FAIR USE NOTICE

FAIR USE NOTICE

A BEAR MARKET ECONOMICS BLOG

DEDICATED TO OCCUPY AND THE ECONOMIC REVOLUTION

OCCUPY THE MARKETPLACE

FOLLOW ME ON FACEBOOK

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates
FAIR USE NOTICE FAIR USE NOTICE: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This website distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for scientific, research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.

Read more at: http://www.etupdates.com/fair-use-notice/#.UpzWQRL3l5M | ET. Updates

All Blogs licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Toxicologic Assessment of the Army's Zinc Cadmium Sulfide Dispersion Tests: Universal Healthcare?


During the 1950s and 1960s, the U.S. Army conducted atmospheric dispersion tests in many American cities using fluorescent particles of zinc cadmium sulfide (ZnCdS) to develop and verify meteorological models to estimate the dispersal of aerosols. Upon learning of the tests, many citizens and some public health officials in the affected cities raised concerns about the health consequences of the tests. This book assesses the public health effects of the Army's tests, including the toxicity of ZnCdS, the toxicity of surrogate cadmium compounds, the environmental fate of ZnCdS, the extent of public exposures from the dispersion tests, and the risks of such exposures.

Dew I

Operation Dew I consisted of five separate trials from March 26, 1952 until April 21, 1952 that were designed to test the feasibility of maintaining a large aerosol cloud released offshore until it drifted over land, achieving a large area coverage.[2] The tests released zinc cadmium sulfide along a 100-to-150-nautical-mile (190 to 280 km) line approximately 5 to 10 nautical miles (10 to 20 km) off the coast of Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina.[2] Two of the trials dispersed clouds of zinc cadmium sulfide over large areas of all three U.S. states. The tests affected over 60,000 square miles (150,000 km²) of populated coastal region in the U.S. southeast.[3] The Dew I releases were from a Navy minesweeper, the USS Tercel.[2]

Dew II

Dew II involved the release of fluorescent particles and Lycopodium spores from an aircraft.[2] Dew II was described in a 1953 Army report which remained classified at the time of a 1997 report by the U.S. National Research Council concerning the U.S. Army's zinc cadmium sulfide dispersion program of the 1950s.[2]

Operation LAC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Operation LAC was undertaken in 1957 and 1958 by the U.S. Army Chemical Corps.[2] Principally, the operation involved spraying large areas with zinc cadmium sulfide.[1] The U.S. Air Force loaned the Army a C-119, "Flying Boxcar", and it was used to disperse zinc cadmium sulfide by the ton in the atmosphere over the United States.[3] The first test occurred on December 2, 1957 along a path from South Dakota to International Falls, Minnesota.[4]

The tests were designed to determine the dispersion and geographic range of biological or chemical agents.[3] Stations on the ground tracked the fluorescent zinc cadmium sulfide particles.[3] During the first test and subsequently, much of the material dispersed ended up being carried by winds into Canada.[4] However, as was the case in the first test, particles were detected up to 1,200 miles away from their drop point.[3][4] A typical flight line covering 400 miles would release 5,000 pounds of zinc cadmium sulfide and in fiscal year 1958 around 100 hours were spent in flight for LAC.[4] That flight time included four runs of various lengths, one of which was 1,400 miles.[4]

Specific tests

The December 2, 1957 test was incomplete due to a mass of cold air coming down from Canada.[4] It carried the particles from their drop point and then took a turn northeast, taking most of the particles into Canada with it. Military operators considered the test a partial success because some of the particles were detected 1,200 miles away, at a station in New York state.[4] A February 1958 test at Dugway Proving Ground ended similarly. Another Canadian air mass swept through and carried the particles into the Gulf of Mexico.[4] Two other tests, one along a path from Toledo, Ohio to Abilene, Texas, and another from Detroit, to Springfield, Illinois, to Goodland, Kansas, showed that agents dispersed through this aerial method could achieve widespread coverage when particles were detected on both sides of the flight paths.[4]

Scope

According to Leonard A. Cole, an Army Chemical Corps document titled "Summary of Major Events and Problems" (1958) described the scope of Operation LAC. Cole stated that the document outlined that the tests were the largest ever undertaken by the Chemical Corps and that the test area stretched from the Rocky Mountains to the Atlantic Ocean, and from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.[4] Other sources describe the scope of LAC varyingly, examples include, "Midwestern United States",[3] and "the states east of the Rockies".[1] Specific locations are mentioned as well. Some of those include: a path from South Dakota to Minneapolis, Minnesota,[2]Dugway Proving Ground, Corpus Christi, Texas, north-central Texas, and the San Francisco Bay area.[1]


Cold War Chemical Tests Over American Cities

WASHINGTON -- A series of secret tests conducted by the U.S. Army in the 1950s and 1960s did not expose residents of the United States and Canada to chemical levels considered harmful, according to a new report* from a committee of the National Research Council.

The U.S. Army released the chemical compound zinc cadmium sulfide from airplanes, rooftops, and moving vehicles in 33 urban and rural areas as part of a Cold War program to test the way biological weapons might disperse under different conditions. Zinc cadmium sulfide, a fine fluorescent powder, was chosen because its particles are similar in size to germs used in biological warfare, and because its fluorescence under ultraviolet light made it easy to trace. It is not a biological weapon, nor was it thought at the time to be toxic. But residents in affected cities -- including Minneapolis; St. Louis; Winnipeg, Manitoba; Corpus Christi, Texas; and Fort Wayne, Ind. -- became concerned about possible health effects after details of the tests became widely known in the 1990s.

