Grenfell responders cancer toll

Grenfell responders cancer toll

Author
Discussion

Earthdweller

Original Poster:

14,225 posts

132 months

Friday 13th January 2023
quotequote all
https://twitter.com/fbunational/status/16139063897...

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/cancer-grenf...

Terribly sad reports of numerous firefighters who responded to the Grenfell tower tragedy have now been diagnosed with terminal cancer, at least a dozen and maybe more cases, directly linked to their duty that day

“Up to 12 have been diagnosed with the disease – understood to mostly be digestive cancers and leukaemia – but there are fears more than 20 may be affected.
The cancers are “linked to the high levels of unprecedented exposure to contaminants during the huge rescue effort” according to a Mirror investigation.
During the June 2017 tragedy, many firefighters ran out of air in the tower and many sat in their contaminated suits for more than 10 hours.”

Shades of 9/11 where almost more Fire Service responders have died of illness linked to their service that day, and 10 times the number of Police officers than on the day

https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/10/...

https://abcnews.go.com/US/241-nypd-officers-died-9...

It’s a real tragedy

scenario8

6,763 posts

185 months

Friday 13th January 2023
quotequote all
I can’t open the links on this device but simply taking your post at face value that really is a tragedy in itself.

Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Mr Whippy

29,563 posts

247 months

Friday 13th January 2023
quotequote all
They do say that these days you’re more likely to die from toxins in your house fire, than asphyxiation from smoke or the fire itself.

And then secondary stuff like floors being weaker sooner, so risks of collapse for fire fighters.


Fire fighters are being increasingly exposed to these risks.

It doesn’t seem like a very green, sustainable, or ethical way to build the housing in our society, when simply being on fire makes them more of a death trap than the fire itself!

irc

8,080 posts

142 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
Study proves Scottish firemen more likely than general population to get cancer.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64216321

franki68

10,618 posts

227 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
They do say that these days you’re more likely to die from toxins in your house fire, than asphyxiation from smoke or the fire itself.

And then secondary stuff like floors being weaker sooner, so risks of collapse for fire fighters.


Fire fighters are being increasingly exposed to these risks.

It doesn’t seem like a very green, sustainable, or ethical way to build the housing in our society, when simply being on fire makes them more of a death trap than the fire itself!
Multiple governments corrupted by housebuilders into allowing them to build cheaper and cheaper builds endangering the lives of those who bought them and those that deal with some of the consequences .



Edited by franki68 on Saturday 14th January 10:11

Teddy Lop

8,301 posts

73 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
That's terrible. What was done, in the immediate aftermath, knowing these guys had breathed contaminants? I can probably guess.

Mr Whippy said:
They do say that these days you’re more likely to die from toxins in your house fire, than asphyxiation from smoke or the fire itself.

And then secondary stuff like floors being weaker sooner, so risks of collapse for fire fighters.


Fire fighters are being increasingly exposed to these risks.

It doesn’t seem like a very green, sustainable, or ethical way to build the housing in our society, when simply being on fire makes them more of a death trap than the fire itself!
I was going to retort that this particular case was where designed-in building fire safety principles had been violated, but I can see your wider point - everything from insulation to cable etc is toxic when burnt because that's the cheapest way to do it.

chemistry

2,352 posts

115 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
I have no doubt fire fighters have an increased risk of getting cancer, as a result of exposure to soot, chemicals released in a fire, etc.

I do question whether any such cancers are linked solely and specifically to Grenfell, as opposed to an accumulation of exposure over many years, including at Grenfell.

Teddy Lop

8,301 posts

73 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
chemistry said:
I have no doubt fire fighters have an increased risk of getting cancer, as a result of exposure to soot, chemicals released in a fire, etc.

I do question whether any such cancers are linked solely and specifically to Grenfell, as opposed to an accumulation of exposure over many years, including at Grenfell.
Running out of air and sitting in contaminated suits for 10 hours would make this a particular contributor due to the size of the incident, and I guess the lack of resources to effectively deal with it, resulting in firefighters bypassing their own safety rules.

Evoluzione

10,345 posts

249 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
The first thing I question is why is their breathing apparatus and clothing poor?

pquinn

7,167 posts

52 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
Not really enough detail in that to prove correlation vs causation re. Grenfell; types of cancer, statistics vs their peer group, timing, mechanisms.

Respiratory stuff would be more obvious, leukaemia and digestive *even if their group is an obvious statistical anomaly* without more information doesn't prove it's linked to Grenfell, could just as easily be something else they had in common (shared diet, workplace, firefighting chemicals, whatever).

Also what are the stats for others exposed to the scene?

Obviously nasty for those involved but I'm always slightly sceptical when there's a nice tidy wrap up that points to a cause, especially if it's a handy one to blame.

Jasandjules

70,423 posts

235 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
I must confess I find it astonishing that this is directly linked to a specific incident.

Just hope they can get enough treatment.

soad

33,333 posts

182 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
scenario8 said:
I can’t open the links on this device but simply taking your post at face value that really is a tragedy in itself.

Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Was on Sky News yesterday. Grenfell: Firefighters diagnosed with terminal cancer

rscott

15,202 posts

197 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
Evoluzione said:
The first thing I question is why is their breathing apparatus and clothing poor?
It's not. It copes well with "normal" incidents, but Grenfell was anything but that.

carreauchompeur

17,966 posts

210 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
That’s very sad. We do choose to work in the emergency services but the risks exist.

austinsmirk

5,597 posts

129 months

Saturday 14th January 2023
quotequote all
franki68 said:
Mr Whippy said:
They do say that these days you’re more likely to die from toxins in your house fire, than asphyxiation from smoke or the fire itself.

And then secondary stuff like floors being weaker sooner, so risks of collapse for fire fighters.


Fire fighters are being increasingly exposed to these risks.

It doesn’t seem like a very green, sustainable, or ethical way to build the housing in our society, when simply being on fire makes them more of a death trap than the fire itself!
Multiple governments corrupted by housebuilders into allowing them to build cheaper and cheaper builds endangering the lives of those who bought them and those that deal with some of the consequences .



Edited by franki68 on Saturday 14th January 10:11
If Grenfell had not been modernised, it would of course been far safer. Not so sure about the corruption point, it’s more like decades of incompetence at multiple levels.

Pan Pan Pan

10,302 posts

117 months

Monday 16th January 2023
quotequote all
This seems to be another of those `unexpected consequences' from the the things we do.
In one of the Building regulations Approved Document L Revisions, it became a legal requirement for the thermal insulation of an existing building to be significantly upgraded, when `any' repairs to an existing building worth more than a set figure was to be carried out.
Placing the upgrade in insulation on the inside of such buildings was always going to be difficult, disruptive and expensive, So guess what? it was placed on the outside in an attempt to keep costs down.
Next we get Grenfell incidents. Funny that?

Blue Oval84

5,283 posts

167 months

Monday 16th January 2023
quotequote all
There's nothing wrong with requiring insulation be fitted per se, it's simply that the legislative landscape had enough loopholes (and wilful misinterpretation) that it allowed highly combustible materials to be used in that insulation system.

Successive governments knew about the problem but chose to ignore it, and one of the manufacturers (I forget which) was aware that their product nearly burned the test lab down but they chose to continue promoting it for use on high rise buildings. There should be people going to prison for what happened at Grenfell.

(Disclosure - I'm writing this whilst a crew remove cladding from outside my living room window so that it can be replaced with safer stuff - I have very little respect for the legislators or the industry that allowed this situation to occur - it's the sort of thing you imagine would only happen in the third world, not right here in the UK where the dangers were known about for many years)

gotoPzero

18,042 posts

195 months

Monday 16th January 2023
quotequote all
The news report I read said 1200 fire fighters were on scene over the course of a few days. I had not realised it was so many, I assumed it was maybe 100 or 200 or something.

otolith

58,496 posts

210 months

Monday 16th January 2023
quotequote all
There was this;

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/12/to...

Average age of a firefighter in 2017 was around 40.

Average rate of incidence of all cancers (excluding melanoma) in men aged 40-44 is 124 cases per 100,000 men per year. Rate for women of that age is higher, but firefighters are over 90% men.

Expected number of cancer diagnoses in 1300 40 year old men over the following five year period would be approximately 1300 * 5 *124/100000 = 8

However, that's all cancers, and that's diagnoses not terminal cases. There are very different prognoses for different types of cancer. About a third of men die within the first year of diagnosis and about half die within five years.

Overall, I'd guess that 12 terminal cancers in 1300 men that age over a five year period is 3-4 times what you'd expect in the general population, however firefighters generally have a higher rate of incidence of cancer;

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/10/fi...

Someone needs to do a proper statistical analysis, but I suspect that the rate of cancer amongst the firefighters who attended Grenfell will not turn out to be statistically significantly higher than that amongst firefighters in general.


Pan Pan Pan

10,302 posts

117 months

Tuesday 17th January 2023
quotequote all
Blue Oval84 said:
There's nothing wrong with requiring insulation be fitted per se, it's simply that the legislative landscape had enough loopholes (and wilful misinterpretation) that it allowed highly combustible materials to be used in that insulation system.

Successive governments knew about the problem but chose to ignore it, and one of the manufacturers (I forget which) was aware that their product nearly burned the test lab down but they chose to continue promoting it for use on high rise buildings. There should be people going to prison for what happened at Grenfell.

(Disclosure - I'm writing this whilst a crew remove cladding from outside my living room window so that it can be replaced with safer stuff - I have very little respect for the legislators or the industry that allowed this situation to occur - it's the sort of thing you imagine would only happen in the third world, not right here in the UK where the dangers were known about for many years)
\

This also happened when the fire risk of timber frame apartment blocks was being tested, and assessed by the fire authorities on a complete apartment block, built in a fully enclosed laboratory, which required numerous further visits by firemen to prevent the lab from catching fire again, after the test had concluded, and the block was dismantled.
The quest for cheap quick housing solutions strikes again.