2,500 Ground Zero workers have cancer

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: loam

Much, much higher.

My sister lived in the red zone. Died 6 years later of some strange lung disease.

First, sorry to hear about your loss.. Second, they were never able to pinpoint the cause?

originally posted by: jhn7537

originally posted by: BoovDawg
a reply to: IBossJekler

More proof of the thermite used to melt the steel...

Trust me, I'm a believer in thermite being used too, but do we know thermite causes cancer when exposed to it? I honestly think it's likely asbestos.. Asbestos was banned from the US in 1989 and the WTC towers were built in 1972. It's also known that asbestos was used in the construction of the towers.

Bingo, Jhn. The towers were slated to be demolished anyway because
of the cost of removing the fireproofing versus just starting over. The
EPA was on the job (for a change) threatening big fines for noncompliance
to the code, and it must have looked almost good to send in the 'grey
butter' crew instead of comply. Who knows... there's been flap out there
that the Twin Towers were constructed with built-in party favors.
Not buying that last one.
I believe the whole thing DID get helped along by the money saved---
and the big fat insurance payout for 'terrorism'. Just specu, sorry
BUT
you're not going to hear Shep Smith slip that one by us anytime soon.

After fending off a case of Hi C myself from breathing overheated plastics
that could turn Robert Culp into Lizard Pilot, I've got a direct dog in this fight.

And yeah, asbestos is right up there next to radiologicals for carcinogenic
properties per milligram. It helped get my mom and great uncle... the
latter a fire chief for over twenty years. Too close to home, rock wool
is bad news too. But it was cheap and really efficient, so everybody got
some in the old frame homes that sprung up in the Teens to Thirties.

a reply to: loam

There was a Russian that all along has claimed it was a small nuke that brought down the towers. As part of his claims was that they never informed local PD & FD but when FBI showed up they were wearing suits to protect them. I thought his article was credible but arrgh but I can' remember his name. Will start the search again..

Stay tuned... Unless someone else remembers.

Frigg'in finger...doubled up.

originally posted by: rickymouse
Something in that building, when heated, gave off fumes that causes something in the body to happen where you can't fight cancer correctly. Could be an endocrine disruptor that accumulates in the body and can't get excreted. Probably some sort of plastic or polyurathane product. There is so much stuff created today that there is no testing for long term damage. If you have a little tiny fire in your house in one room, you can die from the inhaled fumes. A friend of mine is a firefighter and he knows of a lot of this stuff from training. We got rid of a lot of the stuff in our house with these chemicals in them. Polyurathane is one of the worst in my mind, because it is on a lot of furniture.

What happened to varnish and stains, they made your throat burn when you breathed the fumes when they burned but they didn't kill you.

Just the EPA making sure all the chemical manufacturers can
give us more and better spin-off compounds that they haven't
even tested yet for long term effects... kind of like the drug
combos. And in the long run, I'd be leery of even sawing into
a new shelf now for fear of the demon doggies fuming off it.

Stain used to be no worse than cheap bourbon and
charcoal dust mixed yup: now it's choking out a roommate
in the next room twenty feet away re-doing a shoebox. sigh

My money is on the cause being something more than just asbestos

I don't think asbestos accounts for all of the various cancers being reported.

Worth additional research.

originally posted by: jhn7537

originally posted by: BoovDawg
a reply to: IBossJekler

More proof of the thermite used to melt the steel...

Trust me, I'm a believer in thermite being used too, but do we know thermite causes cancer when exposed to it? I honestly think it's likely asbestos.. Asbestos was banned from the US in 1989 and the WTC towers were built in 1972. It's also known that asbestos was used in the construction of the towers.

Sadly, many people might be shocked to learn that asbestos is NOT banned in the US.

Unfortunately, in 1991, asbestos industry supporters challenged and overturned the ban in a landmark lawsuit: Corrosion Proof Fittings v. the Environmental Protection Agency. Although the case resulted in several small victories for asbestos regulation, the EPA ultimately failed to put an end to asbestos use.

www.asbestos.com...

It started with miners, followed by factory workers. Unknowingly, asbestos workers were bringing toxic fibers home with them on their clothes. Also unaware of the dangers of asbestos, many consumers fell ill from exposures to asbestos-containing products.

And they kept getting sick.

We now know for certain that all forms of asbestos can cause lung cancer, mesothelioma and other chronic respiratory conditions.

I spent 10 days at ground zero, getting there, from Ohio, about 12 hours after the towers came down. I was issued a respirator, however, only wore it about 25% of the time.

The heat on "the pile" was such that it made wearing the respirator unbearable. Sounds stupid, I know, but you couldn't breathe in the damn thing.

originally posted by: shasta9600
My money is on the cause being something more than just asbestos

I would imagine that breathing in completely annihilated and burnt steel alone could contribute, you know like the 75% of the steel that just vaporized and blew away in the wind, and how about the other steel which looked like it had been heated to 5000 degrees for a second and bent like pretzels.

The term "Towers Collapsed" is one of the most insane statements I can, or ever will hear.

Those things were completely and UTTERLY blown apart in all manner of ways, ANNIHILATED COMPLETELY !

And yet the basements were intact, amazing considering the millions of tons of building that should have piled in there.

