The Great (and deadly) asbestos scam

On the morning of 9/11, Dr. Arthur M. Langer was at home, not far from the twin towers of
the WTC.  Dr. Langer is a mineralogy professor at the City University of New York.  He
was intimately familier with the WTC and expected that the towers would survive after
being hit by a plane.  Langer was involved with the construction of the towers and had
been at a meeting  where fireproofing for the buildings had been discussed and had
been somewhat  disturbed when his boss, Irving Selikoff had insisted that asbestos
not be used on account of new found "dangers" of asbestos in office buildings.

Asbestos will not burn and in addition is a pretty good insulator.

Today, Dr. Langer says of asbestos, "Knowing what I know thirty six years later, I
would have said we need this material . . . these materials can be used with relatively
little risk.  The substitutes do not perform well".  In short, he would have made a more
emphatic argument against the denial of asbestos fireproofing in the buildings.  Had
the buildings been built a few years earlier, the steel would have been covered by an
asbestos spray-on fireproofing which would, at least have postponed the collapse and
probably have prevented it alltogether.   If those steel columns had been protected by
asbestos, it would have taken a lot longer for them to get so hot they would distort and
thus fail.  (Note: contrary to some popular baloney, they did not melt)

Four years after 9/11, the National Institute of Standards did an investigation of the
collapse of the buildings.  Shyam Sunder, who led the investigation, stated," Even with
the airplane impact and jet-fuel ignited, multi-floor fires, which are not normal
building fires, the building would likely not have collapsed had it not been for
the [lack of] fireproofing".

The popular "News Media", led by the famous New York Times, lionized all the whistle-
blowers who had warned about the vulnerability of airlines, failure to track and profile
terrorists and every failing except the poor fire protection.  Only Fox News Steven Milloy
 "Junk science" commentator  gave coverage to the comments of the late scientist and
inventor Herbert Levine - who invented the spray-on asbestos fireproofing that had been
include in the original plans for the buildings.  The original plan forsaw the remote
chance of a Boeing 707 (the largest commercial airliner of that time) impacting the
building and provided the fireproofing needed to guard against that.

So, why did it happen?

Some shipyard workers of WWII contracted a lung disease called mesothelioma.  In
most cases, this disease showed its symptoms, 20-30 years after the workers worked
in the WWII shipyards and the type of asbestos involved was amphibole - - a brown
material with long fibers imported during the war and representing only about 5% of
all the asbestos in use.  I lived in Vancouver, WA during WWII.  My dad helped to
build Kaiser's shipyard there and some of my friends and relatives worked there.
It was an emergency situation. Ships were being built in days and hours rather than
months and years as previously and the work environment was almost as hazardous
at the front lines in some cases.  Nobody was worrying much about air quality and
things that are given top priority today.  So, naturally some of the workers became
casualties of the war.

Environmental groups raised a cry about the dangers of asbestos and paniced the
NY Port Authority into substituting some mostly untried coatings - some of them the
testing laboratory reported could be removed by the human hand - for the tried and
true asbestos. It's clear that not only were these products inferior, but much of it had
been removed by the initial impact vibration so the steel was bare.

Enter, the lawyers

Lawsuits against asbestos product manufactuers became an industry - a goldmine for
lawyers and they are still working that mine even though they have managed to bankrupt
most of those manufacturers, starting with Johns Manville Corp (over 60,000 jobs lost -
cost is approaching 200 billion) If you enter "asbestos" into Google, the first thing you
come up with is an ad by a scumball lawyer promising you millions of dollars if you just
let him run a lawsuit for you.

A subsidiary industry is that of removal of asbestos in existing buildings.  This is being
done extensively, especially in schools, in spite of the fact that removing the stuff puts
more of it in the air - so any real danger is magnified by that action.  About $50 Billion
has already been spent on this endeavor.

1989 New England Journal of Medicine report says:  "Recent epidemiological
studies of persons with low exposure to asbestos provided little support for
the concept that there is an increased risk of cancer."

Asbestos is a natural substance which exists everywhere.  There is an almost 100%
probability that everyone in this room has some of it in their lungs.  Every time someone
steps on the brake pedal, microscopic quantities of asbestos are released into the air.
But, there is an old and many times proven adage: "The poison is in the dose" and the
human body deals quite successfully with quite a number of substances (such as table
salt) which in sufficient quantities would be  fatal.  Face masks are a much more sensible
remedy than banning a very important, much needed, life saving  product.

What does the EPA say about asbestos:
"Don't panic . . . . .LEAVE and asabestos material that is in good shape, ALONE"

In short, while there is some risk from asbestos, the risks involved in fire are so
much greater, there is simply no comparison.  Once again, an hysterical rant
trumps common sense and real science.

What does today's politically correct EPA have to say about asbestos?
From their website:  "Don't panic . . .Leave good asbestos material alone,
If it gets frayed, have it professionaly removed".
.

     TELL N.O.B.B what YOU THINK
 

     RETURN TO INDEX PAGE