***"Nearly Every Cleanup Worker from Exxon Valdez Now Dead?"***

[Catalina]

"Nearly Every Cleanup Worker from Exxon Valdez Now Dead?"

http://soitgoesinshreveport.blogspot.com/2010/07/nearly-every-cleanup-worker-from-exxon.html

Greta Perry linked this article from Business Insider on Facebook last night that states nearly every cleanup worker from the Exxon Valdez is now dead.  Why?  From the fumes?  From natural causes?  From chemicals?  More explanation, please.  This prompted me to do some digging today.  I read the article, watched the video clip, and my initial reaction was, "Aww c'mon.  Hyperbole.  Fear mongering by CNN and their 'expert'."  It was 21 years ago, to be sure, and are they dead because of the spill?  Surely not ALL of them.  

Questions.

    Are you sure that you want to help clean up the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico?  In a previous article we documented a number of the health dangers from this oil spill that many scientists are warning us of, and now it has been reported on CNN that the vast majority of those who worked to clean up the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska are now dead.  Yes, you read that correctly.  Almost all of them are dead.


Merle Savage is one of those that helped cleanup the beaches in 1989 after the Exxon Valdez spill and she is trying to warn the workers in the Gulf and inform them what happened in 1989..  She wrote a book about her experience:  Silence in the Sound.  Her website is here.  Savage explains that her health problems began almost immediately:

    After working for 3 days on the oily beaches, I had a persistent cough that developed into bronchitis, headaches, sore throat, upset stomach and fatigue. On the 4th day I reported to the sick bay and was given medication by the doctor who was supplied by VECO, and on the way to my room, I fainted. I had 3 days of bed rest, but went back to work with recurring symptoms. Of the workers that I supervised 80% had the same medical problems. I wonder how many other cleanup workers, like me, went home thinking we would get better – but didn’t? The symptoms escalated until my medical condition took over my life, and was so bad that I have been unable to hold a job.


Savage breathed in crude oil and dispersant for weeks as she and her coworkers cleaned up the beaches that summer. One of the dispersants used that summer was Corexit 9580.  Another was Inipol EAP22, also toxic.

The dispersants BP is using today is a variation of the Corexit dispersant used in 1989.  They're using Corexit 9500 and 9527. The EPA freely admits that they just don't know about the exact toxicity of them on animals or humans:

    It is also important to note that the LC50 value may be different for a given chemical depending on the route of exposure (e.g., skin contact, ingestion, inhalation) and can be different for different animal species, ages and sexes. The LC50 is only one source of toxicity information and only provides information for the species and concentrations of chemical being tested under laboratory conditions. Toxicity tests resulting from controlled laboratory experiments may not accurately represent the degree of toxicity seen in the environment because of factors such as breakdown of the chemical, different species, different routes of exposure, age, sex, stage of development (e.g., adult versus larval).


To protect workers, the EPA advises hazmat gear and masks:

    People working with dispersants are strongly advised to use a half face filter mask or an air-supplied breathing apparatus to protect their noses, throats, and lungs, and they should wear nitrile or PVC gloves, coveralls, boots, and chemical splash goggles to keep dispersants off skin and out of their eyes.

BP will provide these upon request.

As of today, BP reports use of more than 1.62 million gallons of dispersant.

Corexit 9527 was used initially in the Gulf but was discontinued  because it was considered too toxic.  Corexit 9500 is considered much better:

    By last week, the EPA and Nalco had both released the ingredient list for COREXIT 9500 in response to widespread public concern. Its constituents include butanedioic acid (a wetting agent in cosmetics), sorbitan (found in everything from baby bath to food), and petroleum distillates in varying proportions—and it decomposes almost entirely in 28 days. "All six [ingredients] are used in day-to-day life—in mouthwash, toothpaste, ice cream, pickles," Ramesh argues. "We believe COREXIT 9500 is very safe."



