|
|
Hotels: biphasic mesothelioma |
|
|
|
What are the Risk Factors for Breast Cancer?
Breast cancer is a largely unknown disease until today, despite the fact that it affects almost ten percent of the women above the age of forty years all over the world. The causes of this killer cancer are not known even after decades of research into it. Similarly it is unknown why some women have higher chances of getting breast cancers than others.
Though the causative factors are not known, some risk factors have been identified. There is no medical proof why these factors make the disease more probable, but this is a study of observation. In a vast cross-section of women with the observed risk factors, it has been found that the chances of getting breast cancers are very high.
The various risk factors for breast cancer are as follows:-
(1) Family History of Breast Cancer
If a near relative like a mother or a sister has had breast cancer, then there is a very high chance that the cancer will occur sometime in life. This propensity is observed even if far relatives such as cousins and aunts have had breast cancer, though the chances are lesser as the relatives are more removed. Even if a male relative has had breast cancer or prostate cancer, then there is a chance of getting breast cancer. This clearly indicates that breast cancer runs through family lines through inheritance. Certainly the chances are very high if more than one family member has had breast cancer.
(2) Personal History of Breast Cancer
If a woman has had breast cancer in the past, then there is a great chance that the breast cancer may recur. This is true even if the cancer had been removed in its benign stage itself. Sometimes the cancer cells spread into the nearby lymph. This makes a possibility that the cancer will occur in the opposite breast. In fact, women who have had cancer in one breast have 50 to 75% more chances of developing the cancer in the other breast.
(3) Diseases of the Breast
Several breast diseases can increase the chances of having breast cancer. Changes in the cells of the breasts can lead to atypical hyperplasia. This condition can cause a three to fourfold increase in the possibility of getting breast cancer in the later years. This risk also exists if the atypical hyperplasia has occurred in other women of the family. Another such condition is the benign breast tumor condition known as fibro adenoma. However, women with fibrocystic breasts generally do not have any added vulnerability to breast cancer. Yet, such conditions could make the breasts lumpy and hide the real tumors (if any) during mammography.
(4) Lifestyle
In today’s world, lifestyle is the single largest contributing factor for the proliferation of breast cancer among women. Several elements of the lifestyle have been found to be directly accordant with the prevalence of breast cancer. Smoking and alcoholism in women are among the chief factors. Even diet has been pointed out as an important risk factor. Women who consume a diet with more high-cholesterol fats in them have higher chances of breast cancer. At the same time leading a sedentary lifestyle without indulging much in physical activity are also potentially dangerous.
(5) Radiation
It has been found that women who undergo radiation therapies in their chest region at a young age have an increased risk of developing breast cancer in their later lives. Radiation therapy is generally prescribed for women with conditions like Hodgkin’s disease or non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. So women who have undergone such treatments may get breast cancer in their later years.
(6) Hormonal Imbalances There are several factors that can change the hormone balance of the body. Some of them are:- a) Beginning the menstrual cycle early, i.e. before the age of twelve years, b) Having the first pregnancy after the age of thirty years, c) Having no pregnancy at all, d) Having a late menopause. All these conditions can increase the level of estrogen in the body. This increases the risk of getting breast cancer to a mild extent. Apart from that women who take regular birth control pills, breast enhancement supplements, antidepressants and antihistamines and hormone modifying supplements stand at a higher risk to get breast cancers.
The above are the major risk factors for breast cancers. But since the study on breast cancers is not yet complete, the above is by no means a complete list. There are several other indications of breast cancers, like breast implant operations; but these have not yet been confirmed. The implants used in the earlier days were made of silicone gels. These were riskier in terms of breast cancer. However, nowadays the silicone gel implants have been replaced by saline implants. This has reduced the risk to a great extent.
It must be also noted that women have much higher chances of getting breast cancer than men. In fact, most people think that breast cancer is a disease that affects only women. This is not true. Men also get breast cancers, but to a much lesser degree than women. Also, age is a very important factor. The chances of getting breast cancer are much higher when the woman has crossed the age of 50 years.
Why You Should Consult an Asbestos Lawyer
If you've been diagnosed with a condition related to asbestos exposure, a lawyer familiar with the laws surrounding asbestos and compensation could be one of your most valuable allies. An asbestos lawyer can help you recover medical costs and compensation for the pain, loss and suffering you and your family are going through. An experienced asbestos lawyer can work with you to establish that your condition was caused by asbestos, and identify those that are to blame for your illness so that they can be held accountable for your illness and losses.
Why Asbestos Is a Matter for the Courts
From the early 1900s through the mid-1970s, many industries in the United States hid the facts about asbestos from the public, the government and even their own employees. Even though they knew that working around asbestos can scar your lungs and cause several types of cancer, they told no one. Instead, the executives of those companies actively conspired to hide the danger rather than provide their workers with safety equipment that would have reduced their exposure and their risk of developing deadly cancers and other diseases.
The companies that used asbestos in their products or manufactured asbestos products knew as early as the 1920s that asbestos was a killer. They were told by their own doctors and researchers that asbestos caused lung disease. Many were also told that they could lessen the risks by providing their workers with face masks and using air filters.
They chose to ignore the warnings rather than spend a few cents of their profits to protect their employees. The internal memos and communications from these companies that have been brought out in court are horrifying in their cavalier attitude of putting a few pennies profit above the lives of their workers and their customers.
