70% of WTC first responders are ill

Discussion in '9/11' started by Kokomojojo, Sep 11, 2011.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,463
    Likes Received:
    1,721
    Trophy Points:
    113
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caxQeR-tHqw"]CNN - 70% of WTC first responders are ill - YouTube[/ame]




    what a deal. Help other people clean up and get cancer! That is if you were not the unfortunate ones to be inside the building when they pulled the plug.

    Radiation causes cancer several have died from cancer and cancers as a result of poisoning take a while to set in.
     
  2. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, the republican Christine Todd Whitman, told everybody it was safe to breathe, safe for Wall street to re-open. Still ill. Still being lied to.
     
  3. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,638
    Likes Received:
    3,690
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah. By you guys.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/02/health/research/02cancer.html

    Cancer rates are higher in those who were exposed to the carcinogens on the site of the WTC collapse. I would expect that to be the case in any collapse that contains jet fuel, asbestos, heavy metals, and a host of other toxic substances. What's astonishing is that they are only 10 percent higher then the general population.

    Other things to bear in mind are that this is just a sample of first responders on site. We're talking about 1400 people if 263 cancer cases is equivalent to 19 percent. What about the other hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers within a 400 meter diameter of the collapse? Do they have a 19 percent increase in cancer cases as well?

    Leukemia is the most common form of cancer in those exposed to ionizing radiation. (the kind released by x-rays, gamma rays, alpha particles and protons) There's no mention of leukemia. That pretty much rules out toxic radiation exposure from the sample.

    Sounds like there was a toxic soup of carcinogens on site, but radiation from a nuclear reaction was not one of them.

    Just more truther lies.
     
  4. Beevee

    Beevee Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    13,916
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Whether it's a fact or not, one would think that the US government - any US government - would treat with dignity those who put their lives at risk in order to save others.

    The fact that they don't is more significant because they know that were a similar event to occur, other people would still act as first responders, knowing they might receive the same depleted quality of life at a future date.

    It would take the amount of cash that is spent in five minutes on military matters for politicians to take some responsibility as those who now suffer because they did.
     
  5. Margot

    Margot Account closed, not banned

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    Messages:
    62,072
    Likes Received:
    345
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Between the extreme trauma they suffered, long term exhaustion and exposure to various toxic substances.. I am not surprised they are ill.



     
  6. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,638
    Likes Received:
    3,690
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do you have any money? Do you have any skills that would help? Have you taken any responsibility?
     
  7. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,463
    Likes Received:
    1,721
    Trophy Points:
    113

    there is an even bigger problem here.

    a naturally collapsing building from fire and structural failure cannot pulverize everything to dust and especially cannot create nanoparticles:


    Case Report: Lung Disease in World Trade Center Responders 
Exposed to Dust and Smoke: Carbon Nanotubes Found in the Lungs 
of World Trade Center Patients and Dust Samples





    Maoxin Wu1, Ronald E. Gordon1, Robin Herbert2, Maria Padilla3, Jacqueline Moline2, David Mendelson4, Virginia Litle5*, William D. Travis6, Joan Gil1
    1 Department of Pathology, 2 Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, 3 Division of Pulmonary and Sleep Medicine, 4 Department of Radiology, and, 5 Department of Thoracic Surgery, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA, 6 Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
    Abstract Top





    On 11 September 2001 (9/11), lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn were engulfed by a dense cloud of toxic and irritant dust and smoke generated by the collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers (Landrigan et al. 2004; Levin et al. 2002; Lioy et al. 2002). This cloud comprised a complex mix of pollutants, among them the products of combustion of 91,000 L jet fuel, pulverized building materials, cement dust, asbestos, microscopic shards of glass, silica, heavy metals, and numerous organic compounds [see Supplemental Material, Table 1 (doi:10.1289/ehp.0901159)] (Edelman et al. 2003; McGee et al. 2003; Prezant et al. 2002; Reibman et al. 2005).
    [​IMG]Table 1.


    http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/fetchArticle.action?articleURI=info:doi/10.1289/ehp.0901159
     
  8. ar10

    ar10 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    623
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    100% of all the rescue dogs are reported dead, within three years as I remember.
     
  9. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Probably because there was nothing "natural" about it. Certainly not very much of any truthful ("officially").

    Aren't buildings routinely pulverized? The mighty aluminum tubes at work once again, no doubt.
     
  10. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,463
    Likes Received:
    1,721
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the definition of "official" is most properly defined as "lie".
     
  11. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Obviously sad but true.
     

Share This Page