9/11 Blamed for Smaller Babies - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-06-2003, 02:47 PM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:10 PM
9/11 Blamed for Smaller Babies

[Q]Small babies linked to 9/11 smoke plume


16:50 06 August 03

NewScientist.com news service

The pall of smoke and dust that hung over Manhattan after the September 11 terrorist attack on New York appears to have caused pregnant women in the vicinity to bear small babies, according to a new study by US researchers.

Pregnant women who were in the area on the day of the attack or up to three weeks later were twice as likely as women not exposed to the murky cloud to have a child with intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). Babies born with this condition are small for the length of their gestation.

[/Q]

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994032

I know someone in here posted a while ago asking about complications from 9/11. This whole areticle has some info.

Peace
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-06-2003, 03:26 PM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 07:10 PM



I don't know what else to say about that

The people there are always in my thoughts and prayers
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 08-06-2003, 05:32 PM   #3
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 633
Local Time: 12:10 AM
That was me who wrote in earlier. Thanks for the article.

I just pray to God that I won't be part of a cancer cluster in a few years.

I was really nervous when they were letting people back down there just after a couple of weeks and the debris was still smoldering. But if that's where you lived at the time, and you were new to the city, where else could you have gone?
__________________
wolfwill23 is offline  
Old 08-06-2003, 07:34 PM   #4
New Yorker
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,637
Local Time: 07:10 PM
wolf -- where were you down there? and have I asked this question before?

as for babies, I had a co-worker who was pregnant at the time and came out of the Path station into the WTC when they were evacuating after the first tower was hit. don't know about her baby's size but he was born healthy. In fact, she saw her doctor that day and he said the kid was in the safest place he could be in under those circumstances.
__________________
sharky is offline  
Old 08-06-2003, 08:49 PM   #5
Blue Crack Distributor
 
LarryMullen's POPAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: I'll be up with the sun, I'm not coming down...
Posts: 53,698
Local Time: 07:10 PM
That's so sad.
__________________
LarryMullen's POPAngel is offline  
Old 08-06-2003, 10:04 PM   #6
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 633
Local Time: 12:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by sharky
wolf -- where were you down there? and have I asked this question before?

as for babies, I had a co-worker who was pregnant at the time and came out of the Path station into the WTC when they were evacuating after the first tower was hit. don't know about her baby's size but he was born healthy. In fact, she saw her doctor that day and he said the kid was in the safest place he could be in under those circumstances.
I lived four blocks from the towers at the time. It was pretty close.
__________________
wolfwill23 is offline  
Old 08-06-2003, 11:21 PM   #7
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,410
Local Time: 07:10 PM
Re: 9/11 Blamed for Smaller Babies

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
[Q]Small babies linked to 9/11 smoke plume


16:50 06 August 03

NewScientist.com news service

The pall of smoke and dust that hung over Manhattan after the September 11 terrorist attack on New York appears to have caused pregnant women in the vicinity to bear small babies, according to a new study by US researchers.

Pregnant women who were in the area on the day of the attack or up to three weeks later were twice as likely as women not exposed to the murky cloud to have a child with intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). Babies born with this condition are small for the length of their gestation.

[/Q]

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994032

I know someone in here posted a while ago asking about complications from 9/11. This whole areticle has some info.

Peace
I really, sincerely doubt this. The first thought that came to my head was "bullshit!"

That thought still stands.
__________________
DaveC is online now  
Old 08-06-2003, 11:27 PM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:10 PM
Re: Re: 9/11 Blamed for Smaller Babies

Quote:
Originally posted by DaveC


I really, sincerely doubt this. The first thought that came to my head was "bullshit!"

That thought still stands.
And you have what to back up these thoughts? Any articles from Science or Medical journals to refute the study?

They find similar effects in homes where the pregnant mother smokes.

[Q]Trudy Berkowitz, director of epidemiology at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, led the study and says the air pollution might be compared to cigarette smoke, which is known to reduce growth.

"We don't really understand how cigarette smoking reduces birth weight, but we can speculate it could affect oxygen levels or blood flow," she told New Scientist. "In that sense particulate matters might have the same effect." The placenta would be particularly vulnerable, she says, because of its vital role in carrying oxygen and nutrients to the fetus.[/Q]

I eagerly await any evidence you could provide other than "Bullshit".
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-06-2003, 11:34 PM   #9
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 633
Local Time: 12:10 AM
Re: Re: 9/11 Blamed for Smaller Babies

Quote:
Originally posted by DaveC


I really, sincerely doubt this. The first thought that came to my head was "bullshit!"