It is the fact that they knowingly exposed their workers to danger that forms the basis for most court cases against the asbestos companies. In the court systems, this is known as negligence and callous disregard, and can entitle the victims to recover both actual and punitive damages.
Why You Need an Asbestos Lawyer
Because of the long latency period, it can be difficult to identify when and where you were exposed to asbestos. The companies that you worked for may have changed their names or gone out of business. You may have been exposed to asbestos from many different sources. More often than not, there is more than one company or entity that could be held legally responsible for your illness.
In addition, the laws on bringing suit for injuries resulting from your job vary from state to state. There are statutes of limitation that must be observed, and matters of jurisdiction that will affect where you can file your lawsuit. The whole field of asbestos law is constantly changing as the courts and governments attempt to deal with the enormous number of people who were injured by the actions of the asbestos industries. Making sense of the maze of regulations requires a skilled asbestos lawyer who understands the most current rulings.
What An Asbestos Lawyer Can Do For You
An experienced asbestos lawyer will do far more than go to court for you. Because of their experience in the field, asbestos lawyers have access to records and materials that can help identify the source of your asbestos exposure. They understand the stresses that you are living with and can help you find ways to deal with them. An asbestos lawyer may have access to information about your illness and resources that will help you financially and emotionally while your case is pending.
As a worker, you may not even have known that you were working with asbestos, but given the names of the companies for which you worked, an experienced asbestos lawyer can often discover the names and suppliers of the products that you used in your job and link them to specific companies that can be held responsible.
If it turns out that there has been a settlement against one of those companies, your asbestos lawyer may be able to help you file for compensation under that settlement. If there is not, he or she can advise you of your options for filing suit against the companies and negotiate with them to get you a settlement that is in your best interest.
If you have been diagnosed with an asbestos related illness, call a local asbestos lawyer to find out how they can help you get the help that you need.
California Asbestos Lawsuits Grabbing Attention
California asbestos lawyers are grabbing plenty of attention as the rate of mesothelioma lawsuits climb. Asbestos litigation is definitely on the rise, proving that California manufacturing companies and construction companies failed to take adequate measures to keep their employees safe and protected over the past 30 years.
While California asbestos lawyers can do very little to negate the pain and suffering their clients face on a daily basis, a mesothelioma lawsuit provides the best chance of offering these clients peace of mind and financial security for their families. California asbestos lawyers have been speaking on behalf of their clients for over 50 years, and will continue to do so for as long as mesothelioma victims choose to file mesothelioma lawsuits in order to claim their legal rights to compensation.
Despite the rise in asbestos litigation, there has been little done to thwart future mesothelioma lawsuits. There will most likely be a continual rise in asbestos litigation, as it is not always necessary for a client to have been diagnosed with mesothelioma prior to filing asbestos litigation. In some cases, exposure to asbestos is enough to file.
This is not true in every case, but companies that knowingly exposed employees and other individuals to the dangers of asbestos are now finding themselves facing off with California asbestos lawyers who are ready and willing to take on the fight. Potential for mesothelioma has proven enough in the past for asbestos litigation.
Where will these cases end up? It is hard to determine how long the government is going to allow asbestos litigation to continue without an actual diagnosis, but the potential threat has proven to be enough in the court of public opinion and in the eyes of jurors.
It has truly become unthinkable, and in the eyes of California asbestos lawyers a severe tragedy, that today's society has not cracked down on workforce safety. Big business has placed very high demands on the American worker and has done little above and beyond the bare minimum required by law to protect their employees.
Some California asbestos lawyers cite the likelihood of employee turnover as a possible cause for this, but yet are still able to determine in the court room the foul nature of this attitude during mesothelioma lawsuits. Without asbestos litigation, mesothelioma victims would be virtually unheard. Mesothelioma strikes approximately 3000 to 3500 new victims every year.
Asbestos litigation has brought to the forefront the dangers of asbestos exposure. Since the number of new victims is quite small in comparison to other diseases, asbestos litigation is the only attention grabbing venue for victims. However, who can really ignore the fact that this means that 3000 people every year lose their health and eventually their life to a disease that is entirely preventable?
The unthinkable health conditions that mesothelioma victims are forced to live with are revealed to many people for the first time sitting in a jury box during a mesothelioma lawsuit. For many Americans, the term mesothelioma means nothing until they are involved in asbestos litigation, and the education they receive from the California asbestos lawyer is mind blowing.
Mesothelioma as a disease has not received its due recognition from the medical community, except for a small percentage of specialists, and of course with the exception of asbestos litigation and mesothelioma lawsuits, the legal community hasn't heard nearly enough about the effects of asbestos exposure.
California asbestos lawyers are hoping to capture the attention of both legislators and the public through asbestos litigation in order to improve the quality of care and determine demands for changes in light of mesothelioma victims. Mesothelioma is always 100% the result of asbestos exposure, and without determining the responsible companies or organizations through mesothelioma lawsuits, there are numerous cases of mesothelioma that would never have been prevented.
It has become quite natural for companies who have been on the cross examining end of a California asbestos lawyer to be sure to change their asbestos exposure policies to beyond state and national requirements. It is unfortunate that it requires litigation to encourage company participation in the prevention of mesothelioma.
Hopefully as time goes on and California asbestos lawyers grab more of the public's eye, they will be able to help facilitate changes in the quality of workforce safety as well as raise the standard of mesothelioma health care.
