It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

“Never Forget”: Gov’t Said the Air Was Safe, Now Thousands of 9/11 have Cancer

page: 2
18
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

If it´s asbestos, it will take 10-30 years for it to become a real problem in the lungs, even with relative low contamination compared to 911.

That means, this is inside the timeframe and we´re going to see the numbers rising for the next ~20 years at least.




posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Well, when it really comes right down to it, it wasn't even safe to be in those buildings in the first place. NYC never had a plan for putting out fires like the ones that happened on 9/11. It has been said many times that they knew they couldn't put those fires out.

Basically, the sheer size of the buildings, I guess, is the only thing that kept them from burning down years sooner than they did. They just couldn't imagine a scenario where there would be such a massive fire. Nevertheless, once it happened, those buildings were no match for those fires.

There had to be people watching who knew all those people were going to die. I was a fast food employee and I looked at my friend and said "Those buildings are going to collapse and those people are just standing around too close". How did I know that? Because I have a brain. You could just look at it and see that it was a horrible situation.



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
Something like this?


No. Proper research of cancer rates that demonstrate longitudinal impact and variance of cancer types against a control, or "normal" baseline. Peer reviewed. Not written by a lawyer. Only then can there be a objective assessment,
edit on 4/9/2018 by paraphi because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders


[quote]
Basically, the sheer size of the buildings, I guess, is the only thing that kept them from burning down years sooner than they did. They just couldn't imagine a scenario where there would be such a massive fire. Nevertheless, once it happened, those buildings were no match for those fires.


You don't think that FDNY would not know this …..??

Each floor of WTC was 208 feet square with a floor area of over 40,000 sq ft, an acre, in size

he spilled jet fuel had ignited massive fires inside the building - more larger than a conventional fire would start and
spread

Fire ground commanders knew this, and quickly reconfigured the response to rescue, they had crews drop most of their
hose rolls, leaving enough to protect themselves and people trying to rescue

Problem was the aircraft impact had jammed up the stairways in impact zone with debris trapping people there
Also cut off the elevators forcing responders to climb 80-90 floors carrying heavy loads

As for collapse, FDNY Chief Joseph Callan in Lobby of North Tower notices plaster failing from ceilings and large
windows popping out of frames - indications building is shifting and becoming unstable

He ordered crews to evacuate, but because of communication problems most did not hear him



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: firerescue

You don't think that FDNY would not know this …..??


Of course they knew it. And anyone who knew anything about those buildings knew that (most likely) the escapes were all blocked.

My point is that the fire dept never had a workable plan for a disaster of this magnitude and therefore, the buildings were inherently unsafe. Which is why insurance even exists in the first place. The worst thing that can happen usually doesn't. But if it does, it is usually a disaster and people will probably die.

So, the buildings were designed to be as safe as they could possibly be (with the technology and the money they had when they were built) but that really wasn't very safe. As 9/11 demonstrated.

Also, it was repeatedly pointed out that the airline security of the day just wasn't good enough to prevent this kind of terrorism. The security they had in place was not designed to deal with hijackers who intended to use the planes in this fashion. The strategy was to find out what they wanted and deal with them that way. So it was really a matter of time before something like 9/11 happened. They had tall buildings and they had all kinds of planes in the air with minimal security.

So the idea was that a plane would probably never intentionally crash into a building and an accidental collision would be highly unlikely. Again, it was just dumb luck that it never happened before it did.
edit on 4-9-2018 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2018 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

What did you not understand about lungs full of ground glass, asbestos, benzene, jet fuel and other carcinogens?



Forgotten victims of 9/11 are developing cancer at alarming rates

thehill.com...

Detective Zadroga’s autopsy revealed that his lungs were full of ground glass and noxious chemicals. The WTC dust that he breathed in contained asbestos, benzene, jet fuel and other carcinogens. Detective Zadroga’s death was the first to be officially linked to the toxins present at the World Trade Center.



So? There is no existing “peer reviewed and properly researched” studies that already link asbestos, benzene, and the other carcinogens that were in the WTC dust to cancer. Why would what is already proven have to be proven again?

Why would you not want to take care of those that are willing to sacrifice their wellbeing to help others?
edit on 4-9-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

edit on 4-9-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 02:57 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

? Calm down. What I said is not that there was not an impact of 9/11, but that a good study would show what that was, lest everyone with a cancer gets on the bandwagon and it becomes a lawyer-driven money-fest. Causation versus Correlation and all that.



posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 03:34 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

Your heartless and idiotic words?



Everyone lining up to get some cash




gets on the bandwagon and it becomes a lawyer-driven money-fest.


To combat equally slimy politicians and insurance companies out to protect thier budgets. Is that false?

While you didn’t answer

So? There is no existing “peer reviewed and properly researched” studies that already link asbestos, benzene, and the other carcinogens that were in the WTC dust to cancer. Why would what is already proven have to be proven again?

Why would you not want to take care of those that are willing to sacrifice their wellbeing to help others?
edit on 5-9-2018 by neutronflux because: Added



posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 03:45 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

You mean studies like these?



