In response to recent contamination scares, Australian regulators are redefining what counts as “high risk” for asbestos. Products once considered low risk are now under scrutiny. Testing requirements are tightening. And the assumption that asbestos is a “legacy problem” is being challenged once again.

At the centre of this shift is a series of contamination incidents that exposed a critical gap. Not in legislation, but in detection.

This article explores how those incidents reshaped risk classifications, why existing testing frameworks failed to catch the problem early, and what this means for regulators, importers, and safety professionals moving forward. 

It also looks at the growing need for faster, more accessible detection methods, and how emerging technologies are helping bridge the gap between compliance and real-world risk.

When “Low Risk” Isn’t Low Risk

In late 2025, authorities moved to reclassify certain imported materials, including children’s play sand, as “high risk” (1). This followed widespread recalls and school closures after asbestos was detected in products previously allowed to enter the country without mandatory testing (2).

For regulators, the issue was not a lack of rules. Australia has some of the strictest asbestos bans in the world, in place since 2003. The problem was how risk was defined.

Materials like coloured sand had historically been treated as low risk. That classification meant less scrutiny at the border and fewer testing requirements before distribution. But the contamination events revealed a flaw. Risk assessments were based on assumptions about manufacturing processes and supply chains, not direct verification.

When those assumptions failed, asbestos slipped through.

A System Built on Detection—But Not Always Designed for It

Australia’s regulatory framework relies heavily on identifying asbestos before exposure occurs. This typically involves laboratory testing, carried out after samples are collected and sent away for analysis.

While accurate, this approach has limitations.

• Testing is often reactive rather than proactive
• Results can take days to return
• Sampling is selective, not comprehensive
• Suspect materials may already be handled or distributed before confirmation

In the case of the contaminated sand, detection did not occur at the border. It happened later, through testing processes that were never designed to catch every instance.

This is not an isolated issue. The Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency continues to report detections in a wide range of imported goods, from construction materials to automotive components (3).

The reality is clear. Regulation can set the rules, but detection determines whether those rules are effective.

Tightening Rules Means Increasing Pressure on Testing

The reclassification of materials as “high risk” is a logical response. It increases accountability at the import stage and reduces reliance on assumptions.

However, it also introduces new challenges.

More products requiring testing means:

• Higher volumes of material needing verification
• Greater pressure on laboratories and compliance teams
• Increased delays in supply chains
• Rising costs for importers and regulators

In short, the system becomes more robust—but also more strained. This is where the conversation begins to shift. Not just toward stricter rules, but toward better tools.

The Case for Faster, On-Site Screening

To close the gap between regulation and reality, detection needs to move closer to the point of risk.

That means identifying asbestos:

• At the border, before products are cleared
• On-site, before materials are handled or installed
• In real time, without waiting for lab results

This is the space where new technologies are making a meaningful impact.

One example is the ASBpro handheld asbestos analyser, developed by PAS Scientific and distributed by Portable Analytical Solutions.

Unlike traditional methods, ASBpro is designed for rapid, on-site identification of asbestos-containing materials.

How ASBpro Addresses the Detection Gap

ASBpro introduces a fundamentally different approach to asbestos testing. Rather than relying on off-site analysis, it allows users to assess materials immediately, at the point of inspection.

Key benefits include:

• Real-time results
  Identify asbestos in minutes, not days, reducing delays and uncertainty
• On-site testing capability
  Perform analysis directly at ports, warehouses, construction sites, or manufacturing facilities
• Reduced reliance on lab workflows
  Minimise bottlenecks and free up laboratory resources for confirmatory testing where needed
• Improved risk management
  Make faster decisions before materials are disturbed, distributed, or installed
• Portability and ease of use
  A handheld format enables use by inspectors and safety officers in the field.

This is not about replacing laboratory testing altogether. It is about strengthening the system by adding a first line of defence. With rapid screening, high-risk materials can be identified earlier, and only confirmed cases need to move through more time-intensive lab processes.

From Reactive to Preventative

Australia’s move to tighten asbestos testing rules reflects a broader shift in thinking. The goal is no longer just to respond to contamination. It is to prevent it from reaching people in the first place.

That requires more than policy. It requires capability.

As the definition of “high risk” expands, so too must the tools used to manage that risk. Technologies like ASBpro support this transition by enabling faster, more accessible detection. They reduce reliance on assumptions and create opportunities for earlier intervention.

In a regulatory environment where the stakes are high and the margin for error is small, that shift matters. Because when it comes to asbestos, the difference between assumption and certainty is everything.

Sources:

• Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency

• The Guardian

• BBC News

More than 30 toys were recently recalled across the UK after asbestos was found in something as ordinary as children’s play sand (1).

The concerning part was not just the contamination itself. It was that these products had already undergone testing and were cleared for sale before reaching consumers.