Today's mesothelioma victims are pioneers in their own time, braving the stress and turmoil of a mesothelioma lawsuit to not only to fight for their rights, but to pave the way for others to do the same while hopefully preventing future case of mesotheliom, with a hopeful heart.
The History of Asbestos-Related Mesothelioma
Asbestos is a fiber that was once used in construction as insulation and fireproofing. Asbestos fibers are small and toxic, easily entering the body through the lungs and causing a number of health problems. Exposure to asbestos can cause a variety of diseases, including lung cancer, asbestosis, and mesothelioma. Mesothelioma is a cancer that affects the meosthelium or protective lining that covers the body's internal organs, most notably the lining of the lungs and chest, known as the pleura. While mesothelioma can be caused by other factors, the majority of cases are linked to asbestos exposure.
Asbestos-related mesothelioma first gained attention in 1929 when the first lawsuit against asbestos manufacturers was filed. Both sides settled and agreed to avoid pursuing similar cases in the future, and asbestos harmful effects yet again dropped off the radar.
In 1960, however, asbestos and mesothelioma were in the news again. In a paper published by Wagner et al, asbestos was declared as the official cause of mesothelioma. The paper cited more than 30 cases of mesothelioma in people who were either working in asbestos mines or spent a good deal of time in proximity to asbestos. Two years later, an Australian asbestos worker was diagnosed with the first case of malignant mesothelioma. He worked in the asbestos mines in Wittenoom, Australia for just two years before developing the disease.
Wittenoom would eventually become a mesothelioma nightmare. A mining town that revolved around the asbestos mills, the mines asbestos waste had an affect on many who lived there, whether or not they worked in the mines. Toxic levels of the mines asbestos were found on playgrounds, and cases of mesothelioma began to crop up in mine workers and non-mine workers alike. Mining in Wittenoom lasted from 1943 to 1966 despite the existence of proof that asbestos caused mesothelioma and other serious medical conditions.
The mines were owned and operated by CSR Limited, a company that produced aluminum and construction materials including asbestos insulation. The company didn't take proper safety precautions to control the exposure of individuals to asbestos from the mines.
In fact, during the period that CSR Limited Wittenoom mines were in operation, thousands of mine workers, their families, and visitors were exposed to lethal amounts of asbestos. There were regulations in place at the time as to how to control asbestos exposure for mine operators; CSR Limited simply didn't follow them.
The Western Australia Health Department issued several warnings to CSR, but they failed to make any changes to protect the miners and townspeople, even after many cases of mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases began to spring up.
In the late 1970's the Western Australian government began shutting down the town of Wittenoom because it was no longer safe to live there. Asbestos levels were far too toxic, and, eventually, at least a third of those exposed to asbestos in Wittenoom would be diagnosed with mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases.
In 1979, suits were brought against CSR Limited, and they were found to have shown conscious negligence and disregard for the safety of the mine workers and the town. Even now, new cases of mesothelioma related to the Wittenoom tragedy are being diagnosed, costing CSR Limited millions of dollars in settlements.
Asbestos is still widely used in many products today, despite its toxicity. Attempts to legislate a ban on asbestos, so far, has been overturned by the courts. The EPA has resources available to provide you with information about asbestos, asbestos-related products, and how to control your asbestos exposure.
Bras and the Breast Cancer Cover-up
"Whom can you trust when your culture is the biggest enemy of your health? Can you trust your culture's leading authorities? Can you trust your culture's government? Can you trust your culture's private industry?"
We asked those questions in 1995, at the end of our book, Dressed To Kill: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras. Before writing our book, we sent details of our research to the National Cancer Institute, American Cancer Society, President's Cancer Panel, American Women's Medical Association, National Organization for Women, National Women's Health Network, and National Women's Health Resource Center. There was no response. Not one. Given the lack of interest, we decided to publish our findings in a book, getting the information directly to the women who needed to hear it.
But are women getting the message?
It has been 13 years since our book was first published. Over that time, more than 500,000 women in the US alone have died from breast cancer, with another 2,000,000 having been diagnosed with this terrible disease -- a disease that is in most cases preventable by simply loosening up or eliminating the bra. And yet, this lifesaving information has been actively suppressed and censored by the medical and lingerie industries.
Examples of Suppress and Censorship
A large public relations firm in New York City was willing and eager to help us release this information to the public. "My wife just had breast cancer, and I'm sure you are right," the head of the firm confessed. A big media announcement and celebration were planned. Days later, however, the firm withdrew its offer to help, stating that one of their clients, a large medical center, objected to their working with us.
A Sydney, Australia public relations firm agreed to help publicize our work when we were doing outreach efforts in their country. But it, too, reversed itself. We had asked if they had any conflicts of interest, such as lingerie industry clients. They said they had none. But as it turned out, they did represent a pharmaceutical company that makes a breast cancer treatment drug, and the prevention of breast cancer and its treatment are in conflict, they explained.
The Intimate Apparel Council (which is the US trade association for the multi-billion dollar bra industry) threatened our publisher, Avery Publishing Group, with a lawsuit if Dressed To Kill was released. The publisher said the publicity would help spread the word. The lawsuit never materialized.