That thought still stands.
That's what I thought too.

I also think that smoking causing cancer is bullshit. And I believe that eating McDonalds every day of your life doesn't make you fat. And booze killing brain cells? Who are trying to fool?

__________________
wolfwill23 is offline  
Old 08-06-2003, 11:40 PM   #10
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:10 PM
You are right Dreadsox. It would take a lot more than the significant list of toxic materials spewed over NY on 9/11 to have this affect.

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 08-06-2003, 11:53 PM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:10 PM
[Q]ALL OF THE HAZARDS LISTED BELOW are likely to be encountered during World Trade Center recovery and clean-up operations. Anyone working at or near ground zero is more likely to encounter these hazards than someone involved in clean-up operations several blocks away, but at any location, dust and ash from the World Trade Center pose a potential health hazard.


DUST AND FUMES
Contaminated air poses health risks that depend on the nature and concentration of the contaminants and upon the physical condition of the exposed worker. Workers with any history of chronic conditions of the lungs or heart are at greater risk of adverse health effects from contaminated air.

Contaminants in the air, including toxic dust and chemicals, can cause serious illness or death. Dust and ash anywhere in the vicinity of the World Trade Center site is likely to contain asbestos, cement, drywall and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) combustion products.

CEMENT DUST AND DRYWALL DUST usually contain crystalline silica. Inhalation of silica dust can cause silicosis or other potentially fatal lung diseases. Cement dust can be irritating and can cause or worsen asthma and chronic bronchitis.

AIRBORNE PARTICLES OF BURNED PLASTIC, INCLUDING POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) or other plastics from insulation, conduit, furniture, etc., may cause respiratory irritation and provoke or worsen asthma and chronic bronchitis.

ASBESTOS was a major material used in the construction of the World Trade Center. That asbestos is a constituent of the dust and debris. Inhalation of asbestos fibers can result in serious or fatal diseases, including cancer. Although there is no known safe level of asbestos exposure, higher levels of exposure result in greater risk of disease.

OTHER DUSTS may cause asthma or bronchitis or other respiratory problems, such as difficulty breathing. Any dust can cause eye irritation. Some dusts can cause allergic skin reactions. If dusty work clothes are worn off the job, they can contaminate vehicles and residences.


HAZARDOUS GASES
Another concern in the World Trade Center area is the possible build-up of toxic or explosive gases from ruptured gas lines or stored chemicals. Of most concern is the presence of such gases in confined or restricted spaces.

FLAMMABLES OR EXPLOSIVES may be released from ruptured gas lines and storage containers.

CARBON MONOXIDE, a colorless, odorless gas, may be present as a byproduct of combustion (fire). Inhalation of carbon monoxide can cause a wide range of health effects, from loss of judgment to death by asphyxiation.

OXYGEN DEFICIENCY: There may not be enough oxygen present in the air to support breathing. This can result from other gases (such as carbon monoxide) replacing oxygen. Oxygen can also be used up during combustion.

Exposure to other gases can cause eye, nose, throat or lung irritation. Workers who enter confined spaces are at highest risk for these hazards.


COMMUNICABLE DISEASES
Workers who are exposed to infected blood or other bodily fluids can become infected. For infection to take place, infected blood or body fluids must enter a workers body through the eyes, nose or mouth or through a break in the skin, such as a cut or abrasion.

UNSANITARY CONDITIONS: Workers skin and clothing may be exposed to a wide variety of toxic materials and disease organisms. Care should be taken to protect food, beverage containers and smoking materials from contamination.

[/Q]

http://www.immuneweb.org/911/articles/nycosh.html
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-07-2003, 10:40 AM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
ouizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: s p o r a t i c
Posts: 3,788
Local Time: 07:10 PM
This scares me.

I will never forget that smell.

Never.
__________________
ouizy is offline  
Old 08-07-2003, 06:43 PM   #13
New Yorker
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,637
Local Time: 07:10 PM
I remember the smell and the taste quite clearly. I actually had chunks of drywall in my throat. I was evacuated to downstate Jersey where my company's headquarters were. We drove back to the city on that Friday and just as we got over the Verazanno bridge into Brooklyn, you could smell it from that far away. So whatever was down there is not going to be reserved just for people in Lower Manhattan that day.

and yes, that list is quite scary.
__________________

__________________
sharky is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com