{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0162748643761302, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.254237288135593, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of asbestos burden in non-urban patients with and without lung cancer.

Asbestos is a recognized carcinogen which is widely available for environmental exposure. Since all members of our society are exposed to asbestos containing environments and, indeed, have asbestos fibres in their lungs, the concern exists as to its significance in contributing to the incidence of lung cancer in such populations. The asbestos burden was compared in lung tissue from control and lung cancer patients who had resided in a non-urban environment. There were no significant differences between the asbestos burdens in both age matched groups; however, the proportions of amphiboles to chrysotile were different from those reported in previous urban based studies. This difference was suggested to be attributable to chrysotile exposure in urban air. All patients had appreciable non-asbestos fibres within their lungs. The results indicate that when comparing any dust burden in lungs, it is necessary to have data from regional control populations before attempting to explore causal-disease relationships.