After the book was released, the NBC television news show, Dateline, was interested in doing a story on our work. We were extensively interviewed by a skeptical reporter who became a supporter. The story was then abruptly terminated. The producer confidentially explained that the policy of General Electric, which owns NBC, is to avoid airing news stories that can adversely impact on other GE interests. As it happens, GE is a manufacturer of mammography machines.
Women's magazines, such as Glamour, Self, and others, ran critical stories condemning our work, and finding "experts" to encourage women to continue wearing bras. Elle magazine planned a positive story about the bra/cancer link, but was coerced into pulling the story by bra advertisers. In various newspapers around the world, such as the Guardian in the UK, stories were pulled prior to publication because of fear that they may "panic the public", including their lingerie advertisers.
The British Fashion Council (which is the UK's equivalent of the Intimate Apparel Council) published the Breast Health Handbook in 1996 to oppose our efforts. They announced the formation of the Breakthrough Breast Cancer Foundation, which was to receive donations from bra sales to fund genetic research into breast cancer. The book criticized our work, claiming, "The idea that wearing a bra encourages cancer by trapping toxins was recently put forward by researchers at the Institute for Culturogenic Studies (sic) in Hawaii. Researchers from more august establishments promptly dismissed it as claptrap." Without any medical evidence or research, the book informs women that wearing bras is a health necessity, and should be worn as early in life as possible to prevent breast damage.
Our original publisher, Avery, was purchased by giant Penguin Putnam in 1998. The new publisher did not list the book for three years and refused to revert publication rights to the copywrite holders, Singer and Grismaijer. The book was virtually unavailable, and it was thought to have gone out of print. Finally, after repeated requests, the publishing rights were released to us in October, 2001. (ISCD Press has been keeping it in print since then.)
A television documentary was produced in the year 2000 by Channel 4 in the UK, called, Bras- The Bare Facts. In the documentary, 100 women with fibrocystic breast disease went bra-free for 3 months to document the effect on breast cysts and pain. Two prominent British breast surgeons conducted the study. The results were astounding, and clearly demonstrated that the bra is a serious health hazard. We were interviewed for the program to discuss the bra/cancer connection, which was considered highly plausible and important by the doctors interviewed. Some theorized that, in addition to lymphatic impairment, the bra could also cause cancer by overheating the breasts. The documentary made newspaper headlines in British Commonwealth countries throughout the world, but no mention of it was made at all in the US. The following day, headlines in the U.K. tried to suppress fears of the bra/cancer link, and the doctors in the study quickly distanced themselves from the cancer issue, telling women to continue wearing bras. Their research for the documentary was supposed to be published in a medical journal, but never was. And no further research ever materialized to follow-up on their work, which they said they would do. Extensive news coverage of the program was available on the Internet soon after it aired, but most articles were removed shortly thereafter.
No follow-up studies have been done to refute or confirm our research. None. While a Harvard study, published in the European Journal of Cancer in 1991, discovered that bra-free women have a lower rate of breast cancer, the results were not central to the research they were conducting and were considered unimportant and not followed-up. In fact, apart from our initial 1991-93 Bra and Breast Cancer Study, discussed in detail in Dressed To Kill, and our follow-up research in Fiji, discussed in our book, Get It Off!, there are still no other studies on the bra/cancer link. Not even a letter or discussion of the issue can be found in any medical journal. After decades of breast cancer research, the bra is still completely ignored as even being a potential factor for consideration. It's like studying foot disease and ignoring shoes.
Keeping the Public Mystified
This lack of research, and the consequent ignorance, are then used by cancer organizations to justify further suppression of the issue. As the American Cancer Society states on its website, (ignoring the Harvard study), "There are no scientifically valid studies that show a correlation between wearing bras of any type and the occurrence of breast cancer. Two anthropologists made this association in a book called Dressed To Kill. Their study was not conducted according to standard principles of epidemiological research and did not take into consideration other variables, including known risk factors for breast cancer. There is no other, credible research to validate this claim in any way." And they don't seem interested in funding any such studies in the near future, either. There are other organizations that are similarly critical of the bra/cancer link for lack of research evidence, while at the same time discouraging any research on the subject.
Of particular interest is when breast cancer organizations antagonistic to the issue declare the bra/cancer link to be "misinformation" or a "myth", without any scientific study supporting their claims. They say bras are important for women to wear for support, without any evidence showing bras are safe or necessary. They then encourage regular mammograms, cancer prevention drug therapy (not realizing that "prevention therapy" is an oxymoron), and even preventative mastectomies (which means that those who are high risk for breast cancer but who don't want to get it can have their breast removed as a prevention strategy). Of course, it is better to remove the bra instead of the breasts, but bra removal is not a billable procedure.
Keep in mind that bras have been associated with other health problems, such as headaches, numbness in the hands, backache and other postural problems, cysts, pain, skin depigmentation, and more. And lymphatic blockage, which is the result of bra constriction, has already been associated with various cancers. Clearly, the bra/cancer link needs further research, while women take the precaution of loosening up.
Why the resistance?
What harm could there be in following our simple advice, or in even researching this issue? Why the defensive reaction?
There are three reasons:
1. The bra industry fears class action lawsuits. Many insiders have admitted to us that for years the industry suspected underwires were causing cancer. They know that tight bras cause cysts and pain. It is only a matter of time until a lawsuit is made against a bra manufacturer. As a defense, the industry is shifting the blame to the customer, claiming that most women are wearing their bras too tightly, and should get professional fittings. (How do you get a properly fitted push-up bra?) Breaking ranks with their industry peers, and trying to capitalize on the bad news, are several bra manufacturers that now offer newly patented bras claiming to mitigate the damage, including cancer, caused by conventional bras.
