Posted by ahmed ali (134.84.78.32) on February 20, 2002 at 23:13:20:
In Reply to: HEALTH CONCERNS AT GROUND ZERO posted by CNN on October 30, 2001 at 08:25:58:
: Gupta: Health concerns at Ground Zero
: October 29, 2001 Posted: 1:00 PM EST (1800 GMT)
: ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) ?When the
: World Trade Center towers collapsed,
: tons of dust containing an assortment of
: dangerous substances released into the
: air. Some say it has created new medical
: concerns for those working and living in
: the area.
: CNN medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay
: Gupta is in Atlanta and spoke with Miles
: O'Brien about what some are calling the
: World Trade Center Syndrome.
: GUPTA: We just can't seem to forget the
: large plumes of smoke that we've seen since
: September 11th after the collapse. (The
: site) is still showing some smoke, and the
: health effects of that smoke -- of the small
: particles, all those sorts of things that are
: released in the air -- that's what we're
: talking about.
: A syndrome, Miles, typically is something that has a definite cause and a definite
: effect. We don't know if we necessarily have that here. We don't know what the
: full effects of all this smoke are going to be, but "Newsweek" reported that up to
: 40 percent of the 11,000 firefighters continue to have significant coughs requiring
: medical attention, requiring inhalants with steroids in them.
: Some people have gone on and developed frank respiratory problems requiring
: ventilators. So, all that smoke, all the small particles that are floating through the
: air are of some health concern. How long term that concern is going to be is
: something we're going to wait and see.
: Incidentally, Miles, the EPA has been monitoring
: the air for small particles and for things that people
: have been frightened and concerned about such as
: asbestos and have continued to report since
: September 11th that the levels are very, very low.
: So, that's a piece of good news, Miles.
: O'BRIEN: Sanjay, assuming these firefighters do
: have ongoing problems with this smoke inhalation,
: is it something that is above and beyond what they
: might encounter in any other fire? Is there
: something unique to the World Trade Center
: location, which could cause some greater concern?
: GUPTA: I talked to a few different lung doctors
: about that very issue. And certainly the magnitude
: of this and the amount of smoke and small particles
: -- that is, particles that are less than 10 microns in
: size -- the magnitude of that was much greater
: obviously with the World Trade Center. So the
: numbers of people that are complaining of
: respiratory problems even up until now is
: significantly higher.
: Regarding the other sorts of particles ?again, asbestos is the thing that springs to
: mind. One of the lung doctors I talked to put it like this:
: There may have been some asbestos in the building that may be out in the air. How
: dangerous is that? Well it's like if someone were not a smoker and were out to go
: out and smoke a few packs of cigarettes. Certainly that would increase their risk of
: lung cancer, but if they stopped smoking and they didn't continue to smoke long
: term, their risk would probably still be small.
: And that's kind of how it was explained to me.
: O'BRIEN: Sanjay, it might be worth reminding our viewers -- because when they
: hear about asbestos, they probably think back to some stories we told 10 years ago
: or so about the asbestos threat. And at the time, there was some concern that one
: little piece of asbestos could cause some great difficulties, perhaps even lung
: cancer. That's been pretty much debunked, hasn't it?
: GUPTA: That's right, Miles. It has been debunked and I think the best way to think
: about it is the folks that have had chronic asbestos exposure -- that is, asbestos
: exposure over a long period of time -- are those that are most at risk. Sometimes, it
: can cause just sort of mild lung disease. It can certainly cause lung cancer ... Again,
: we're talking about long-term asbestos exposures, not high concentration short-term
: asbestos exposures as we may have seen in New York now.
: O'BRIEN: As we've been looking at these pictures from Ground Zero ever since
: September 11th, you see many of the rescue workers who are closest in are wearing
: respirators. Is that enough to keep them out of trouble?
: GUPTA: We're talking about the respirators here that are very different than
: masks, Miles. It's an important distinction. These respirators actually continuously
: filter all the air including all the small particles out and just allow the non-particle
: air in, and those are good. The EPA Web site, in fact, continues to recommend
: those for responders to the scene.
: They have tested all the way through New York, lower Manhattan, midtown, all
: the way further north and as you get further north, certainly, the risk goes way
: down. But those people in lower Manhattan, around that site, are still recommended
: if they're on the scene to wear these respirators.
: O'BRIEN: Let me ask you this: When you go down to lower Manhattan, you see an
: awful lot of people wearing those paper masks, and I have to wonder when I see
: them if they really are doing much good.
: GUPTA: It's a good point, Miles. The thing that lung specialists are worrying about
: are the small particles and these are the particles that can actually get down through
: your nose into your lungs. What they literally do is, they clog up the bottom of
: your lungs. The bottom of your lungs is the place where air exchanges with your
: blood and if you clog that area up, you can't get enough air into your blood.
: Those are the small particles we're worried about. They are smaller than those
: masks will be able to prohibit from getting in, and that's why the respirators are
: being recommended over masks in that situation.