The discovery did not come from routine compliance checks. It was triggered after concerns were raised by a customer, prompting further investigation. By that point, the products had already entered homes, schools, and retail environments.

This raises a critical question. If testing exists, how is asbestos still being missed?

When Testing Isn’t Enough

The UK recall highlights a broader issue that extends well beyond a single product category or region.

In theory, strict regulations and established testing protocols should prevent asbestos from entering the market. Many countries, particularly Australia, have long-standing bans supported by robust compliance frameworks (2).

Yet incidents like this continue to occur. The issue is not the absence of testing. It is the effectiveness, timing, and accessibility of that testing. In this case, initial assessments failed to detect asbestos fibres present in the sand. Only after additional scrutiny was the contamination identified, leading to widespread recalls and concern among regulators.

This suggests a gap between what testing is designed to do and what it is able to achieve in practice, in real-time situations.

The Limits of Traditional Detection Methods

Most asbestos identification relies on laboratory-based analysis. Samples are collected, sent to a lab, and examined using specialised techniques. This approach is highly accurate under controlled conditions. However, it comes with practical limitations that become more pronounced in complex, fast-moving supply chains.

• Testing is often sample-based, not comprehensive
• Results can take days to process and return
• Materials may already be distributed or used before confirmation
• Detection depends on where and when samples are taken

In global supply chains, where materials may pass through multiple suppliers, manufacturers, and distributors, these limitations create risk. If contamination is inconsistent or present at low levels, it can be missed during initial testing. If samples are not representative, results may not reflect the true condition of the product.

The result is a system that can confirm asbestos when it is found. But it cannot always guarantee it will be found in time.

Bonus Resource: Understanding the Technology Behind Modern Asbestos Detection

Technologies like ASBpro are powered by near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy—a method that identifies materials based on how they interact with light, enabling rapid, non-destructive analysis in real-world environments.

While its applications today are highly advanced, NIR has a long and fascinating history that underpins its reliability and growing role in field-based testing.

Read more: The Fascinating History of NIR: From Discovery to Modern Applications

A Problem of Timing and Proximity

One of the most important factors in asbestos detection is timing.

In many cases, testing occurs at specific checkpoints. During manufacturing, at import, or during compliance audits. These are important controls, but they are also limited in scope. Between those checkpoints, materials move. They are processed, packaged, transported, and sold.

If contamination is introduced at any stage, or if it was missed during earlier testing, it may not be identified until much later.

By then, exposure risk increases.

This is what makes incidents like the UK toy recall particularly concerning. The system worked in the sense that contamination was eventually identified. But it worked too late.

Moving Closer to the Point of Risk

To reduce the likelihood of missed asbestos, detection needs to evolve. Not just in accuracy, but in accessibility.

Testing needs to happen closer to where decisions are made. At the point of import, during handling, and before materials are used or distributed. It needs to be fast enough to support real-time decisions, not delayed responses.

This shift from centralised, lab-based testing to more flexible, field-based detection is already underway. Technologies are emerging that allow asbestos identification to move beyond the lab and into the environments where risk actually exists.

A More Immediate Approach to Asbestos Detection

The ASBpro handheld asbestos analyser, developed by PAS Scientific, reflects this shift.

Rather than relying solely on off-site analysis, ASBpro enables rapid, on-site identification of asbestos-containing materials. This changes how and when detection occurs.

Instead of waiting for lab results, users can assess materials in real time, at the point of inspection.

Key advantages include:

• Immediate results
  Detects asbestos in seconds, enabling faster decision-making in real-time.
• On-site capability
  Test materials at ports, warehouses, retail environments, or worksites
• Reduced reliance on sampling assumptions
  Assess materials directly, rather than depending on limited samples
• Improved supply chain visibility
  Identify potential issues before products move further downstream
• Practical, portable design
  Suitable for inspectors and safety professionals in the field

This approach does not replace laboratory testing entirely. Instead, it strengthens the overall system by introducing an earlier layer of detection. Materials that raise concern can still undergo confirmatory lab analysis, but only after being flagged through rapid screening.

From Detection to Prevention

The UK toy recall serves as a reminder that asbestos is not just a historical issue. It remains a present-day risk, particularly in global supply chains where variability is difficult to control. More importantly, it highlights that the challenge is not simply whether we test for asbestos, but how effectively we detect it before exposure occurs.

As regulatory expectations increase and supply chains become more complex, the need for faster, more accessible detection will continue to grow. Technologies like ASBpro support this shift by enabling earlier intervention and more informed decision-making.

Because when it comes to asbestos, finding it eventually is not enough. It needs to be found before it becomes a risk.

If you have any questions about the ASBpro, or anything related to this article, please get in touch with our team.

Sources:

• Australian Border Force

• The Guardian