2. The medical industry is making billions each year on the detection and treatment of breast cancer. As mentioned above, there is a conflict between the prevention and the treatment of disease, especially if the prevention does not include drugs or surgery. The fact is that our treatment-focused, profit-oriented medical system is making a killing treating this disease, and has billions to lose if breast cancer goes out of fashion along with bras.
In addition, the bra issue will revolutionize the breast cancer field, embarrassing many researchers. Breast cancer research to date that has ignored the bra issue is seriously flawed as a result, which is why the "experts" are still unable to explain the cause of over 70% of all breast cancer cases. Career cancer researchers who have ignored the bra issue will have to admit this fatal flaw in their work, which they are not inclined to admit in their lifetimes.
3. Finally, there is the dogmatic, fearful resistance from some women who find their personal identity so connected to their bras that they would rather risk cancer than be bra-free (which some women have actually told us.) Women are cultural entities, and so long as our culture scorns a natural bustline, many women will submit to the pain, red marks and indentations, cysts, and even the threat of cancer rather than face potential public ridicule (which never really happens.)
There are also women who believe the myth that bras will prevent droopy breasts. The bra industry admits this is a myth, while it still promotes it to improve sales. In fact, bras cause breasts to droop, as the breasts become dependent on the bra for support and the natural supportive mechanisms atrophy from non use.
Despite the resistance, however, some women have gotten the message. And many health care professionals, who have also suspected bras for years, are now spreading that message. As women hear the news and discover that eliminating the bra also eliminates cysts and pain, the news further spreads by word of mouth.
There are now thousands of websites on this subject, many from health care professionals including medical doctors, naturopathic doctors, osteopathic doctors, chiropractors, massage therapists, lymphatic specialists, nutritionists, and others who care about women and helping end this epidemic. Grassroots efforts to keep this information alive and spreading have supplanted the traditional medical research approach, which has disqualified itself for lack of interest and conflict of interest.
When a disease is caused by the culture and its habits, attitudes, fashions and industries, there is bound to be resistance to change. Industries that contribute to disease will be defensive, and industries that profit from disease will be conflicted. However, the truth has a way of getting out, despite the resistance and suppression. Thank Goodness the truth does have a way of getting out.
Parts of the House Which Need Asbestos Removal
Many older buildings contain asbestos which up until the late 70s was usually applied with a sprayer and used as a flame retardant or as insulation. In some cases it was sprayed above false ceilings and inside certain ducts. The production of asbestos was banned in the early 70s but the ban did allow for the use of existing stock, so houses still used asbestos until the mid 80s. Today these homeowners are faced with the need for asbestos removal in these older homes, and the only way to tell if these houses have asbestos in them is by having an asbestos removal expert take a sample and have it tested by a specialized lab.
Other possible ways of recognizing asbestos:
Asbestos is generally an off white material, although sometimes it was made in blue or brown and the appearance changes depending on the material it was mixed with. Sometimes it was mixed with cement, asphalt, starch, polymers and other adhering materials.
A common place where asbestos material might be found is in the heating ductwork. Some ducts were made of asbestos and others were wrapped in a form of asbestos. These old ducts look a bit like corrugated cardboard and some insulation has a similar appearance but without being corrugated. When you find this type of material, you should call an asbestos removal specialist to come in and take a sample.
Duct work made of asbestos is of special concern because as it begins to deteriorate the fibers are blown into the house by the air conditioner. Some duct wrapping can be encapsulated so as to avoid having any of the fibers blown into the house. Otherwise asbestos removal is your best bet. Although somewhat expensive it is preferable to make this expense rather than have to deal with the problems that come from asbestos exposure.
Another likely place to find asbestos is in or near a furnace. The furnace may have an asbestos lining or it may even sit on an asbestos pad. Wear and tear to these items will cause the fibers to float around, so it is best to remove it, or to encapsulate it.
At one point, pipes where lined with asbestos, especially pipes that connected to radiators or heating systems. If you find a white surface material, then it is probably best to repair it with glass cloth.
Be careful with old wiring. There were some old knobs and tube wires that had a white coating material that was covered with black fabric. Don’t pull these out, just bypass with new wiring.
Artificial fireplaces that were made prior to 1978 used asbestos as ashes. If these still exist it is essential to remove them. Vinyl flooring and roofing tiles were also made of asbestos. In some cases you should apply asbestos removal, but in others you should place an overlay and lay your floor on top. It really depends on what the asbestos contractor suggests.
Depending on the way asbestos was applied, it may or may not pose a threat to the users of the house or building. It does not pose a threat if the fibers cannot come loose, but many forms of its application, especially when sprayed on allow the fibers to become loose and go airborne. In these cases you may need asbestos removal.
Find a Professional Contractor for Asbestos Removal
Due to the nature of asbestos and the terrible diseases it can cause, asbestos removal is a process that requires a specialized contractor and cannot be done by just anyone.