It is time for a check of peoples thinking, how anyone could believe this is a "collapse" is the worst part of all,

The REAL Ground Zero, is the reality that people are totally thought for, and they cannot even believe they are not free, free to see.

originally posted by: amazing
Something bad happened there and the Government lied to us. That much, we know for sure, now.

I agree 100% they lied to us and still try to to cover up the lie.

Which for most of us on ATS, it never worked.

-SAP-

insulation on wires and electricial transformers,large capacitors, paint, adhesives, flame-retardants, and other sources in the towers contained PCBs.

when burned the PCBs turn into fumes containing Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins Polychlorinated dibenzo furans and PCB,


Polychlorinated dibenzo dioxins and Polychlorinated dibenzo furans are dioxins just like what was in agent orange.

www.epa.gov...

there is another disorder common among firefighter every where and at ground zero.
that is sarcoidosis.
www.nydailynews.com...
It also could be caused by exposure to Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins Polychlorinated dibenzo furans and PCB,

I always thought just the flooring alone burning up would be toxic enough all by itself. Carpet, tile or vinyl? That many floors of it. I'd really be interested in what types of cancer they are seeing.

a reply to: jhn7537

Ah...therein might lay one of the reasons to bring down the towers...asbestos removal would have cost multiple millions and the towers would have had to have been shut down, probably for a very long time while the asbestos work was being carried out.

By demolishing the buildings in 'a terrorist attack'...they remove the asbestos for free, collect handsomely on the insurance and get an excuse for a profitable and politically expedient war in the ME.

Given they don't give a damn about anyone but themselves and their cronies, people developing cancer from the asbestos particles flying around in their multi-trillions all over Manhattan, it was a big win for all concerned in the plot.

asbestos burning causes people to devolop cancer ,i call it false ,and here are my reasons why. in the second world war london was burning asbestos was everywhere in buildings in uk ,,guess what none of these cancer issues.
so whatever caused this cancer in my opinion was not asbestos but i have no theory on what caused the cancer ,best guess is radiation or any electromagnetic explosion possibly ..

The American people have a serious problem and that is the people who are running their country.

The causes of the first responders' cancers can be determined but only through more costly procedures than are routinely employed. It might be in your interest to know that you are dying because tiny filaments of asbestos are irritating your lungs at a microscopic level or that tiny alpha particles are bombarding tissue in your lungs as they decay radioactively, but it is not in the interests of the government to pursue these matters.

Liabilities, both political and financial make it preferable to ignore the issue altogether. The longer the victims of 9/11 are in their graves, the better. People move on. In the political aspects of this case people have moved on. Probably half of the American people are perfectly happy with the system that betrayed them on 9/11.

Unfortunately for the perpetrators of 9/11 the side effects of their handiwork are moving on also, following the first responders and other New Yorkers down through time.

Mesothelioma (caused by asbestos) has a long incubation period. People started dying of cancer much before they should have if mesothelioma had been the cause. Personally, I believe they are dying of cancers caused by alpha particles radiating in their lungs. I think the source of the alpha particles is dust from depleted uranium sheathed cutting charges used in the demolition of the WTC.

I think the government is hiding information that would make this obvious, in the form of unreleased data from a USGS survey of dust from the WTC that was done to reconnoiter saftey hazards that might be faced during the cleanup. Too much uranium was found in the dust to have come from background sources or from industrial sources.

The amount of uranium found is buried in the list of all chemicals found in the dust. Furthermore, the exact nuclides of uranium found in the dust have never been listed publicly, to my knowledge. I believe they are trying to conceal the presence of U236 in the dust, which is a tell tale impurity found in Depleted Uranium.

Depleted Uranium is used in so-called "shaped charges" and patents for its use in the production of shaped charges existed prior to 9/11.

Unfortunately, owning up to its presence in the WTC dust would be tantamount to owning up to having demolished the WTC and that is something that the US government probably will not do for generations, if ever.

Tough luck for all of the 9/11 victims, including the first responders and their poor families.

I'm sorry but some of the blame has to be put on the responders.

Common sense tells you breathing in that crud is bad for you despite what the government readings told us.
You have to take personal responsability for your own health.
Coughing is bad. Hint! Hint!

originally posted by: conz1992
a reply to: IBossJekler

I was going to say the same thing, the article doesn't exactly pin it down to anything, was it the asbestos that was mentioned at the end? Or just general thick ash/smoke getting in their lungs? I don't think they would have used chemicals, I think we would have seen the damage that would have caused by now...Although I wouldn't put it past Bush...

Maybe they don't know and aren't going to make assumptions like so many 9/11 truthers like to do. I see that people in this thread have already chalked it up to nuclear radiation (despite there being no radiation there now) and thermite.

Everyone in this thread saying that this is proof of this or that needs to understand that this isn't proof of ANYTHING except that a bunch of first responders were exposed to cancer causing agents. It MAY be supplemental proof of something if they can nail down what that substance was, but you cannot decide what the substance is beforehand then magically claim that this proof of it. That is called confirmation bias. This article was actually doing the CORRECT thing by not making claims or assumptions about things they didn't know.

I'm sure that this will be lost on most people in this thread though.

The say anywhere between 400 to 2000 tons of asbestos remaining in the world trade towers could have affected over 450,000 people.

RIP

Is it mostly lung cancer ?

Or is it just a variety of cancers all over the body ?