Posted on 06/13/2006 7:45:56 AM PDT by Grig
Be well!
well, that sample set is much larger, and urban dwellers likely have a higher cancer incidence anyway. its harder to draw a conclusion there, unless the statistic was way above the norm. all I can tell you is - the air in NYC (and I'm not talking just at the WTC site itself) was horrible for weeks after 9/11. the WTC was essentially an open air crematorium for thousands of people, and add to that the debris from the building and the burning jet fuel.
It still doesn't compare to the FATALITY rate of the firefighters and policement, not to mention the victims who never made it out...somehow stats seem so small next to the reality of those deaths!
Cancer rates etc....
I don't think there is anyone who would be surprised by increased rates of anything in rescueres from 9/11.
As I watched the towers fall, my first thoughts were of all those people breathing in such an accute exposure to toxins and as the stuff burned for days....people refusing to wear PPE,....they all made their own decision regarding their lives vesrses saving lives. The death toll is not limited to what happened on 9/11.
For what a few Safety Professionals thought that worked the site: http://www.asse.org/ps0502vincoli.pdf
Bush of course
Yes, bring in that ambulance chaser Robert Kennedy, Jr. He has no shame.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.