Heartbreaking News

Today I was visiting with someone I don't usually talk to, and came up with my usual, "What did you do in 1989 during the Exxon Valdez oil spill cleanup?"

doesn't look too shabby, does, it?

Turns out he was on a barge that delivered supplies of all kinds, mostly to the beach workers. That would be the 'bioremediation' experiment using 1,000 young MEN ... mostly college age kids.

He said they didn't realize how strong the Inipol EAP 22 was and that the workers were having blood in urine and had red bloodshot eyes. *

My heart sank. From what I've learned about this product, it causes compensated autoimmune hemolytic anemia (that's the blood in urine) and with that strong an exposure, it is very unlikely that any of these young men would be alive today, 16 years after the fact. But worse, you didn't have to work directly with the chemical to get exposed! The breeze could blow it into your eyes &, like Exxon monitors, ... never even step foot on the beach or the worker boats.

Lessons that could be learned about this chemical ... from Exxon Valdez oil spill cleanup: Even if they are just helping out on an oil spill such as this US Coast Guardsman or some of our Navy personnel - & others

The synonym for hemolysis is hemoglobinuria. I looked it up and learned some more things, but the most distressing was that the average people live is 10.3 years. Without exception, this is a rule that has proven true. So, anyone still alive today ... is on 'borrowed time' Then, too, that would depend on how much exposure. Some people died in that very year, with easy jobs, like transporting people and equipment in their fishing boats. (I suspect exposure to either ethylene oxide &/or 2-butoxyethanol) Same as for the 'gulf war syndrome' vets. They had exposure to 2-butoxyethanol AND diethylene glycol monobutyl ether or other glycol ether

I next talked to a Union worker from those days. They said the Union was offering free blood tests to those in the Union (either at this time, or for those retiring). There seemed to be little trust for the Union. Who wants this info? Why? What will they do with it? Who would get a copy?

Of course, I know that they don't find the harm of 2-butoxyethanol unless they were to check some extra things.

What a shame, Maggie. The ripples from that incident go on and on.

Woodmonkey

That's true. There are also hidden ways: like not being the normal temperament to be patient and loving to spouse and children (Always irritable - Flying off the handle over nothing, a part of the CNS damage)

I was just thinking about a Union man I talked with a couple of years ago. He had some health concerns, but didn't work directly with the chemical, so didn't connect it to that: was building ramps for the workers to get to & from housing units at sea, I believe. He thought the Union out of Fairbanks who sent a lot of workers to the Spill cleanup would be helpful or at least interested in helping their workers.

And I met a widow of one such worker. She said he was a welder and that his forearms were cracked and bleeding all the time. He died of leukemia that his doctor said was related to the work he did in 89. He left his wife with 5 small children which she did raise herself. She was a Christian woman & held no malice.

What do blood shot eyes mean?

PS

Ah ha ... I just remembered what the blood shot eyes would mean. This is the primary route of exposure to this 2-butoxyethanol chemical: through the eye membranes. These workers would have had an extreme, very excessive amount of exposure to this chemical for the eyes to be blood shot like this.

(And remember, they were inexperienced, stranded at sea - working long hours for 2 weeks straight with no cell phones and no computers to contact their families.) More

Even without this sign the eyes can burn and hurt and give someone way too much exposure. ... like this lady who worked for the box dept of Home Depot in Sugar Land, TX. She is now having kidney failure and expected to die at 35 years of age. Doctors are stumped as to what is the matter with her.

Quote:


	12-19-03 Daughter: "Yes, I remember all to well when my eyes started burning like there was hot pokers in them. It coincided with a VERY nasty stomach bug...vomiting, the runs...it was miserable. The day I got sick I had been rolling around in a very nasty store cleaning up the mess. (box account in Sugar Land, TX) That night I was so sick...took me 2 days to get the energy up to drag myself to the doctor's office & threw up all over it for him to tell me I had the flu." Margaret: "These 'flu' like symptoms are also the signs of having too much chemical exposure of some kind." My question, "Now, what were you using to clean up?"

To discuss this - Trackpads.com

July 23, 2004

I'm glad there are people like you who are keeping such a good lid on the effects of these deadly chemicals, and Exxon is as big and powerful, to say nothing of bloatedly wealthy, corporations in the world today.

I'm not slamming Exxon directly, as I do not know their true level of disregard, but I do not for a second think they would willingly provide medical related health care coverage specifically for those affected by their disastrous spill in Alaska.

While I certainly think THEY SHOULD, as it is their responsibility, I'm probably correctly guessing that they are fighting any and all such claims made (yea, those chemicals were harmless) even dressing like an astronaut the opportunity for passage of some trace amount of these chemicals in many ways to affect the human condition is possible, probably likely as well, in some form or another. Danny

"Watchdog groups" have to exist to keep those who would suffer the little guy for financial/economic gains/profits. It is a very sad fact of life that too many large corporations put profit about their people. It does not speak highly of the morality of those in charge. These types should not be viewed as trivial lawsuits. I hope that legally any corporation involved in any type of chemical disaster is made to anty up and take care of the clean-up - not just the short-term physical of the landscape but more importantly the long-term health-care needs of any workers effected by them.

Thank you for the update, Dear Maggie.

Cal

Thanks for your insights & concern

You are right.

Exxon was wanting to look like they were doing OK, a PR event ... with little regard for human life. Of all the things they've checked in on ... with the environment ... those in charge of 'checking it out' have avoided or neglected to find out what health ailments existed for the workers. Over half of the 11,000 reported 'flu-like symptoms' which the doctors (as usual, just said was a virus, or like living in tight quarters).

Right now there is 100 million dollars on the table for workers to come forward. But they are intimidated. You know, Exxon lawyers, I've been told, made a big deal about the chemical, 2-butoxyethanol, being in so many everyday products, "How do you know it was ours that caused your health concerns?"

Believe me they would know. Worst of all, EPA did axe the Inipol EAP 22 at 12% strength 2-butoxyethanol, but gave Exxon a worse product to sell & promote ... and they have! ... Corexit. It is 38% 2-butoxyethanol and it has been sold to the Dept of Defense, to Australia, to Karachi. I suspect some of it was in the 1990-1991 gulf war for soldiers to move around and to smell the fumes when they walked into the arms room.

AND there had been pretty poor warnings on products, now there will be none at all: EPA has 'delisted' 2-butoxyethanol and diethylene glycol monobutyl ether? ... or just EGBE? No limits for plastics or dry cleaning businesses on how much they can put into the air? No more EPA registration number on Lysol tub 'n Tile, etc? (It's a pesticide, you know) Sad, sad story. I thought things were bad. Since 2003 they are worse.

I've learned a lot about 2-butoxyethanol these past three years

Margaret