ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Silicosis history: from antiquity to the anthropocene.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Silicosis is the oldest occupational lung disease known to medicine and, at the same time, one of the most contemporary public health emergencies. Described in classical antiquity, given monographic attention by Paracelsus and Agricola, established as the founding example of occupational medicine by Ramazzini in 1700, and named by Visconti in 1870, the disease was widely assumed by the late 20th century to be a controlled relic of heavy industry. Yet over the past two decades it has returned with force as an acute and accelerated disease of the young, through two technology-driven outbreaks: denim sandblasting and the fabrication of engineered (artificial) stone. This article traces silicosis across roughly 2,500 years and argues that its history is best understood less as a story of mineralogy than as one of political economy: of who works, who profits, who is believed, and who is compensated. This article integrates three dimensions usually treated apart: the medical history of recognition and pathophysiology; the social history of class, race and the deliberate manufacture of doubt; and the history of labor mobilization and health policy, from the world's first silicosis compensation statute (South Africa, 1911) and the 1930 Johannesburg conference of the International Labor Office (ILO) to the United States silica standard of 2016 and Australia's world-first prohibition of engineered stone in 2024. As Sisyphus was condemned to roll a boulder uphill only to watch it roll back each time he neared the summit, so each silicosis epidemic that one society defeats tends to reappear in another; we argue that this cyclical recurrence is driven by economic disparity. Each time a wealthy jurisdiction eliminates a hazardous process, that process, and with it the disease, migrates to a poorer country or a less-regulated sector rather than disappearing, and until those underlying inequalities are addressed the boulder will keep rolling back down. This article closes with a forward projection on emerging hazards, diagnostics, the prospects for the World Health Organization-ILO goal of global elimination, and the equity question of who is left behind. Silicosis is wholly preventable; its persistence is therefore a political choice, not a scientific mystery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.