But, as this Scientific American article points out, all dispersants contain carcinogens.  There are reports that Corexit has been banned in the UK but to be clear, it's only been banned in use on rocky shoreline.  It may or may not be used elsewhere.


Reports of illness in Louisiana and other Gulf Coast states are beginning to mount.  As of June 29:


    Exposure to the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico has resulted in 162 cases of illnesses reported to the Louisiana state health department, according to a report released Monday. Of those cases, 128 involved workers on oil rigs or individuals involved in the oil spill cleanup efforts, the report said.

And that's just Louisiana. This article in The American Chronicle suggests that the Gulf Oil Syndrome is on the horizon and suggests that many won't be taken seriously:

    The Gulf oil spill will likely lead to a new condition known as Gulf Oil Syndrome (GOS), a syndrome of toxicity related to 911, GWS, and MCS, which will initially be denied and labeled as psychiatric to protect the financial interests of responsible parties.



The Exxon medical records were sealed by the courts until 2023 and the Miami Herald reports that long term studies have never been done on the effects of that disaster, so it's difficult for us to know what to expect with this crisis.  Last week U.S. Surgeon General Regina Benjamin reiterated this problem:


    "Current scientific literature is inconclusive with regard to the potential hazards resulting from the spill," Benjamin said. "Some scientists predict little or no toxic effect ... while other scientists express serious concerns about the potential short-term and long-term impacts the exposure to oil and dispersants could have on the health of responders and our communities."

    That lack of published, peer-reviewed study of the Exxon Valdez cleanup workers has made protecting the growing number workers in the Gulf of Mexico all the more difficult and has Alaska watchdogs warning that BP and government regulators are repeating mistakes that made people sick a generation ago.


What are the options?  What are the alternatives?  Environmentalists would probably suggest that we quit drilling and that would solve all this, but everyone with half a brain knows that's not realistic.  Not unless you want to turn back the clock 200 years. I don't have the answers. I don't know how many people died as a result of the Exxon cleanup.

People want to get out there and clean the beaches, the wildlife, and put things back to normal.  BP has an obligation to clean up the oil.  But at what cost does it all come?  The state of Louisiana is already asking BP to set up a fund for mental health help but what about the physical medical needs these clean up workers will be facing?  Is that to come from the $20 billion?

And that's the tragedy of the whole episode.  That's where you see that this is an end to a way of life on the Gulf coast.  Scientists are already predicting a huge dead zone where wildlife cannot survive. Some will say it's all fear mongering and hype and that the Gulf will survive.  Everything will be okay.  Life goes on.  We survive.  I sure hope so.

Merle Savage is advising great caution and wants people in the Gulf cleanup to learn from the mistakes of the Exxon Valdez.

[Dig]

RED ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!


IS THIS CONFIRMED?!?!?!?!

[Catalina]

http://www.businessinsider.com/warning-to-gulf-cleanup-workers-almost-every-crew-member-from-the-1989-exxon-valdez-disaster-is-now-dead-2010-6

Are you sure that you want to help clean up the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico?  In a previous article we documented a number of the health dangers from this oil spill that many scientists are warning us of, and now it has been reported on CNN that the vast majority of those who worked to clean up the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska are now dead.  Yes, you read that correctly.  Almost all of them are dead.

In fact, the expert that CNN had on said that the life expectancy for those who worked to clean up the Exxon Valdez oil spill is only about 51 years.  Considering the fact that the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is now many times worse than the Exxon Valdez disaster, are you sure you want to volunteer to be on a cleanup crew down there?  After all, the American Dream is not to make big bucks for a few months helping BP clean up their mess and then drop dead 20 or 30 years early.

This news clip from CNN is absolutely stunning.  If this is even close to true, then why would anyone want to be involved in helping to clean up this oil?....

The truth is that what we have out in the Gulf of Mexico is a "toxic soup" of oil, methane, benzene, hydrogen sulfide, other toxic gases and very poisonous chemical dispersants such as Corexit 9500.

