Hello, Charles.  Replying in haste - - gotta travel tomorrow AM to see
new grandkid.

You took issue with my 'synopsys' of what I had briefly read - -

 JH> Some of the spray-on fireproofing used on WTC steel was
 JH> found to contain about 20% of asbestos fibers, but those
 JH> were the "serpentine" type fibers, generally not considered
 JH> to be as dangerous as other type asbestos fibers, due to
 JH> their large size.

 CA> You failed to mention why they are not considered as dangerous.

'Mea Culpa', I guess, but didn't my citing of "due to their large size"
get me in under the wire?

 CA> Supposedly people can cough them up from their lungs.

Yuh, "due to their large size" I surmised folks generally hack them out,
and they don't end up way down in the lungs like those tiny sharp intert
fibers which seem to have caused most of the asbestos-related health
problems?

 CA> Nothing
 CA> said they won't be inhaled nor that they can't embed themselves
 CA> in people's lungs.

Also, nothing said they  _would_ be inhaled deeply enough to embed
themselves in peoples lungs and cause health probs.  Are you trying to
make a point, or is this more of a jaundiced eye seeing all things as
yellow?  I did read enough to see that there is not unanimity of opinion
that the long asbestos fibers are much safer, so I didn't want to
present that here as if it were established fact.  But lets face it like
grownups, Charles, - - with significant parts of the rubble containing
debris from spray-on-fireproofing which contained about 20% of
those long serpentine type asbestos fibers, if there were significant
health risk for the cleanup folks from that, there would have been a
_lot_ of attention focused on that, and they wouldn't have been just
picking it up with the loaders and putting it on dumptrucks to take to
the landfill.

 JH> The serpentine type includes some with fibers so long they
 JH> could be (and were) woven into cloth. I saw no indication
 JH> that this type material was any sort of large contributor
 JH> to the "dust" problem. The two small areas where asbestos
 JH> remediation was done due to the dust, this wasn't the type
 JH> of fibers they were trying to clean up.

I read about, but failed to mention, the types of asbestos fibers which
they were cleaning up when the did that remediation.

 JH> In the dust layers which settled, the particles most
 JH> commented upon, and which are/were known to be capable of
 JH> causing respiratory problems, were

 JH> dust from pulverized constituents of concrete, including
 JH> silica dust from pulverized constituents of gypsum plaster
 JH> and wallboard dust from pulverized products containing
 JH> glass fibers

 CA> You missed some fire retardant chemicals that were mentioned in
 CA> other articles you did not read?

I read late DEC articles which concentrated on the organic constituents
in the dust before I posted this, but didn't mention it to you for two
reasons - - the news was generally 'good', and you seem to have been
hung up on the asbestos thing, so I didn't want to overload you with
info about which  you had not been commenting.  I encourage you and all
others interested in this topic to do your own reading and draw your own
conclusions about the constituents of that dust.  Lord knows, there was
enough dust involved.



 CA> I've been reading articles but with a twist. I don't
 CA> automatically assume that if it is in print "it must be so".

 CA> http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/ny-hswtc1226,0,2912369

What is "NewsDay"?  Your cited link didn't work for me at first, but I
think I finally got to an AP article at the newsday site to which you
must have had reference. I think it was even more poorly written than
the 12/26 or so article which I saw as part of my google search.

 CA> I had this URL saved to post here AMOF. It somewhat agrees with
 CA> your synopsis but adds a few carcinogens to the list. I'm not
 CA> saying this article speaks for me nor that I accept their
 CA> results carte blanche. It does point out that they _are_ aware
 CA> there were hazardous materials (to humans) within the structure.

Per above, I read about, but didn't want to introduce the issue of the
organic constituents for the purposese of our current discussion.



 JH> rather than blindly accepting "blame the rich capitalists"
 JH> type theorizing.

 CA> You probably have no knowledge of the Astor family history or
 CA> how they came to be as rich as they are. I do. It began with
 CA> selling guns and whiskey to the American Indians. Neat huh?


Starting here you digress again into positing your own political and
world-view about how 'the rich and powerful' in the USA are the root of
all evil. I won't discuss such topics with you in this echo. (probably
no place else, either).



CA> Here's more reading:
 CA> http://news.com.com/2100-1023-978598.html
 CA> Just relax, everything is fine. The rich and powerful watch
 CA> over you and keep you.

I read it.  Scarey, but IMO not a topic for the TECH echo.

 CA> Sorry to be so harsh but you don't need to badger me to make a
 CA> point.

Hee, well I got purdy thick hide at this point, so no need to worry
about being so harsh, and I'm so dull-witted I didn't even realize I was
badgering you, and wonder if this post of yours was some sort of an
attempt to badger me back and get even??  Just teasing - - don't get
mad, Charles, its bad for your outlook on life.

- - -  JimH.



... Bother, said Pooh, as he tried to think of someting on-topic to add.
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.32