Talk:World Trade Center Health Program

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the World Trade Center Health Program article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Articles for creation C‑class

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article was accepted on 11 August 2012 by reviewer GregJackP (talk · contribs).

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 0 external links on World Trade Center Health Program. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=0dd6b4cf-6b22-4337-9ca3-d6dc11545017

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:41, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Covered conditions

The WTC Health Program has new covered conditions: WTC-exacerbated and new-onset chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), acute traumatic injury, burn, complex sprain, eye injury, fracture, head trauma and other similar acute traumatic injuries, and tendon tear. The program publishes a list of covered conditions. If someone could update the article I would appreciate it; as a NIOSH contractor I abstain from editing the page directly. James Hare (NIOSH) (talk) 13:21, 16 August 2016 (UTC) So what good does this info tell us without the statistics on the sicknesses? A user could now visit this WP article and say "I'm glad I went to Wikipedia today and found out my chronic condition induced by breathing in the rubble (or whatever injury) from 9/11 is covered by the WTCHP"? They would not know how many people are covered by the program , what the spread of illnesses are, how many people died for what illnesses. Why are they going to use this page when every source out there has actul data?[reply]

Where's the DATA?

This article appears to be a dissemination on the WTCHP. Wheres the data for over 37,000 people tracked since 9/11? I came out today to research what percentage of people who died from 9/11 related effects who were tracked as part of this program, died of cancers vs other diseases. (The media is harping specifically on "cancer" so I decided to do my own research.)

Clearly, doing that on Wikipedia is a mistake. This article serves no purpose, I might as well read the original document since it has the important DATA where as this article is... Fluff, history, with "NO CREAM FILLING".

Put something actually meaningful like data and numbers in this article, why waste someone's time explaining what health conditions this program covers, what am I, insurance shopping? This article stinks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.219.204.36 (talk) 00:01, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]