Former CNN Videographer Dies From Cancer Caused by 9/11 Exposure

Former CNN Videographer Dies From Cancer Caused by 9/11 Exposure

A former CNN videographer has died after contracting cancer caused by hazardous materials he was exposed to during his efforts to cover the events of September 11th and the weeks that followed.

Michael Gittelman covered the events of 9/11 both on September 11 itself and in the weeks after, staying nearby Ground Zero to record the aftermath. He contracted cancer that was attributed to the numerous hazardous substances he was exposed to at the site and has now passed away, sadly.

According to the federal World Trade Center Healthy Program, approximately 10,000 people ranging from first respondents, to nearby residents, to members of the media have contracted cancers related to the release of materials like asbestos when the Twin Towers and other buildings collapsed on 9/11.

Lead image by Michael Foran, used under Creative Commons.

Log in or register to post comments

6 Comments

Leigh Miller's picture

So sad...thanks for sharing this.

We take for granted how our buildings are constructed...at least in the past. No idea what's lurking.

Yes. If he hadn't been exposed to the aftermath effects of tossing a heavily fueled 767 into the side of a skyscraper never designed to withstand that sort of offense orchestrated and executed by nasty subhuman vermin bent on the outright destruction of this (our/my) Nation, he somewhat more likely would not have contracted cancer and succumbed at 61 yrs old. My heart goes out to him, his family, and all 911 victims past, present and future.

Leigh Miller's picture

It's a combination...obviously. It's not jet fuel alone

You miss my point, and please don't be offended. The "how our buildings are constructed... at least in the past" comment implies a reference to the asbestos noted in the last paragraph of the article. If this fire & heat barrier had not been knocked/blown off of the steel support structure of the towers by the violence of the event, it would have served its purpose keeping the steel from plasticizing, and the collapse might not have happened at all. It was certainly engineered to serve that purpose in a structure fire. We've got to stop villainizing everything without taking into consideration all of the facts.

Leigh Miller's picture

I understood.

It's not simply asbestos...neurotoxins, carcinogens, hormone mimics and reproductive disrupters all contribute to the situation even in so-called "green buildings". Flame retardants...PVC.

It's a long list. Add burning jet fuel and now all of it is airborne.

I don't take offence, I take facts. Asbestos is the least of our problems with old/new buildings.

EL PIC's picture

Does anyone here know how how many more are projected to have similar fate ??