Breathing all of this stuff is not good for your health, but the reality is that the true health toll of this oil spill is not going to be known for decades.

However, the early reports are not encouraging....   

*Already, a large number of workers cleaning up the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico report that they are suffering from flu-like symptoms.

*According to another new report, exposure to the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico has resulted in 162 cases of illnesses reported to the Louisiana state health department.

*In addition, according to one local Pensacola news source,  "400 people have sought medical care for upper or lower respiratory problems, headaches, nausea, and eye irritation after trips to Escambia County beaches."

This is going to be something that we all want to keep a very close eye on.

But it is not just oil spill cleanup workers and people who have gone to the beach who are reporting health issues.  The following is a report from a reader named Dee....

My 2 friends and I have been sick with headaches and vomiting, also it feels like heartburn, just feeling lousy. We have not been to the Gulf but there is an inlet at the end of our street. We live on the West side of Pensacola FL. near the Bayou. At first I thought it was just me. My 2 friends are having the same symptoms, all at the same time. Right now I have a dull headache, and my stomach is queasy. I have been thinking maybe the chemicals from the oil cleanup or the oil itself is causing us to be ill. It has been raining all day off and on. I started feeling ill late last night. I was wondering if anyone else in Pensacola have the same symptoms.

So what can we conclude from all this?

Well, it is still very early, but when this crisis is all said and done the biggest tragedy of all might be the health devastation that this oil spill has caused.

If the Exxon Valdez oil spill is any indication, a lot of pe0ple are going to end up dying early deaths.

So once again, do you really want to go down there and clean up this oil?

Of course all of this oil is not just going to clean itself up.

But if we all refuse to participate, who will clean it up?

Perhaps BP CEO Tony Heyward and other high ranking BP executives could roll up their sleeves and go down there and start cleaning up all of that toxic sludge.

It's their mess, so let them clean it.

Videos: http://www.businessinsider.com/warning-to-gulf-cleanup-workers-almost-every-crew-member-from-the-1989-exxon-valdez-disaster-is-now-dead-2010-6#ixzz0seV87ZA7

[H0llyw00d]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRrbqBEGxiw

[Catalina]

So What Are These Dispersants Made Of That Makes Them Such a Powerful Neurotoxin Pesticide?

The main ingredients of Corexit is 2-Butoxyethanol which can make up to 60% of the dispersant and is known to be toxic to blood, kidneys, liver, and the central nervous system (CNS).

2-Butoxyethanol is also known to cause cancer, birth defects and has been found to cause genetic mutations and is a delayed chronic health hazard as well as an environmental hazardous material

Corexit also contains Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Mercury, and Cyanide.

How effective is Corexit in dispersing Gulf crude?

Corexit 9500 is only 54.7% effective and Corexit 9527A is 63.4% effective in dispersing the crude oil found off the shores of South Louisiana.

BP has sprayed both Corexit 9500 and Corexit 9527 into the Gulf of Mexico to disperse the oil both of which have been banned in the UK since 1998 for failure to pass the Rocky Shores Test.

By BP’s own admission Corexit has the potential for bioaccumulation meaning it has the potential to accumulate in the tissues of organism beginning with the first organism in a food chain.

Why allow the use of these toxic dispersants?

Well the EPA has ordered BP to stop using the dispersants but BP has refused

Instead BP replied with its justification for using Corexit which the EPA responded to saying BP’s response “lacked sufficient analysis and focused more defending your initial decision” .

In general, the EPA justifies the use of dispersants because they are less toxic than oil and the cause less of an environment impact that oil along the coastline calling dispersants an environmental trade off which is the lesser of two evils.

However the choice of using Corexit contradicts both of those justifications.

Corexit is lethal in as little as 2.6 parts per million where oil is lethal in 11 parts per million meaning that Corexit is over 4 times more toxic than oil.

