In the dismal argot of government, few working-class families in west central Scotland have not been adversely affected by bad health “choices” and “outcomes”.

Heart disease and cancer in particular seem to have developed a peculiar attachment to those who lived and worked near yards and factories and inhaled the fumes of mass production. Politicians, academics and health professionals – almost all of them sincere and intent on doing the right thing – like to reduce their analysis of these patterns of bad health into easily digestible bites that seem to make sense to the rest of us. If only we would all drink less, eat better and reduce our salt and sugar intake, why Scotland could become the gym bunny of Europe.

Of course, they’re all right and their work has led to a better understanding of our bad health and greater funding to address it. Poor personal choices might contribute greatly to ill-health but many of these are rooted in causes that few people can control: unemployment, low wages, unacceptable workplace health and safety and loss of self-esteem.

In their important research paper, Health Outcomes and determinants by occupation and industry in Scotland, 2008-2011, Martin Taulbut and Gerry McCartney analysed the effects of the workplace on the health of Scottish workers. In their conclusion, this sentence leaps out: “This report supports the view that inequalities in health are partly driven by inequalities in the labour market. Policies that increase the number of working-age adults in sustainable, paid employment that protects their physical and mental health would make an important contribution to improving health outcomes.”

These words will resonate with campaigners seeking justice for the victims of asbestos-related disease in Scotland. The history of asbestos in Scotland largely mirrors that of the rest of the world and is characterised by the rapid growth in profits for the industrialists. This is equalled only by their zeal in ensuring that an awareness of the dangers of asbestos to workers was concealed for as long as possible.

Asbestos manufacturing in the west of Scotland began almost 140 years ago and within a few decades every ship made on the Clyde carried asbestos panels. It was found to be a cheap option in providing heat insulation and thus became widely used by building contractors and housing associations. Inevitably, it became a primary material in the construction of new schools and university and college buildings. Research into its adverse effects on those involved in their construction and those who later used these buildings was routinely covered up by companies happy to wade in its profits.

How many of us have seen relatives who worked in the building trade spend their final years breathing through a mask?

In his essay for the New Statesman more than a decade ago entitled Asbestos: The Lies that Killed, Ed Howker describes the tactics of the Lancashire manufacturing giant Turner & Newall, once the world’s largest asbestos conglomerate. The firm “exposed millions to a lethal carcinogen in full knowledge of its dangers, using PR firms and politicians to hide a truth which it had secretly admitted to in 1961, namely that ‘the only really safe number of asbestos fibres in the works environment is nil’”.

Now, more than a decade after it was banned for use in construction across the EU, the families of victims are still fighting against the avarice and inhumanity of the corporate insurance industry. The nature of asbestos poisoning has been advantageous to the construction firms and the hired jackals in the insurance business. It can take many years for asbestos-related diseases to become apparent in the body, long after a worker has retired and thus providing great scope for insurers to mitigate compensation by delaying tactics. How many of us have seen proud and sturdy male relatives who once worked in the building trade spending their final years coughing up their insides while breathing through a mask and not knowing what lay behind it beyond the usual west of Scotland toxic soup of ailments?

For more than two decades, Clydeside Action on Asbestos (CAA) has been the principal campaign group in Scotland seeking justice for the tens of thousands of families whose lives have been disfigured by asbestos-related diseases including mesothelioma and lung cancer. It must always seem that they are running up the down elevator. They currently exist with the help of a modest grant from Glasgow city council and the kindness of donors. A recent alteration in the structure of Holyrood grant applications means they no longer receive funding from the Scottish government.

Last week CAA announced the appointment of a specialist nurse, dedicated to improving care for patients with pleural disease, including those with mesothelioma. They are trying to persuade the Scottish government to remove asbestos from around 1,600 school and university buildings – a mission given more urgency following the publication of a National Audit Office report which found that asbestos was a “potentially dangerous issue” in most schools. It further warned the substance could be disturbed by boisterous pupils or teachers attaching work to walls.

Children have a much higher risk of developing mesothelioma, with a five-year-old child being five times more likely to contract the disease than someone exposed to asbestos in their 30s. CAA reports that 200 to 300 people die each year from having been exposed to asbestos in schools.

The Scottish government has recently encountered turbulence in imposing its workplace car park tax. Perhaps it might consider diverting some of the revenue raised into funding the removal of asbestos in our schools. It’s only the future health of our children that’s at stake, after all.

• Kevin McKenna is an Observer columnist