|
About 5,000 Australians a year develop cancer after being exposed to cancer-causing substances at work - more than twice as many cases as previously estimated. Research by the Queensland Cancer Fund and University of Sydney found 11 per cent of all cancers in men and 2 per cent of cancers in women were linked to occupation, prompting doctors to warn that occupational health and safety regulations may be failing to protect workers. The study, published on 13 June in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, echoes TUC criticisms last year of the Doll-Peto paper which forms the basis of official work cancer estimates in both Australia and the UK.
Report co-author and head of epidemiology at the Queensland Cancer Fund, Lin Fritschi, said the Doll-Peto paper had significantly underestimated the level of work-related cancer in Australia. 'A large study in the 1980s suggested 4 per cent of cancers in the world were caused by occupation, and that's the figure that is still used in Australia,' Professor Fritschi said. 'But that is a really big underestimate, because the data they used was from the 1950s and 60s. We now know a lot more about chemicals and cancer risk than we did 20 years ago.' Commenting on the findings Andrew Ferguson, NSW state secretary of the construction union CFMEU, called for more vigorous analysis of any new products that could be carcinogenic. 'Technological changes in the industry have led to the very rapid introduction of different processes which often require the use of new solvents and chemical-based products,' he said. 'There's inadequate research into the implications of these new materials for workers.' The paper concludes the findings 'should act as a spur to elevate the importance of occupation as a cause of cancer in order to decrease the population burden of cancer.' The TUC-backed report published in Hazards magazine in November 2005 also concluded official cancer estimates represented no more than half the true toll, and recommended occupational cancer prevention should be a major public health priority.
Source: Hazards
|
