So I have asbestos in my home...

[shponglefan]

So I just did some testing on my house and discovered that the joint compound for the drywall contains asbestos.  Fortunately the quantity is relatively minor (less than 1% per the report).  Of course, I find this out AFTER I re-drywalled a room-and-a-half.

I have another room I want to redo and am torn between either trying to tear it out myself (taking all appropriate precautions of course), or now hiring a remediation company.

Anyone here have experience with this sort of thing?  What did you do?

[Howard_Casto]

I think it's usually better to leave it to the pros for hazardous material removal... why take a chance.  Then again I removed a whole bunch of floor tiles from Grandma's house that we found out later contained asbestos and I didn't die of cancer or anything. 

The stuff is inert as long as you don't breath it in or swallow it.  I would think drywall dust would put up a lot of particulate so maybe have someone else do it to be on the safe side.

[Xiaou2]

There is nothing more valuable than your health, and your quality of the life, that you are currently living.

 I think its a better choice,  to get the pros to take care of Asbestos.   They would have all the equipment, experience, and know proper disposal procedures.

 At least, ask a few of them their opinions,  and get a few different quotes.

[menace]

I think the whole "asbestos in my home" issue is completely overblown.  The only way the asbestos will ever become a significant concern is if it becomes friable (turned into airborn particles) and you snorted it-directly.  Even at 1% you probably get a bigger whiff of asbestos driving down the highway with your windows open (truck brake pads, engine brake pads etc.) then you ever would in your house.  I say leave well enough alone and move on with your life.

The caveat here is that if you are a drywaller and do this for a living then you could become exposed to small amounts frequently and possibly develop issues.

As a home inspector I see this issue come up time and again and you have to accept reality (every home built before 1970-80 probably has some asbestos in it in the building materials)

Unfortunately since you did the test you are now legally obliged to disclose the results to the next person should you ever sell your house.   

[Typefighter01]

My father contracted Mesothelioma and passed away from the complications of it (never smoked a day in his life) and it was either through his job (but we can't figure out exactly what in his job had asbestos...he dug wells for a living so he was in contact with concrete and heavy machinery) or, when he renovated our house 30 some odd years ago (too late to know for sure if there was asbestos in the walls or not, and there wasn't much info about asbestos back then).

Evil disease...you have to weigh extra cost, piece of mind and health against saving money, a lifetime of worry and possible cancer (the fibers can sit in your lungs for decades before they cause issues).

So...you takes your chances, and I would hate to see someone go through what my dad went through.

Pay professionals, you only have one chance at this...

[BadMouth]

I think the whole "asbestos in my home" issue is completely overblown.  The only way the asbestos will ever become a significant concern is if it becomes friable (turned into airborn particles) and you snorted it-directly.  Even at 1% you probably get a bigger whiff of asbestos driving down the highway with your windows open (truck brake pads, engine brake pads etc.) then you ever would in your house.  I say leave well enough alone and move on with your life.

The caveat here is that if you are a drywaller and do this for a living then you could become exposed to small amounts frequently and possibly develop issues.

As a home inspector I see this issue come up time and again and you have to accept reality (every home built before 1970-80 probably has some asbestos in it in the building materials)

This is my thinking too.  Do some research and decide for yourself though.

I went to the trouble of sending off four samples from ceiling tiles, floor tiles & drywall.
Everything came back negative.
When I hauled an entire pickup load of ceiling tiles to the garbage transfer station, I was all ready with my negative test results.
The guys there just chuckled and said they didn't need to see it.  I got the impression they didn't care if it was asbestos.

Unfortunately since you did the test you are now legally obliged to disclose the results to the next person should you ever sell your house.   

That's the big part and the reason you pretty much have to remove it now.
Even though it's really no problem unless it is turned into powder, the value of the house will take a hit at least equal to the cost of having it professionally removed and restoring the house back to normal with other materials.

The bottom layer of paint in one of the rooms in my house tested positive for lead.  I tested while the baseboards were removed.
The original paint was the only layer behind the baseboards.  All other rooms tested negative.
I made the decision to just ensure it was encased completely by the top layer of paint.
When I bought the house, there was a disclaimer that because of the age, it "may contain lead paint".
If I sell it, I'll be able to say "yeah, one room contains lead paint but it is completely sealed by subsequent layers".
I'm not sure how much of an issue it will be if I ever sell the place.
In my mind knowing where it is and that it's contained is better than it being unknown, but that's just me.
I think asbestos is a bit scarier to most people.

[BadMouth]

Giving this a bit further thought, it's really more of an all or nothing deal.
There's no point in removing asbestos from only part of the house if there will still be asbestos in other parts.
From the buyer's perspective, its still got asbestos.  One less room of asbestos makes no difference if three other rooms still have it.

