Silicosis and Lung Cancer News
Big Hopes On The Smallest Particles
By Rachael Myers Lowe
(September 14, 2004) – Every year more than a million Americans are diagnosed with cancer. Every minute, another American dies from the disease. It’s the disease, NCI Director von Eschenbach says, Americans fear most.
The National Cancer Institute says it will spend $144 million dollars over the next five years to promote research in the new field of nanotechnology “to radically change the way we diagnose, treat, and prevent cancer.”
Nanotechnology is the creation of materials that are extremely small, so small they can enter cells to kill them or mark them for destruction. At the National Cancer Institute sponsored science writers briefing recently, experts said that some day nanodevices will be useful in determining a person’s likelihood of developing cancer, detecting cancer at an earlier stage, determining more quickly if a therapy is working or not, eliminating cancer cells, or controlling them so that no one dies from cancer.
Some nanodevices are already in use against cancer. Liposomes are manmade microscopic spheres that can carry drugs to a target. They are approved for use against a number of malignancies including ovarian cancer. Other nanoparticles are used in imaging. When injected into the blood, they migrate to and accumulate at a cancer site and “light up” when viewed under x-ray or some other imaging technology.
“Most drugs right now are nano-scale objects however they aren’t designed that way, they just ended up at the scale,” Janet Woodcock, M.D., Acting Deputy Commissioner for Operations at the Food and Drug Administration said. As a result, she believes many of the rules in place now for measuring a new drug’s effectiveness will work with nanotechnology.
But new methods of classification may be required. Some nano-particles may qualify as a drug and a devise.
The FDA is poised to help move new nano products through the approval process quickly, although Woodcock acknowledged there are several critical regulatory hurdles for nanotechnology advances. For instance, people are concerned about the safety of any new technology and question whether current toxicology tests will work on nano-scale materials or whether they might pose a threat to the environment.
While the concept of nanotechnology has been around for decades, the reality of it is much more recent. It’s already been the subject of a best selling horror tales. In 2002 Michael Crighton raised the frightening specter of self-replicating nanotechnology gone awry in his science fiction novel Prey.
“We will have to vigilant,” Woodcock said. “We need to check all this in advance including the potential for adverse reactions which are unanticipated so that everyone feels comfortable as we move these technologies.”
Overseeing and coordinating the new multi-million dollar five-year effort will be the NCI Alliance for Nanotechnology, which will bring together public and private organizations, researchers, and clinicians to translate cancer-related nanotechnology into clinical practice.
Some examples of nanotechnology under development now are nanowires, cantilevers, nanoshells, and nanoparticles.
Nanowires and cantilevers show promise as cancer detection devises by picking up and amplifying the microscopic cancer waste products in the blood or other bodily fluids. Nanoshells have already shown promise in lab tests; silica cores surrounded by a metallic coating, the nanoshells can be designed to seek out and infiltrate cancer cells and then, when subjected to infrared light, heat up to kill the cancer but leave nearby healthy cells unharmed. Nanoparticles are also designed to seek out and get inside cancer cells and either deliver potent cancer drugs or mark the cancer cells for imaging.
Nanotechnology, NCI Deputy Director Anna Barker said, “has the ability to change the way we see cancer, and treat cancer and ultimately defeat cancer.”
“It’s a brave new world out there,” Richard Smalley, Ph.D., Rice University professor of nanotechnology said. “What’s new is the notion that we can actually build new nano-objects that have never existed before that increase our arsenal of capabilities.”
SOURCES:
Cancerpage coverage of NCI science writing briefing 9-13-04
NCI Alliance for Nanotechnology web site.
Neighbors blast Busque quarry
By Douglas Wright
Staff Writer
WINDHAM (April 14, 2006): Set back in the woods off Route 302 and Nash Road, there sits a large hill of tree stumps and rocky ledge that is at the heart of heated debate in Windham.
Developer and local businessman Peter Busque plans to blast the hill, and a surrounding 75 acres of elevated terrain, bit by bit to yield rocks for concrete, cement, asphalt and other construction materials. It will be a first-class operation, he says, and many years worth of work with noise buffers and safety precautions to protect nearby residents.
But with these big plans comes equal opposition from Nash Road neighbors and nearby business owners who believe a quarry next door would disrupt their lives.
Windham residents packed a public hearing on Monday night to speak out against Busque’s quarry, now under review by the Windham Planning Board.
Neighbors spoke harshly about the effect that blasting at the quarry would have on the Nash Road neighborhood.
Their concerns were many and varied: from noise the quarry’s rock crushers would make and hazardous dust in the air to potential damage to water wells and traffic congestion on Route 302.
Jennifer Potter, whose family has lived on Nash Road for a century, read a letter voicing her disapproval of the quarry project.
“The quarry will negatively impact our quality of life because of loud and disruptive noise, vibrations, fumes, odors, dust and glare,” she read.
