Jonathan Sharp
(Editor’s Note: The following in an op-ed article submitted by the Environmental Litigation Group advocating for an asbestos registry to provide more accessible information asbestos exposures locally and across the U.S.)
Asbestos was mainly removed from factories, military sites and public buildings, but its deadly legacy continues to affect communities across the U.S.
In Ohio, counties such as Jackson continue to experience the long-term consequences of exposure without documentation or clarity. From old industrial corridors to aging schools and public buildings, this hazardous mineral has left a lingering public-health burden.
Despite well-established scientific knowledge about asbestos-related illnesses, the country still lacks a transparent, centralized record of where exposure truly occurred. Instead, the nation depends on what is essentially a “shadow registry” — a scattered collection of records held in asbestos trust funds, Veterans Affairs (VA) databases, private settlements and closed-off archives. Without complete transparency, communities must face a public-health crisis with limited information and no clear path towards accountability.
The Tragic Toll of Asbestos Exposure on Ohio Communities
A public asbestos registry would provide a comprehensive picture of exposure resulting from decades of corporate negligence and regulatory shortcomings. It would make clear which job sites, buildings and military facilities — especially those tied to Ohio’s manufacturing, mining and industrial past — contributed to widespread exposure.
Between 1999 and 2017, Ohio reported 12,697 asbestos-related deaths, including 2,353 linked to mesothelioma and almost a thousand to asbestosis. Even in the small community of almost 33,000 in Jackson County, the death toll due to asbestos exposure accounted for 20 casualties in the same period. Yet, the country has no comprehensive log of where these exposures occurred or how many residents have been affected.
Asbestos trust funds were initially created to compensate victims, but now they function as sealed vaults. Each contains extensive records detailing contaminated sites, unsafe materials and affected workers. These files remain inaccessible to those who need them most. A system intended to deliver justice has become one that obscures the truth.
The Shadow Records that Leave Ohio Families Unprotected
The United States already holds considerable quantities of asbestos-related data, but none of it is connected or transparent. More than 60 trust funds store detailed histories of exposure. The VA and the Department of Defense maintain records of veterans suffering from asbestos-related diseases. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has documented cases of secondary exposure among families affected by asbestos microfibers and dust brought home on working clothes. However, without a unified system, these pieces remain isolated and inaccessible.
For counties like Jackson and others across the state, the impact is profound. Workers who powered local industries and veterans who worked and lived in asbestos-laden military facilities are practically invisible in federal datasets. Without a centralized record, the accurate scale of exposure remains underestimated, and meaningful reform remains out of reach.
The People Paying the Price of Asbestos Exposure Remain Invisible
Between 2003 and 2022, more than 63,000 mesothelioma cases were reported nationwide, with nearly one-third involving military veterans. That is because military installations nationwide, including Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, extensively used asbestos-containing materials in hangars, barracks and vehicle maintenance areas. According to the latest census data, Ohio is home to more than 600,000 veterans, many of whom served during peak asbestos-use decades.
A national Mesothelioma Registry, overseen jointly by the VA and the DoD, would enable earlier diagnoses, more precise tracking and more consistent compensation for veterans and their families.
Civilian workers need equal protection. For generations, Ohio’s manufacturing backbone ran on industries that heavily used asbestos, yet there has never been a national system to document occupational exposure. OSHA regulations focus on safety rather than long-term health monitoring. A unified Occupational Exposure Registry, led by the CDC, could finally preserve the work histories necessary to identify at-risk communities.
Families across Ohio have also carried the hidden burden of secondary exposure. Many spouses and children were exposed to asbestos through contaminated clothing or from deteriorating materials in old homes or schools. Their experiences remain absent from public records. A dedicated secondary exposure tracking system would finally acknowledge their suffering.
A Path Towards Transparency and Accountability
Meaningful progress will come only when the nation discards its fragmented, hidden system and replaces it with clear, accessible records. The necessary data already exists. The challenge lies in linking it together and making it public.
A national Mesothelioma Registry, combined with a consolidated Occupational Exposure Registry maintained by NIOSH and the CDC, would create a long-needed structure for this fragmented system. These tools would offer transparency to families, communities, researchers and healthcare providers while guiding policy reform.
Releasing historical jobsite and occupational records without creating new liabilities for companies would help families finally validate what many have long suspected: their exposure was real, preventable and far more widespread than official records suggest.
Workers, veterans and families in Jackson County and across Ohio deserve more than a system built on silence. It is time to replace secrecy with truth and honor those who have paid the price for the nation’s industrial and military legacy.
(Editor Note: It is the policy of The Telegram to accept and publish Letters to the Editor and Opinion / Editorial pieces. The views expressed in those submissions do not necessarily reflect the views of The Telegram staff and should be viewed as being only the opinion of the writer.)
Loading Comments