Panel agenda for Air Quality After 9/11 conference, March 2004

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document

right after the disaster. She became progressively sicker soon after this work and has been shuttled from doctor to doctor.

“A bone marrow aspiration revealed a huge level of toxic mercury in her system that could only have gotten there from an intense outside exposure. The only place she could have gotten such an exposure was at the World Trade Center.

“Increased pressure inside her skull has developed, and she is having severe headaches, nausea, and nosebleeds. Her friend reported to me that, ‘She has a horrible rash all over her body. She has horrible cramps in her legs and back. Her lung capacity is greatly diminished and she has had major changes in her vision, and was told she is going blind. The government doctor who was sent to treat her told her to take a six month leave of absence and get her life in order because in six months she would no longer be able to perform her duties as a firefighter.’

“The supervisor of this 12 year veteran rescue worker told her ‘all of this medical testing is fine, as long as it does not get in the way of you doing your job.’ With the EPA downplaying any toxic effects, she is getting little sympathy from agencies and insurance companies.”

Several studies and surveys have been published since 9/11 which attempt to document the

extent of health issues that can be attributed to the terror attack. Manhattan Community Board 1,

which encompasses the World Trade Center site, conducted a survey and reported the following

in a November 3,2003 letter to Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney:

“... in a survey of local residents that we conducted in May 2003,30% of those surveyed reported that they currently suffer from respiratory problems such as coughing, wheezing or sinus headaches brought on by the 9/11 attack.”

In September 2002 the American Journal of Industrial Medicine reported on a medical screening

program for Lower Manhattan clean-up workers created by Doctor Steven Markowitz, and

others, at Queens College. The article reported that more than 400 workers were examined and it

contained the following descriptions and conclusions:

29

NYC-WTC_000161664