Furthermore scientific studies show that oil dispersed with Corexit is 11 times more lethal than oil alone.

In fact the study referenced showed that crude oil was lethal at 4250 parts per million to killifish but combination of oil mixed with Corexit was lethal in as little as 317.7 ppm.

“Dispersed oils were more toxic than crude oils,” noted the report.

The other justification of lessening the environmental impact along the shoreline doesn’t hold up either as the reason Corexit was banned in the UK is because it was in fact shown to have a “significant deleterious ecological change” on the shoreline.

The fact Corexit is 4 times as toxic as oil and up to 11 times as toxic when combined with oil it literally makes no sense to allow the use of such a toxic chemical that can “delete” the ecological systems along the Gulf coast.

A report in the journal Environmental Toxicology a decade ago concluded that lethality levels in “dispersed oil combinations were significantly more toxic to these organisms than .. crude oil.” Another study, this time of snails and amphipods reached exactly the same conclusion.

What are the long term effects of Corexit?

The EPA has stated over and over that the long term effects of the use of Corexit are unknown yet there is plenty of data documenting the long term effects on humans (see below).

Further making the EPA claims questionable is EPA’s Deepwater horizon response sites site clearly states that between 1 million and 2.5 million gallons of the neurotoxin pesticide Corexit was used in the 1979 ixtoc oil spill which makes it unfathomable that the EPA doesn’t know what the long term effects are of a chemical that has been widely used, and eventually banned in certain countries, over a period of 30 years.

To the contrary of the EPA’s statement scientific studies widely state Corexit 9527 has been tested extensively in the laboratory and used on oil spills since 1978 and a considerable number of toxicity reports exist concerning a wide variety of species.

So why does the Federal Government continue to tell us the the long term effects of the dispersant usage are unknown?

Why does the Federal Government continue to pretend like they know so little about the dispersant BP is being used?

What are the chemical components of the dispersants COREXIT 9500 and COREXIT 9527?

While the main ingredient which makes up to 60% of Corexit is reason enough to cause concern.

If you dig any more dirt on these let me know.

The components of COREXIT 9500 and 9527 are:
CAS Registry Number    Chemical Name
57-55-6    
1,2-Propanediol
111-76-2    
2-butoxy-Ethanol
577-11-7    
Butanedioic acid, 2-sulfo-, 1,4-bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester, sodium salt (1:1)
1338-43-8    
Sorbitan, mono-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate
9005-65-6    
Sorbitan, mono-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) derivs.
9005-70-3    
Sorbitan, tri-(9Z)-9-octadecenoate, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) derivs
29911-28-2    
2-Propanol, 1-(2-butoxy-1-methylethoxy)-
64742-47-8    
Distillates (petroleum), hydrotreated light
The have also been found to contain Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Mercury, and Cyanide among other heavy metals

What are the Chronic Health effects of Corexit?

Here are some of the highlights from the MSDS for the active ingredient (2-butoxyethanol) – of Corexit (up to 60% by volume)

