Off topic, reports of toxic dispersant Corexit 9527A found in Florida swimming

8/31/2010 2:28:04 AM

I didn't know if anyone was interested in hearing about people getting sick from toxic found in swimming pools miles inland in Florida. They suspected their swimming pool water and had it tested. Results 50.3 ppm of Corexit's 2-butoxyethanol in swimming pool. This is north of Tampa. To sum up it causes rashes, diarrhea and liver and kidney damage. I don't know if the winds blew it over the area or if it got caught up in the wind and rain. I'm just wondering how widespread the damage zone will end up. I thought I read in the comments section another family miles away was having similar problems. I'm glad I don't personally know anyone who lives in that immediate area. I feel sorry for those that are. BP is going to find ways to avoid paying any damages or only token damages imo.
Original source
http://www.floridaoilspilllaw.com/exclus…

The place I found the story discussed to start with.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thre…

It is a conspiracy web site but I believe this story.

4 comments

Jump to latest

gatorfan

•

14 years ago

huh?

sharkhunter

•

14 years ago

It's not strip club related but for anyone who lives in Florida, I would be concerned where or how the toxic substance ended up in their swimming pool. The story hasn't really hit mainstream media news yet since I believe there are still investigations. Apparently the people in Florida may have heard something. The suspect is the dispersant chemical being used to break up the oil spill. It is toxic and was being dropped by airplanes I believe like an aerosol spray. I could be wrong but that's what I'm thinking right now. It's possible the winds and rains carried this chemical inland across many miles of Florida. I decided to post links to what I read.

sharkhunter

•

14 years ago

I read somewhere that there have been massive fish kills inland in other states like Alabama and the same chemicals are suspected. Some people have speculated that there is a cover up in process but I think it's just that all the facts aren't known yet.

Dudester

•

14 years ago

70 years ago, during WW2, bombers returning to England with a full bomb load had to drop their bombs in the English Channel because there was too much danger involved in landing with armed bombs.

In 1967,a B-47 returning to Kirtland Air Force base in Albuquerque was experiencing engine trouble. A-Bombs weighed (back then) 10k pounds. The bomb blew up, but not in chain reaction style. It blew up in dirty bomb fashion, scattering uranium all over the place. The number of children who died from brain cancer, west of the bomb site, were the guinea pigs for what we now know about dirty bombs.

Why did I say all that ?

It's possible that a plane returning with a load of dispersant, at night, found it expedient to drop their load-rather than return with it.

You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now