You’ve probably heard of the terrible things that asbestos can do to your body. You’ve seen it on the news, and in special reports. You know that asbestos causes cancer and lung disease which in many cases can even kill you. Yet many homes and buildings that were built prior the 1990s still have asbestos in them. It is therefore important to find an expert in asbestos removal when you find asbestos in your home or office. Because of the dangers of asbestos, not just anyone can work in the asbestos removal process.
Contractors who work with asbestos removal are required to go through strict licensing regulations. The licensing is a way that the government can ensure that asbestos removal contractors have the right training, experience and skills to ensure the safe removal of the product. In this way they can be assured that the removal work does not become a threat either to the worker o the environment
What are the requirements for an asbestos contractor?
• A person who decides to become an asbestos contractor needs to be at least 18 years of age.
• They have to demonstrate that they are the appropriate person for the license and that means demonstrating the appropriate training and technical knowledge in working with asbestos. This person is required to take an examination for licensing purposes
• They must have 3 years experience in the field.
• They must own the appropriate safety equipment to work with asbestos
• They must have workers compensation insurance and liability insurance which covers working with asbestos.
Once a contractor has applied for a license, it takes about four weeks for approval. They cannot work on an asbestos related projects unless they have a license which must be renewed every two years. The purpose of contractor licensing in this area is to ensure that a contractor has the right skills, and experience so as to avoid environmental contamination or a workers contamination.
When there is a job that requires asbestos removal, a permit is required. The reason for this notification and permit is so that any job involving asbestos can be monitored by government officials. During the term of a license, checks will be made at different intervals to make sure that the appropriate procedures and equipment are being used. Not only that, but a license can be cancelled if it is determined that the contractor is not working in compliance with the regulations.
As you can see, working with asbestos is quite complicated and requires a specialized contractor to remove any traces of this material from a home or building. It is important to remove asbestos, but it must be done by a licensed and qualified contractor, and under no circumstances should it ever be done by the owner himself or by an unqualified contractor.
Asbestos Litigation Facts
Mesothelioma is a type of cancer that affects the thin lining that covers and holds in our internal organs. Asbestos is the cause of approximately 90 percent of all mesothelioma cases. Anyone who has worked in an industry or lived in an area where asbestos exposure has occurred may be entitled to damages if they've developed mesothelioma. If you or someone you know have developed mesothelioma, here are some asbestos litigation facts that might help you as you explore your own litigation options.
Because the disease may not develop for up to sixty years after asbestos exposure, asbestos litigation often doesn't take place until long after the fact. A sum of roughly $9 million was awarded in an asbestos lawsuit to a gentleman in 2005 after he developed mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure that occurred in the 1960s. Another woman was awarded $16 million in 2002 for mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure in childhood. One important asbestos litigation fact to keep in mind is that you may be suffering from asbestos-related mesothelioma even if your exposure took place decades ago. Even though a lot of time has passed, you could still have a case.
Another important asbestos litigation fact to keep in mind is that the government passed the FAIR Act in 2005. The FAIR Act provides vital facts for anyone considering asbestos litigation. Included are requirements for bringing asbestos litigation and who might have a case. There is a statute of limitations on filing asbestos litigation, so it is important that you know whether or not time has run out on your case.
Because asbestos is no longer used, many of the companies against which someone might want to file a claim have gone out of business. Still, a company may exist that is partially responsible for your mesothelioma. If you're interested in finding out who may be at fault, seek the advice of legal counsel who can help you with your asbestos litigation.
Other diseases of the lungs may be caused by asbestos exposure, so you may want to explore more asbestos litigation facts pertaining to any lung disease you developed after being exposed to asbestos. Lung cancer and various respiratory diseases have also been linked to asbestos. It is important to note that smoking has not been shown to contribute to the development of mesothelioma, and this asbestos litigation fact may help you determine if you have a case.
Armed with asbestos litigation facts about the period of time between exposure and development of mesothelioma, the financial reparations typically handed out, and the governmental regulations covering asbestos litigation, you may want to find a lawyer who specializes in asbestos lawsuits. There is help available, and you don't have to go through this ordeal alone.
Colon Cancer and Nutrition
Colon Cancer also known Colorectal cancer. Colon cancer 2nd most deaths for cancers in the US. Colon cancer is cancer that starts in the large intestine (colon) or the rectum (end of the colon). The colon is the part of the digestive system where the waste material is stored. The rectum is the end of the colon adjacent to the anus. Together, they form a long, muscular tube called the large intestine (also known as the large bowel). Tumors of the colon and rectum are growths arising from the inner wall of the large intestine. Benign tumors of the large intestine are called polyps. Cancer of the colon or rectum is also called colorectal cancer. In the United States, it is the fourth most common cancer in men and women. It is the third most common form of cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related death in the Western world. Colorectal cancer causes 655,000 deaths worldwide per year.Many colorectal cancers are thought to arise from adenomatous polyps in the colon. These mushroom-like growths are usually benign, but some may develop into cancer over time.
Colon cancer often causes no symptoms until it has reached a relatively advanced stage. Thus, many organizations recommend periodic screening for the disease with fecal occult blood testing and colonoscopy. It is common in the Western world, and is rare in Asia and Africa. In countries where the people have adopted western diets, the incidence of colorectal cancer is increasing. Most cases of colon cancer begin as small, noncancerous (benign) clumps of cells called adenomatous polyps. Polyps of the colon and rectum are almost always benign and usually produce no symptoms. They may, however, cause painless rectal bleeding or bleeding not apparent to the naked eye. There may be single or multiple polyps. Polyps greater than 1 centimeter have a greater cancer risk associated with them than polyps under 1 centimeter. Polyps with atypia or dysplasia are also more likely to progress on to colon cancer. The risk of cancer is much higher in sessile villous adenomas than in pedunculated tubular adenomas. Cancer is found in 40% of villous adenomas, as compared to 15% in tubular adenomas.