If there will still be asbestos in other parts of the house, I'd just use 1/4" drywall overtop the old stuff unless you're changing the layout or something.

[shponglefan]

Thanks for the replies, all. 

I hear what people are saying about the health issues.  I've been digging into studies about drywall joint compound and asbestos, and most of what I've read suggests the risk isn't terribly high, but there is still a risk.

FWIW, my previous drywall removal I did use an asbestos-rated respirator, but naturally wasn't as diligent about keeping dust levels down had I know there was asbestos in the walls.

Also, my neighbor completely gutted his house about a year or so ago.  Not sure if he did any asbestos testing, because I don't ever recall seeing an abatement crew at his house.  I'll have to ask him.

[shponglefan]

Giving this a bit further thought, it's really more of an all or nothing deal.

Knowing what I know now, I'm going to work towards getting rid of all of it.  So this means tearing out walls and ceilings in the whole house.  But I can only reasonably do a bit at a time, short of moving all my furniture and fixtures out, and doing a whole-house remediation.

If there will still be asbestos in other parts of the house, I'd just use 1/4" drywall overtop the old stuff unless you're changing the layout or something.

A lot of what I'm doing is replacing insulation on exterior walls (the existing stuff is crap and there is no vapor barrier), and adding sound-absorbing insulation on the interior walls.  So that's mainly why I'm looking at removing existing drywall.

[shponglefan]

My father contracted Mesothelioma and passed away from the complications of it (never smoked a day in his life) and it was either through his job (but we can't figure out exactly what in his job had asbestos...he dug wells for a living so he was in contact with concrete and heavy machinery) or, when he renovated our house 30 some odd years ago (too late to know for sure if there was asbestos in the walls or not, and there wasn't much info about asbestos back then).

Evil disease...you have to weigh extra cost, piece of mind and health against saving money, a lifetime of worry and possible cancer (the fibers can sit in your lungs for decades before they cause issues).

So...you takes your chances, and I would hate to see someone go through what my dad went through.

Pay professionals, you only have one chance at this...

Sorry to hear about your dad.  You're right, paying a few thousand to do it professionally is probably worth the piece of mind of not having to worry about the long-term health consequences.  Well, not worrying about additional exposure at any rate.

[shponglefan]

As a home inspector I see this issue come up time and again and you have to accept reality (every home built before 1970-80 probably has some asbestos in it in the building materials)

Yeah, my house is '67 or '68.  So far I figure I've been lucky in that every test has been negative so far except for the drywall compound.  But I still have a couple other things to get tested, so we'll see where that ends up...

Unfortunately since you did the test you are now legally obliged to disclose the results to the next person should you ever sell your house.   

At this stage, my plan is to work towards just getting rid of all of it.

[Xiaou2]

Isnt it amazing that home and business owners need to pay to have these things removed?

 It should be paid for by a combination of the Asbestos company / profiteers, as well as the US Govt. , for approving it as "Safe".

[menace]

Isnt it amazing that home and business owners need to pay to have these things removed?

 It should be paid for by a combination of the Asbestos company / profiteers, as well as the US Govt. , for approving it as "Safe".

While its unfortunate that the buck stops at the home owner, have you considered the legal process?  You would have to prove that when the house was built (60's) the gov't of the time knew unequivocally that asbestos was dangerous in its current form.  Good luck with that...Given that gov't is typically the slowest, dumbest, least efficient legal entity you would be not only battling uphill, but doing it while shedding thousands of dollars to lawyers (who would love to get this tort train railing...)

If it bugs you, least cost is to remove it--but consider that asbestos, once freed, stays airborne for weeks since its particle size is sooo small..Take the appropriate pre-cautions, wet everything down first, cut to remove (no hammers or sledgehammers) and every piece gets carefully placed in a plastic garbage bag.

[knave]

If it bugs you, least cost is to remove it--but consider that asbestos, once freed, stays airborne for weeks since its particle size is sooo small..Take the appropriate pre-cautions, wet everything down first, cut to remove (no hammers or sledgehammers) and every piece gets carefully placed in a plastic garbage bag.

Removal companies sheet off the work area and create "negative pressure" so anything airborne does not get to the rest of the house. When done the interior is ventilated through a filtration system. All this is to avoid any particulate in the air after the work is done.

[pbj]

It truly amazes me how much asbestos is still around.  They were ripping floor tiles out an active hospital building under the guise of 'renovation' but the things were clearly those 9x9 tiles we all love.  The doors were all asbestos core, too.  In 2016.  In a major hospital. 

 

[danny_galaga]

The stuff is inert as long as you don't breath it in or swallow it.  I would think drywall dust would put up a lot of particulate so maybe have someone else do it to be on the safe side.