    * Severe over-exposure can result in death.
    * MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Mutagenic for bacteria and/or yeast.
    * The substance may be toxic to blood, kidneys, liver, central nervous system (CNS).
    * Repeated or prolonged exposure to the substance can produce target organs damage.
    * Repeated exposure to highly (this) toxic material may produce general deterioration of health by an accumulation in one or many human organs.
    * Hazardous in case of skin contact (permeator), of ingestion, of inhalation.
    * May cause adverse reproductive effects (maternal and paternal fertility, fetoxicity)
    * May cause birth defects (teratogenic)
    * May cause cancer (tumorigenic)
    * Penetrates intact skin easily and can cause systemic effects and central nervous system depression
    * Inhalation: May cause irritation of the respiratory tract. May affect behavior (analgesia), behavior/central nervous system (headache, drowsiness, dizzness, stuttering, coma, weakness, ataxia, slurred speech, loss of coordination and judgement, personality changes, analgesia, blurred vision, tremor, excitement, somnolence), sense organs, the gastrointestinal tract (nausea, vomiting), metabolism (metabolic acidosis), respiration (dyspnea), urinary system (kidneys – hematuria, albuminuria, polyuria, oliguria, renal failure), liver (liver damage).
    * Exposure to high vapor concentration may also cause corneal or lens opacity of the eyes.
    * Ingestion: Causes gastrointestinal tract irritation with nausea, vomiting, diarrhea. May affect behavior/central
      nervous system (see inhalation), respiration (dyspnea), metabolism, cardiovascular system.
    * Chronic Potential Health Effects: Inhalation and Ingestion: Prolonged or repeated inhalation or ingestion may affect the liver, blood (changes in red blood cell count, pigmented or nucleated red blood cells, microcytosis with or without anemia, erythropenia, reticulocytosis, granulocytosis, leukocytosis), urinary system (kidneys -hematuria), metabolism (weight loss), endocrine system (spleen, thymus, pancreas). Prolonged or repeated inhalation of high concentrations may also cause lung hemmorrhage, congestion, bronchopneumonia.
    * Classified in Canada as CLASS D-1A: Material causing immediate and serious toxic effects (VERY TOXIC).
    * Classified in Canada as CLASS D-2B: Material causing other toxic effects (TOXIC)

What does the EPA say about the human health effects expected as a result of using the dispersants?

The EPA warning about human health affects says

    People working with dispersants are strongly advised to use a half face filter mask or an air-supplied breathing apparatus to protect their noses, throats, and lungs, and they should wear nitrile or PVC gloves, coveralls, boots, and chemical splash goggles to keep dispersants off skin and out of their eyes. CDC provides more information on reducing occupational exposures while working with dispersants during the Gulf Oil Spill Response.

        * Material Data Safety Sheet for Corexit 9500A (PDF) (11pp., 88 K, About PDF)
        * Material Data Safety Sheet for Corexit 9527A (PDF) (11 pp., 132 K, About PDF)

Hasn’t BP switched over to a new less toxic version of Corexit

BP does claim that since it now using the more environmentally friendly version of Corexit it can not be verified whether or not the newer version contains 2-butoxyethanol or not.

BP and the manufacturer to date have refused to release a list of all of the chemicals contained in Corexit 9500 claiming that the ingredients are proprietary.

It is quite possible that 2-butoxyethanol or an even more hazardous substance is contained in Corexit 9500.

Corexit 9500, like Corexit 9527, also contains Propylene Glycol a substance generally recognized as safe for human consumption.

However, Propylene Glycol depletes oxygen from water 5 times greater than raw sewage and the massive amounts used in the BP Gulf oil spill could help contribute to dead zones in the Gulf where aquatic life can not survive.

What about the effects of Corexit on the oil spill clean up workers

During the Exxon Valdez another version of Corexit was used to clean up the oil.

CNN reports that the average life expectancy of workers who cleaned up the Exxon Valdez is 51 years old and most of those workers are now dead.

Watch this CNN video on how the dispersants are affecting the cleanup workers which claims that BP is putting its public image over the safety of those cleaning up the oil spill.

http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2010/06/05/amount-neurotoxin-pesticide-corexit-sprayed-bp-tops-1-million-gallons/

References:

    * Deepwater Horizon Response Current Operations page
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/doctype/2931/53339/
    * COREXIT 9527A Manufacturer MSDS retrieved 07/08/2010 from http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/posted/2931/Corexit_EC9527A_MSDS.539295.pdf
    * COREXIT 9500 Manufacturer MSDS retrieved 07/08/2010 from http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/posted/2931/Corexit_EC9500A_MSDS.539287.pdf
    * COREXIT 9500 EPA MSDS Product Data
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/ncp/products/corex950.htm
    * COREXIT 9527A EPA MSDS Product Data
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/ncp/products/corex952.htm
    * UK Dispersant Testing Guidelines
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://www.cefas.co.uk/publications/techrep/tech102.pdf
    * Act For Climate Justice*
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://www.actforclimatejustice.org/2010/05/exclusive-no-toxicity-tests-on-bp%E2%80%99s-dispersant/
      *Information from this source verified using other resources above.
    * The BP Spill, litigation, and health dangers from Pesticides
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://www.archive.org/details/TheBpSpillLitigationAndHealthDangersFromPesticides – Audio file of the radio broadcast 27 MB MP3
    * Pesticide Database Listing for Corexit – retrieved 01/05/2010 from http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Product.jsp?REG_NR=00892800006&DIST_NR=008928
    * Pesticide Listing For 2-Butoxyethanol (Corexit Main Ingredient) retrieved 06/07/2010 from http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC35051
    * Additional Pesticide Listing Showing the uses for 2-Butoxyethanol (Corexit Main Ingredient) are as Fungicide, Microbiocide, Solvent, Adjuvant retrieved 06/07/2010 from http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC35051
    * Neurotoxin Listing For 2-Butoxyethanol (Corexit Main Ingredient) from NeuroResearch Clinics, Inc a research project published by the Minnesota School of Medicine retrieved 06/07/2010 from http://www.neuroassist.com/Neurotoxins.htm
    * EPA Toxicity Warning Labels
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Docs/ref_products.html#EPAWarning
    * The Watering Hole
      Resource used to find list of more information about Corexit
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2010/05/07/the-watering-hole-may-7-and-now-the-chemical-spill/
    * The Science Blogs
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://scienceblogs.com/speakeasyscience/2010/05/a_lethal_concentration.php
    * COMPARATIVE TOXICITY OF TWO OIL DISPERSANTS, SUPERDISPERSANT-25
      AND COREXIT 9527, TO A RANGE OF COASTAL SPECIES
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://publicfiles.dep.state.fl.us/DEAR/Oil%20Spill/Bioremediation%20and%20Dispersant%20Literature/Toxicity%20of%20Superdispersant-25%20and%20Corexit%209527.pdf
    * 2-butoxyethanol Material Safety Data Sheet
      retrieved 05/06/2010 from http://www.sciencelab.com/xMSDS-2_Butoxyethanol-9923187
    * Stone Prep MSDS
      Contains additional state safety data on 2-butoxyethanol
      retrieved 05/06/2010 from http://www.thisoldgrout.com/msds/stoneprep.pdf
    * TOXICITY OF SOUTH LOUISIANA CRUDE OIL, ALASKAN NORTH SLOPE CRUDE OIL AND DISPERSANT COREXIT 9500 TO GULF KILLIFISH, WHITE SHRIMP, AND EASTERN OYSTER
      retrieved 06/05/2010 from http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-1113103-122552/unrestricted/Liu_thesis.pdf
    * Monitoring biodegradation of creosote in soils using radiolabels, toxicity tests, and chemical analysis
      retrieved on 06/05/2010 from http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/71006506/abstract
    * Oil and dispersed oil toxicity to amphipods and snails
      retrieved on 06/05/2010 from http://bit.ly/aTruF6
    * BP response to EPA on why it will continue to use Corexit retrieved 07/08/2010 from http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants/5-21bp-response.pdf
    * Dispersants Approved in UK and Reason Corexit Was Removed from List in 1998 retrieved 07/08/2010 from http://www.marinemanagement.org.uk/protecting/pollution/documents/approval_approved_products.pdf
    * Washington Post Reports BP Using both Corexit 9500 and Corexit 9527 retrieved 07/08/2010 from http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=382521
    * BP’s Response To The EPA Directive To Stop Using Corexit retrieved 07/08/2010 from http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants/5-21bp-response.pdf
    * EPA Response To BP’s refusal to stop using Corext retrieved 07/08/2010 from http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants/Rainey-letter-052610.pdf