Chemotherapy is also used to treat patients with stage IV colon cancer. Surgery remains the primary treatment while chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy may be recommended depending on the individual patient's staging. High-fiber foods help move waste through your digestive tract faster, so harmful substances don’t have much contact with the lining of the intestine. High-fiber foods are also rich in phytonutrients, which appear to protect against several forms of cancer. Calcium and vitamin D also seem to help protect against colorectal cancer. There is certainly just as much buzz about folate and colorectal cancer prevention as there has been about calcium. The jury is still out on antioxidants and the prevention of colorectal cancer. Taking antioxidants, such as vitamin C or carotenoids, may reduce cancer risk but other studies have failed to back up these results. Vegetables high in folate, like leafy greens, seem to offer particular protection from colon cancer, especially for those who drink alcohol. Cruciferous vegetables, like broccoli and cauliflower, also contain phytochemicals that may prevent damage to colon cells.
Colon Cancer Treatment and Nutrition Tips
1. Chemotherapy is also used to treat patients with stage IV colon cancer.
2. Radiotherapy may be recommended Treatment fot colon cancer.
3. High-fiber foods help move waste through your digestive tract faster.
4. Calcium and vitamin D also seem to help protect against colorectal cancer.
5. Taking antioxidants, such as vitamin C or carotenoids, may reduce cancer risk but other studies have failed to back up these results.
6. Vegetables high in folate, like leafy greens, seem to offer particular protection from colon cancer, especially for those who drink alcohol.
7. Cruciferous vegetables, like broccoli and cauliflower, also contain phytochemicals that may prevent damage to colon cells.
Using A Real Estate Attorney in For Sale By Owner Transactions
Even though you are selling your home without an agent, the assistance of a professional is still needed at various steps in the home selling process. The requirement of a real estate attorney depends on the laws in your state. Even if you live in a state where a real estate attorney is not needed, as a for sale by owner seller, it will still be beneficial for you to use one.
An attorney can serve many purposes in the housing transaction. When you hire an attorney that specialized in real estate, that attorney is responsible for seeing that your best interests are met in the housing transaction. An attorney can act as the escrow agent by holding down payments, documentation, and earnest money deposits. Not only that, the attorney can help you decipher and evaluate complicated offers you might receive from a buyer. In the event that the lenders attorney does not handle the closing, your attorney will host and handle the closing. If the lenders attorney does handle the closing, then your real attorney will represent you in the process.
Your primary concern should be to find a real estate attorney that will provide you with assistance you need in the housing transaction. You can use a local or internet directory to find the names of some attorneys in your area. Asking friends or family who have recently sold homes for references is another way that you can find an attorney to assist you. If there are neighbors with for sale signs in their yards, you can casually inquire about the attorney they are using. Hiring an attorney that comes as a reference is often better than cold calling attorneys.
As you look for an attorney to hire, you should choose one that works primarily with real estate transactions. Avoid choosing a criminal or family law attorney that handles real estate transactions on the side. Your interests will not be best served by an attorney that does not spend a significant part of his or her time in real estate transactions. Certainly do not hire an attorney that has never worked in real estate.
Along with experience in real estate transactions, price will be the other factor you use to choose a real estate attorney. The attorney you hire will have two major responsibilities: reading and advising you on documents and representing you at closing. Get a price quote from prospective attorneys on those two tasks. You can get a discount from the attorney by letting him or her know that you will be preparing and filling out some of the documentation. Shop around among several attorneys to get a feel for experience level and price charged.
The most important thing is that you have a real estate professional available to assist you through the transaction. Even if you have successfully sold a for sale by owner home before, it is better to have legal assistance than to attempt to complete the process on your own.
How to Find a Good Attorney
The question of how to find a good attorney is on everyone's mind when in need of a lawyer. And it's difficult for an ordinary person to know how to find a good attorney. The legal profession is just like any other profession where you have good, disciplined and honest members as well as bad, not disciplined and dishonest ones. And in the legal profession, unfortunately, only fellow attorneys and judges know who is who. That leaves us, the ordinary people, to learn as best as we could on ways of how to find a good attorney to represent our case.
When faced with a legal issue that requires lawyer's participation, the only thing worse than not having a lawyer is to have a bad one. However, the "good" and the "bad" labels are a subject to a personal judgment. As mentioned above, while only fellow attorneys and judges know who is the good, the bad, and the ugly attorney, in the ordinary human world, two people could share a totally opposite opinion about one attorney who represented both of their cases. It's all based on the results that the attorney was able to obtain for them and whether the clients' expectations were met or not. This leads us to a conclusion that when we have a lack of resources to evaluate our prospect attorneys, we need to depend solely upon our individual judgment to pick a good attorney for our case.
On the other hand, there are ways to at least sense a bad attorney. Wait! Isn't it the subject of this article "How to find a good attorney"? Indeed so. In order for you to know how to find a good attorney, you need to know how to at least sense a bad one. Let's touch up on some basics.
