Asbestos and embryonic development

Abstract

Chrysotile asbestos was administered to pregnant CD-1 mice in their drinking water and to Day 4 blastocysts during culture. Administration to pregnant mice did not affect embryo survival. In vitro administration of asbestos did not interfere with embryo implantation upon transfer of blastocysts to recipient females but did result in a decrease in postimplantation survival. These studies did not demonstrate asbestos to be teratogenic whether administered to the dam or to the blastocyst in vitro.

Chrysotile Asbestos Fibers Detected in the Newborn Pups Following Gavage Feeding of Pregnant Mice

“…However, asbestos fibers were not detected in the fetuses. The dose of asbestos used in our experiments (50 µg × 4) was somewhat higher than the highest dose (143 µg/ml) used in the study by Schneider and Maurer (1977), and the mode of delivery of fibers was also different. We used gavage feeding that ensured the delivery of a known amount of fibers to the gastrointestinal tract, whereas fibers were mixed with drinking water in their study and may have resulted in delivery of a lower number of fibers.…”

“…There is one previous study that attempted to demonstrate transplacental transfer of asbestos using asbestos-spiked drinking water (Schneider & Maurer, 1977). Chrysotile was administered to pregnant mice in drinking water from d 1 to 15, using 3 different strengths of 1.43, 14.3, and 143 µg/ml, and the mice were sacrificed on gestational d 18.…”

Nonpulmonary Outcomes of Asbestos Exposure

“…However, studies reporting a positive association include an increase in the number of deaths due to brain tumors observed in petrochemical workers exposed to asbestos in the United States and Canada (Seidman et al, 1982) and rock salt workers in Italy (Tarchi et al, 1994). In addition, there are a number of cases of malignant brain tumor metastases from pleural mesothelioma (Kawai et al, 1997; Wronski & Burt, 1993; Falconieri et al, 1991).…”