She alluded to Windham's Comprehensive Master Plan and how the plan aims to preserve woodland and the rural character of Windham. This potential “eyesore” would not be a positive representation of Windham, she said, and cited potential health concerns associated with quarries.
Resident Tom Gleason elaborated on these health concerns and talked about his personal experience coping with silicosis, a disease contracted from construction dust and fumes.
"It's not a thing to be laughed at," Gleason said. "Small amounts of silica dust can have devastating effects on human beings."
Potter’s brother, Caleb Cummings, argued that the quarry plan shouldn’t pass until blasting tests have been conducted. His house sits across the street from the quarry and he warned that quarry blasting could ruin nearby wells.
"How can this proposal pass if no such test has been conducted?" he asked. "Who is liable for well damage? Is the town willing to run public water to Nash Road?"
Two nearby businesses argued that their livelihood would be threatened if a quarry were allowed next door.
Kennel and animal shelter owner Carl Russell, of Avante Garde Pet Care, said vibrations from the quarry would not only disturb dogs and cats at his kennel, but would also force him to close his business.
Eugenia Gionis spoke for her parent’s fears, daughter of Sandy and Peter Gionis who own the Northeastern Motel across Route 302 from the proposed quarry. She argued the motel would lose customers if quarry blasting were allowed across the street.
“It’s a very scary thing to think about losing your business because of a new business coming in,” Gionis said.
Other residents complained that the trucks hauling rock in and out of the quarry would create a dangerous situation at the Route 302 intersection with Nash Road. They also worried that their property values would fall because of the nearby quarry.
Experts give specifics
The audience of upset residents clapped as their fellow neighbors made their views known before the Planning Board.
They shouted questions and shook their heads as experts, hired by Busque, talked about the various studies done to mitigate any negative effects the quarry might pose.
To prevent the quarry noise from disturbing the neighbors, mining blasts and noise from rock crushers would be lessened by a berm (i.e. raised terrain) around the quarry.
“With a berm, you can see how effectively we can knock the sound down with a barrier," said noise specialist Steve Ambrose.
The quarry access road will be paved, water wells monitored on site and the quarry site will be wet down with water to prevent hazardous dust from blowing outside the quarry bounds.
“If (hazardous dust) leaves the property, it’s in violation of state law,” said air quality expert Ted Johnston.
Sean McGoldrick, whose company will be performing the quarry blasts, told residents that pre-blast tests will be conducted before they began on the quarry hill and assured the residents he and his blasting company were a professional operation.
“In the 18 years we’ve been in business, we have never ruined a well,” McGoldrick said.
From outside the quarry, the blasts would sound like the rumble of a dump truck going by and last less than a second, he said.
What is a quarry?
Prior to the hearing, Busque led residents on a walking tour of the quarry acreage and clear-cut hill where he plans to begin the quarry.
An access road from Nash Road will curve around the hill where the quarrying will begin, he says. Elevated terrain will be left surrounding the quarry grounds as a buffer to shield noise from the neighborhood and block the view from the road.
“Everybody is assuming that it’s going to be big hole in the ground,” Busque said. “Really, we’re just taking down a hill.”
If demand keeps at its current level, Busque anticipates about 35 truck hauls a day coming and going from the quarry. Hours of operation would be from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. with quarry blasts used periodically to loosen rocks.
Two on-site rock crushers will break down the extracted stone and piles of stone will surround these crushers to deaden their noise. Truck fuel will be stored on site along with a possible container to measure stone used for cement, later mixed by trucks outside the quarry.
'Farming rocks'
Behind the quarry debate looms the issue of whether quarrying should be allowed in a land deemed “farm zone."
Windham's land-use ordinance states that "mineral extraction" is permitted on farm zone land as long as it abides by state and federal regulation.
The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has already granted approval to the quarry.
But Margaret Pinchbeck, another Nash Road neighbor upset by the quarry proposal, questions whether “farming rocks” should be allowed in a farm zone. She says the DEP approval is just “paperwork” since the department no longer visits quarry sites for inspection.
“We want the town to review their ordinances because they haven’t been changed since the last time the DEP change their rules,” Pinchbeck said.
After hearing the neighbors' complaints, Planning Board members authorized a "third party review" of all studies already conducted by Busque’s experts to get a second opinion on the matter.
When asked after the meeting whether information at the public hearing allayed their worries, Nash Road residents Earl and Elizabeth Cummings said definitely no.
“I think the question is who would want a quarry in their backyard?” Earl Cummings said. “We just built our house on Nash Road for peace and quiet and now there won’t be any peace and quiet.”
The quarry project still needs Planning Board and Town Council approval. And while Busque and the neighbors wait for results of the third party review, Busque is willing to talk with any residents about their concerns.
“I want to make sure we meet the concerns of the neighbors,” Busque said. “I always try to talk to them, but they won’t talk to me. I’ll do anything. They’ve just got to call.”
Back to News Menu
|