1. Very simple. If you need to file for a divorce, would you call a criminal lawyer? Of course not. That's a bad lawyer for your case. On the same note, if other than a divorce lawyer is offering to handle your case, you would say no. You immediately know that a good lawyer for your case would be the one who has expertise in whatever legal issue you're facing.
2. You somehow find a lawyer that has the expertise in your problem area and you make a contact with him or her. But, it takes that lawyer a week or two to get back to you. That attorney may not be a bad lawyer but he or she may be overbooked with other clients and does not have enough time to give the needed attention to your case. That's a bad lawyer for your case. That attorney needs to immediately tell you that because of their current work load he or she wouldn't be able to handle your case. But if he or she doesn't tell you that, you need to immediately dismiss that attorney and look for another one who can give you the needed attention.
3. Here comes the bad one. It is highly unethical for a lawyer to pay a referral fee or a bonus for "leads" on new cases. (Depending on state law, a referral fee sometimes may be paid to another lawyer, but it needs to be disclosed to the client). Some of the profession's "bad apples" may still engage in the practice of paying "runners" for tips on new clients. So if a stranger (or even someone that you know) seems excessively persistent that you need to see a lawyer, or just happens to have a supply of the attorney's business cards, look out! This is not the kind of person who deserves your trust. On the same note, if you bump into a lawyer who does not take his or her time to understand your case but is also excessively persistent that you need to hire him or her, look out!
Now, let's cover some basics on ways of how to find a good attorney.
1. One of the best ways on how to find a good attorney is to ask someone whose opinion you trust; another lawyer, your accountant, banker, coworker, family friend, business acquaintance. These are the people that you trust and you know that they wouldn't refer you to a bad lawyer if they happen to know one related to your legal need.
2. If the above doesn't work for you, you could always call a company that may be represented by a lawyer of your need. For an example, if you're looking for a real estate lawyer, call a title company and ask them who they use. If you need a collection lawyer, call a collection agency. But, if your issue is pure personal, ask anyone who you trust, who has recently been through a lawsuit, and who is very satisfied with their lawyer. Even if that lawyer is not the right one for your case, you know that you're contacting a good lawyer. Call that lawyer and explain that you couldn't find an attorney on your own and ask him or her if they could refer you to the appropriate attorney for your case. Lawyers are the best source of information about other lawyers. And a good lawyer will always refer you to another good lawyer who could handle your case.
3. And last but not least on how to find a good lawyer, call your local or state bar association and ask them to refer you to a lawyer who is in good standing with the bar. Also, always check with your state or local bar association if your prospect lawyer has ever been the subject of an ethical complaint or inquiry.
To sum up the ways on how to find a good attorney, the primary considerations in selecting an attorney needs to be whether you feel comfortable with the attorney selected, and if you are confident that the attorney is competent in his or her field of expertise. You must feel very comfortable with the attorney and must feel confident that the attorney selected is the one who can capably handle your needs. Make sure that you interview two or three lawyers before making a decision on which one to retain. Ask yourself when interviewing a lawyer: "Do I feel comfortable talking to this lawyer, and am I confident in his or her abilities?" If the answer is anything other than a definite "yes," you need to keep looking. Your case is too important to entrust to someone who does not inspire your confidence.
Disclaimer: The author and publisher of this article have done their best to give you useful, informative and accurate information. This article does not represent nor replace the legal advice you need to get from a lawyer, or other professional if the content of the article involves an issue you are facing. Laws vary from state-to-state and change from time-to-time. Always consult with a qualified professional before making any decisions about the issues described in this article. Thank you.
How to Choose a Lawyer: Referral Attorneys
When selecting an attorney, there are a number of important factors to consider. This article focuses on one: is the attorney you have contacted a "referral attorney"? Referral attorneys are attorneys who advertise to attract clients, but do not represent clients themselves. Instead, they forward the client on to another attorney. A typical referral attorney takes a fee as a percentage of the total recovery.
Is my attorney a referral attorney?
This is a simple question to answer - just ask them. A referral attorney will always, at some point, have to disclose that they will not be the primary attorney on your case. They will eventually be forwarding you on to another lawyer. Generally, if your attorney is advertising on television or has run ads seeking victims of injuries caused by a specific product (Vioxx cases, asbestos or mesothelioma cases, diet drug cases, or other class action lawsuits), then they are probably a referral attorney.
Will it cost me more money if I have contacted a referral attorney?
Generally, no. The typical agreement between a referral attorney and the actual lawyer working on the case grants the referral attorney a percentage of the actual lawyer's fee. Instead of coming from the client, the money comes from the lawyer who eventually is the attorney on the case. However, you should make sure that this is what your actual agreement is. A typical contingent fee case costs the client one third of the recovery. If you have contacted a referral attorney, ask what the ultimate percentage will be.
Why even bother with a referral attorney if I'm going to someone else anyway?
If you know an attorney who is an expert in the field or who is handling that kind of case, there is generally no reason to. However, many people have absolutely no knowledge of the legal industry. They simply can't find an appropriate attorney on their own. A referral attorney usually only makes money if you win, so he will have an incentive to forward your case to a competent lawyer. Just make sure that you aren't being charged more for a referral - it's not worth paying extra to get it, especially because many other lawyers would be eager to point you to competent counsel for a cut themselves.
|
|
|