Actually I think you can even swallow it without any harm. It's quite a mechanical proposition, been a long time since I learnt about it, but basically if you get dust particles in your lungs, cells try to envelope it so the particles can then be expelled in your mucus. But when it comes to asbestos particles, they are just long enough that the cells when trying to envelope it, keep growing. If the particles were longer, they wouldn't try, and if they were shorter, the cells would successfully envelope them. Goldilocks length particles, those.

[pbj]

Yep, exacerbated by being a smoker, and the only treatment is to split you in half and poke around your lungs.  You might make it 5 years afterwards.

[Xiaou2]

The stuff is inert as long as you don't breath it in or swallow it.  I would think drywall dust would put up a lot of particulate so maybe have someone else do it to be on the safe side.

Actually I think you can even swallow it without any harm. It's quite a mechanical proposition, been a long time since I learnt about it, but basically if you get dust particles in your lungs, cells try to envelope it so the particles can then be expelled in your mucus. But when it comes to asbestos particles, they are just long enough that the cells when trying to envelope it, keep growing. If the particles were longer, they wouldn't try, and if they were shorter, the cells would successfully envelope them. Goldilocks length particles, those.

 Not so sure about that.

search:

Johnson & Johnson to pay $72M in talcum powder-related cancer case

Talcum Powder & Ovarian Cancer

Talc is a mineral comprised primarily of magnesium, silicon, and oxygen. When ground into powder, talc can absorb moisture and reduce friction. Talcum powder is widely used to help keep skin dry and prevent rashes. When used on the genitals, however, dangerous talc particles can travel into the ovaries and remain trapped for years. These particles can cause inflammation and lead to the growth of ovarian cancer cells.

Research suggests that talcum powder can contribute to cancer in the ovaries if particles enter the body through the vagina. One review of data reported in the medical journal Cancer Prevention Research indicated that women who regularly use talc-based powder for feminine hygiene might increase their risk of ovarian cancer by about 41 percent.

Following the 1971 study, numerous studies were published pointing to the link between talc and ovarian cancer. In 1992, a study found that regular use of baby powder increased the risk of developing ovarian cancer threefold. In 2010, a Harvard study concluded that talc in baby powder was carcinogenic to humans. Yet talcum powder remained on the market unregulated and without any warning from the manufacturer.

http://www.golombhonik.com/Practice-Areas/Dangerous-Drugs-Medical-Devices/Johnson-Johnson-Talcum-Powder.aspx


 Supposedly the older talc has Asbestos in it.   Nice ehh?
Not sure if the Asbestos is the root cause of the cancers... or talc in general.

[BadMouth]

...or people with issues resulting from the development of cancer are more likely to use talcum powder....


EDIT:  I recommend Anti-Monkey Butt Powder

[danny_galaga]

The stuff is inert as long as you don't breath it in or swallow it.  I would think drywall dust would put up a lot of particulate so maybe have someone else do it to be on the safe side.

Actually I think you can even swallow it without any harm. It's quite a mechanical proposition, been a long time since I learnt about it, but basically if you get dust particles in your lungs, cells try to envelope it so the particles can then be expelled in your mucus. But when it comes to asbestos particles, they are just long enough that the cells when trying to envelope it, keep growing. If the particles were longer, they wouldn't try, and if they were shorter, the cells would successfully envelope them. Goldilocks length particles, those.

 Not so sure about that.

search:

Johnson & Johnson to pay $72M in talcum powder-related cancer case

Talcum Powder & Ovarian Cancer

Talc is a mineral comprised primarily of magnesium, silicon, and oxygen. When ground into powder, talc can absorb moisture and reduce friction. Talcum powder is widely used to help keep skin dry and prevent rashes. When used on the genitals, however, dangerous talc particles can travel into the ovaries and remain trapped for years. These particles can cause inflammation and lead to the growth of ovarian cancer cells.

Research suggests that talcum powder can contribute to cancer in the ovaries if particles enter the body through the vagina. One review of data reported in the medical journal Cancer Prevention Research indicated that women who regularly use talc-based powder for feminine hygiene might increase their risk of ovarian cancer by about 41 percent.

Following the 1971 study, numerous studies were published pointing to the link between talc and ovarian cancer. In 1992, a study found that regular use of baby powder increased the risk of developing ovarian cancer threefold. In 2010, a Harvard study concluded that talc in baby powder was carcinogenic to humans. Yet talcum powder remained on the market unregulated and without any warning from the manufacturer.

http://www.golombhonik.com/Practice-Areas/Dangerous-Drugs-Medical-Devices/Johnson-Johnson-Talcum-Powder.aspx


 Supposedly the older talc has Asbestos in it.   Nice ehh?
Not sure if the Asbestos is the root cause of the cancers... or talc in general.

So you eat by putting things in your vagina?