1º de Maio Building (CESTEH), Manguinhos.
Rio de Janeiro - RJ. ZIP code: 21041-210(21) 2598-2681/2598-2682 / (21) 2270-3219
contatocesteh.ensp@fiocruz.br

Machine Translated by Google

have been created and even regulated by a new law, which did not exist whenof the STF decision. The abusive use of asbestos in Dow's chlor-alkali plantBrazil in Candeias could be an extremely dangerous precedent for
Brazilian public health, in addition to being dangerous for workers and residentsof the place.

When deciding, the Judge highlights the text of the rapporteur’s vote “In this context, I understand

It is timely to record that the eventual recognition, by this Supreme Court,of the unconstitutionality of art. 2nd of Law No. 9,055/1995, which regulates theextraction, industrialization, commercialization and use of chrysotile asbestos,does not have the power to affect situations governed by Law No. 9,976/2000, which does notis the subject of this challenge. This distinction, considering “the frequency, theduration and level of exposure, as well as the type of work and conditions
existing in the workplace”, and, in particular, its transitory nature,seems at first to find support in article 1, § 3, of the” (ADI 4.066, Convention
No. 162/ILO Report Min. ROSA WEBER, Full Court, judged on 08/24/2017, DJe
dated 03/07/2018 — emphasis added)."Asbestos/asbestos is being completely banned because its effects
serious consequences for human health do not depend on qualifications such as frequency,duration and level of exposure, as well as the type of work and conditions
you exist in it. People who inhale any amount of asbestos fibers
may become ill from one of the diseases caused by the material. It may occur
only variation in the time of onset of symptoms and theirintensity. Five varieties of asbestos, called amphiboles, present
risk to humans 300 to 500 times greater than the chrysotile variety,considering dose-response parameters. But this is completely
different from justifying that human beings are exposed to such a serious risk,
to favor the economic interests of the company.

CESTEHCENTER FOR THE STUDY OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND HUMAN ECOLOGY
Rua Leopoldo Bulhões, 1480, 1º de Maio Building (CESTEH), Manguinhos.
Rio de Janeiro - RJ. ZIP code: 21041-210(21) 2598-2681/2598-2682 / (21) 2270-3219
contatocesteh.ensp@fiocruz.br

Machine Translated by Google

The Honorable Judge still insists on recovering the text of Minister Rosa's opinion
Weber that “the prohibition of exploitation does not prevent, nor exempt, thecarrying out necessary measures for the correct closure of activities,
in compliance with relevant environmental legislation.”
Until the definitive and universal ban on the use of asbestos in any part of thenational territory and in any economic activity, Brazil was one of the fivelargest producers and consumers of asbestos in the world, being
also an important exporter. As a result, products containing
asbestos in its composition are widespread in buildings, houses, hospitals,companies, in short all types of construction, in addition to being rejected without
any care, in virtually any type of public or private spacewhen it is discarded. Places where the warning “Be careful, here is
asbestos, carcinogenic product”. We therefore have an immense environmental liability

to be undone over the next generations, as it is truly atask too big for a single generation. This is also the experienceof countries that began tackling the problem several decades ago.
How the diseases inexorably caused by these fibers can linger
from 20 to 60 years old to manifest themselves, there is enormous ease for thesecases go unnoticed by the health system, this is also a
painful learning from countries that started using asbestos in the firsthalf of the 20th century, and as a result, the first to suffer from epidemics
of asbestos that began in the middle of the last century. Today is fineestablished that, after this interval determined by the biology of the diseases andof people, during which it is very difficult to catch the disease in progress
silent, diseases will certainly appear unless those infected
die from other causes, or die without asbestos diseases being
diagnosed, which seems to be what happens most. Brazil has already passed thisphase, and today we have documented more than ten thousand cases of diseases
related to asbestos – DRA, which appeared in dozens of professions
CESTEHCENTER FOR THE STUDY OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND HUMAN ECOLOGY
Rua Leopoldo Bulhões, 1480, 1º de Maio Building (CESTEH), Manguinhos.
Rio de Janeiro - RJ. ZIP code: 21041-210(21) 2598-2681/2598-2682 / (21) 2270-3219
contatocesteh.ensp@fiocruz.br

Machine Translated by Google

and economic activities. There are no exceptions: where there is asbestos, diseases
will appear, and where mesothelioma exists, asbestos exists or existed.

When demanding an extension of the deadline for changing technology, Dow Brasil
lists the changes that must be resolved. It is necessary that thepublic authorities monitor the progress of these stages. Because thehistory of industries that use asbestos in Brazil and around the world, is to go
postponing indefinitely, while the money is coming in.
According to Abiclor data, in 2019: the chlor-alkali industry generated income
2.3 billion reais; employed only 1,440 workers, with a salary
average of 7,500.00 reais, but each worker added to the GDP the value
R$1.6 million annually!!
Lives must be preserved. Asbestos must be banned

Rio de Janeiro, April 12, 2024
Center for the Study of Occupational Health and Human Ecology

CESTEHCENTER FOR THE STUDY OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND HUMAN ECOLOGY
Rua Leopoldo Bulhões, 1480, 1º de Maio Building (CESTEH), Manguinhos.
Rio de Janeiro - RJ. ZIP code: 21041-210(21) 2598-2681/2598-2682 / (21) 2270-3219contatocesteh.ensp@fiocruz.br