[I lived in Ft. Wayne Ind. at the time and observed on my street military vehicles spraying with men in Hazmat suits. I suffer COPD (never smoked) and have Barret's disease, et. al. ~Bear]

"After an exhaustive, independent review requested by Congress we have found no evidence that exposure to zinc cadmium sulfide at these levels could cause people to become sick," said committee chair Rogene Henderson, senior scientist, Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute, Albuquerque, N.M. "Even when we assume the worst about how this chemical might behave in the lungs, we conclude that people would be at a higher risk simply from living in a typical urban, industrialized area for several days or, in some cases, for months."

Information on how zinc cadmium sulfide affects human health is sparse, but data from animal tests indicate that the compound, when taken orally, has no short-term toxic effects; nor was it found to be a skin or eye irritant. Because limited laboratory research on the toxicity of zinc cadmium sulfide has been performed on animals, and no data exist on humans, the committee based its conclusions about the ability of the compound to cause cancer on what it called a "worst-case" assumption: that the compound is every bit as toxic as its most toxic component -- cadmium. High doses of cadmium over long periods of time could cause bone and kidney problems and lung cancer, but the Army's tests involved small doses of a less toxic compound over short periods of time, the report says. The committee estimated that the excess maximum lifetime cancer risk for the most heavily exposed residents of St. Louis is 1.5 in 1 million; in Minneapolis it is one in 2.5 million; one in 1 million in Winnipeg; seven in 100 million in Fort Wayne; and one in 100 million in Corpus Christi.

For non-cancer toxicity, the committee based its conclusions on what is known about cadmium sulfide, a compound that has some properties similar to zinc cadmium sulfide. The committee estimated that an average-size male could inhale as much as 500 micrograms of cadmium sulfide over a few days without causing toxicity in the lungs. Even in populated areas where exposures from the Army's tests were the highest, residents were exposed to far more cadmium in their normal daily contact with soil, water, food, and air (between 12 and 84 micrograms) than they were potentially exposed to from the Army's tests. The maximum estimated cadmium dose from all tests combined was 24.4 micrograms in St. Louis; 14.5 in Winnipeg; 6.8 in Minneapolis; 1.1 in Fort Wayne, and 0.1 in Corpus Christi. In Biltmore Beach, Fla. -- a remote unpopulated island location at the time of the tests -- the total may have been as high as 390 micrograms, but very few people if any were believed to have been exposed there.

The conclusions are based on data from the published scientific literature, information supplied by the Army and its contractors, and testimony from citizens in public meetings held by the committee in Minneapolis, Fort Wayne, and Corpus Christi. Some of the exposure data from the Army's tests have been lost or misplaced over the years since the tests were conducted, but the committee "feels confident in the large amount of data that it reviewed and does not believe it likely that the additional missing data would alter its conclusions."

Beyond looking at information on the toxicity, exposure data, and physical and chemical properties of the substance used in the experiments, the committee also evaluated whether it is feasible to perform a follow-up study to track the health status of those exposed. Three barriers would make such a study unfeasible, according to the report. Since the Army tests are now 30 to 40 years old, it would be extremely difficult to identify the people who were affected and to determine their past exposures to zinc cadmium sulfide. Even if they were found, there is a lack of data on their health before, during, and after exposure. And it would take a huge sample of exposed residents to detect even a small increase in health problems.

The Army should conduct studies to determine whether inhaled zinc cadmium sulfide breaks down into toxic cadmium compounds, which can be absorbed into the blood to produce toxicity in the lungs and other organs. Such research would strengthen the database needed for assessing the risk from the substance, the report says, and would eliminate the reliance on estimates of exposure to cadmium or cadmium compounds.

In some cities the Army dispersed microorganisms -- either alone or in combination with zinc cadmium sulfide. Recent research indicates that the microbes used do not produce disease in healthy people, but could produce disease in people with weak immune systems. The committee was not asked to assess the possible health effects of these tests, nor was it asked to address the ethical and social issues raised by the testing program as a whole.

A committee roster follows. This study was funded by the U.S. Department of the Army. The National Research Council is the operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Engineering. It is a private, non-profit organization that provides independent advice on science and technology under a congressional charter granted to the National Academy of Sciences.

Other NAP books related by word and phrase frequencies

The following titles are likely to be of interest to you. The top keyword and keyphrase weights from this report have been compared with the equivalent lists of words and phrases for all other available NAP publications.

Posted by at

3 comments:

  1. nonameJune 15, 2011 at 7:01 PM

    I'm one of the winnipeg victims. Need a way to contact you. I don't have twitter. Can you start a FB group please on this issue ? I want to see how many others have copd as i do.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousJuly 17, 2011 at 8:29 PM

    I am working on a long personal essay about Operation L.A.C. I would be interested in corresponding with anyone who remembers or who might have been affected by the dispersals.

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownFebruary 19, 2016 at 7:36 PM

    Many people in Ft Wayne affected. I just found out late kidney failure and also have bone pain and shortness of breath. My dad just found out has cancer near lung and on shoulder and doing body scan. Many stories of whole families losing all kids. Why haven't lawsuits been filed? Why haven't we been warned?

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)