Study: WTC Conditions on 9/11 Led to Higher Cancer Risk for Firefighters

www.ehstoday.com...

The study, which appears in a special 9/11 issue of The Lancet, examined 9,853 firefighters, including those exposed to the WTC conditions on Sept. 11, 2001, as well as those who were not.

According to senior author David Prezant, M.D., professor of medicine at Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University, and his coauthors, about 12,500 Fire Department of the City of New York (FDNY) firefighters were exposed to potentially hazardous aerosolized dust on 9/11. This dust consisted of pulverized cement, glass fibers, asbestos, lead, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated furans and dioxins produced as combustion byproducts from the collapsed and burning buildings. Firefighters also were exposed to potentially toxic fumes from burning jet fuel and from diesel smoke emitted by heavy equipment during the 10-month recovery effort.

Comparing Cancer Rates

Researchers accessed the health records for all firefighters in the study dating back to 1996, which were available as part of FDNY’s rigorous health registry. They then compared the cancer incidence rates in WTC-exposed firefighters with cancer incidence in non-exposed firefighters, as well as with a sample of people selected from the U.S. National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database who were similar in age, race and ethnic origin to the firefighters





Risk assessment for asbestos-related cancer from the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center

Robert P Nolan, Malcolm Ross, Gordon L Nord, Charles W Axten, Jeffrey P Osleeb, Stanislav G Domnin, Bertram Price, Richard Wilson
Journal of occupational and environmental medicine 47 (8), 817-825, 2005
Objective: We sought to estimate the lifetime risk of asbestos-related cancer for residents of Lower Manhattan attributable to asbestos released into the air by the 9/11 attack on New York City's World Trade Center (WTC).
scholar.google.com...=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3DUOUjGaDws3gJ




Health effects of the World Trade Center 9/11 disaster: An overview

Michael A Crane, Debra J Milek, Yelena Globina, Leah Seifu, Philip J Landrigan
Fire technology 49 (3), 813-825, 2013
More than ten years after the September 11, 2001 World Trade Center (WTC) disaster, 9/11 responders and lower Manhattan community residents still suffer from the adverse health consequences of this horrific event.
scholar.google.com...=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3DvFb74Vm3bxkJ




World Trade Center Dust: Composition and Spatial-Temporal Considerations for Health

Marc Kostrubiak
World Trade Center Pulmonary Diseases and Multi-Organ System Manifestations, 107-120, 2018
The events of 9/11 caused a unique health hazard by creating a large dust cloud and debris fires that burned for months.

scholar.google.com...,15&as_vis=1#d=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3DEuQ62dmNE4MJ
+



posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 04:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: 14377
If you're worried about your water get a test kit.


Really??
I looked this kit up on Amazon...I would not trust it after reading the reviews.
If you are worried about your drinking water...........get a water distiller.



posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Itisnowagain

I wasn't championing any specific test kit. I was just giving you a example. Are you saying there is no test kit you would ever trust ?



posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
Your heartless and idiotic words?


Stop going overboard with the righteousness. In the real world people get cancer. It's terrible. I know.

However, a proper study by real experts would fully expose the impact of 9/11 and therefore facilitate appropriate action. Anything else is just guess work and making a living for lawyers and other who exploit the system, whether knowingly, or not.



posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi



However, a proper study by real experts would fully expose the impact of 9/11 and therefore facilitate appropriate action.


What were those studies I linked to and quoted in this thread? Fake studies?

You already put your foot in your mouth, move on.

Any more false arguments?



posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: paraphi



abcnews.go.com...

The FDNY reports that in addition to the 343 FDNY members killed on 9/11, another 127 firefighters have died of illnesses related to working at Ground Zero in the past 15 years.

This includes 17 people who died in the last year, according to the FDNY.

The Uniformed Firefighters Officers Association (UFOA) reports that 1,396 members have cancers associated with exposures at Ground Zero, 5,723 have gastrointestinal issues and more than 5,500 have lower airway issues. Many of these current and former FDNY members have two conditions.


How much evidence you want WTC dust was toxic and caused, and is causing very real health issues?



posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: 14377
a reply to: Itisnowagain

I wasn't championing any specific test kit. I was just giving you a example. Are you saying there is no test kit you would ever trust ?

No.



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
How exactly do they link 9/11 to cancers?
The people in question here are first responders that have been around probably hundreds of fires and other assorted disasters.

youtu.be...



posted on Sep, 8 2018 @ 04:29 AM
link   
The levels of dioxin measured in the air near the smoldering pile "were the highest ambient measurements of dioxin ever recorded anywhere in the world," this was in the form of PCDD dioxin.
www.scientificamerican.com...

There were also recorded high levels of PCBs

PCDD dioxin is a cousin of TCDD dioxin found in agent orange and is just as toxic.

i was exposed to PCBs and PCDD during a navy ship board fire and have a very common disorder with ground zero workers and that is sarcoidosis.
sarcoidosisnews.com...



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

What massive fire do you refer too?

Noone ever saw this massive fire...almost any other fire in a building has been far larger..this is a laughable and bizarre claim.

And it should have burnt down years earlier why?







 
18
<< 1   >>

log in

join