Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

The health risk of chrysotile asbestos: Erratum

Erratum

Further to the erratum published in September 2014 issue [1] in relation to the May article ‘The health risk of chrysotile asbestos’ [2] , Dr Bernstein has found that in 2012 he received payment from Georgia-Pacific for work on a previous study. Dr Bernstein apologises for overlooking this disclosure in the previous erratum.

Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine. 21(1):109, January 2015.

Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine: September 2014 - Volume 20 - Issue 5 - p 525
doi: 10.1097/MCP.0000000000000092
ERRATUM
Free
Erratum

During the editing process of the recent article by Bernstein [1], the conflicts of interest statement was wrongly amended from ‘No conflicts of interest relevant to this article’ to ‘There are no conflicts of interest.’ The publisher apologises for this error.

Dr Bernstein would like to take this opportunity to clarify that he works as a scientific consultant to the chrysotile asbestos industry and gives presentations worldwide on the science of chrysotile asbestos. In the last three years he has received payment for his consultancy services from: Honeywell, International Chrysotile Association and Zimbabwe National Chrysotile Taskforce.

Dr Bernstein received no payment, compensation or funding for the current article [1]. The article is solely his work and the opinions stated therein are his own.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCE

1. Bernstein DM. The health risk of chrysotile asbestos. Curr Opin Pulm Med 2014; 20:366–370.
© 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins