Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Just noting it's not just asbestos. There was also crystalline silica, cadmium, lead (Pb) and probably many other contaminates in the dust and rubble, plus whatever was in the initial fire and smoke.


sort by: page size:

No asbestos. It was extremely fine particles of other materials.

To clarify, they didn't contain a "high amount" of asbestos, but there also wasn't "no" asbestos:

>Much of the thousands of tons of debris resulting from the collapse of the Twin Towers was pulverized concrete, which is known to cause silicosis upon inhalation. The remainder consisted of more than 2,500 contaminants, more specifically: 50% non-fibrous material and construction debris; 40% glass and other fibers; 9.2% cellulose; and 0.8% of the extremely toxic carcinogen asbestos, as well as detectable amounts of lead and mercury.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_arising_from_th...


So much asbestos!

Asbestos is a hazard, but a manageable one if it's still intact. I think there's probably an analogous risk here - as long as people aren't somehow ingesting it, it's probably fine where it is. If you're doing demolition where the material is involved, some proper PPE and disposal is in order.

I thought their talc was contaminated with asbestos?

Asbestos causes cancer like this, more or less, I think. It's not like silica is inherently toxic.

The first 40 floors of the World Trade Center, both towers, had every steel beam covered in asbestos. The collapse released 2,000 tons of fibers into the atmosphere on 9/11/01.

Yeah, they call it asbestos.

Asbestos requires extensive exposure for any significant cancer risk. It’s a bit worse than fine silica.

This isn’t plutonium we’re talking about.


I wonder if this was actually even problematic for them. My understanding is that asbestos is no worse than other rocks and silica formations when aerosolized it's just that asbestos was so useful it was much more heavily industrialized in a manner that was injurious to the lungs.

The article mentions heavy metals and asbestos, at the minimum.

Yeah I went down the asbestos rabbit hole a few years ago. It is insane how much stuff was made with it. There’s basically a non-zero background level at all time

This is transitive risk.

Asbestos is clearly linked to cancer > asbestos was found in talc and known to form with talc naturally > risk of using talc that isn’t pure.

The problem is whether talc is pure. At that point it becomes a question of how much you trust J&J to verify that. My guess is that different mined sources varied in asbestos composition and there likely was some contamination that went undetected. But who knows.


Asbestos maybe.

The towers had a high amount of asbestos. I am not surprised that we see the effects so many years later.

Asbestos is just a natural mineral they said...

I mean this really happened though: asbestos was exactly this problem.

We've seen the same thing with tobacco, asbestos, lead, etc.

I hope they dont cause any weird diseases.. I'm just thinking of asbestos-concrete.. It was amazing at the time, far greater tensile strength and fire safety.
next

Legal | privacy