Issue link: https://nnumagazine.uberflip.com/i/117854
���You would be living in a bubble if you were not afraid of the long-term rami���cations of these drilling sites. They���re dealing with these chemicals day in, day out. This is a public health concern for all of us. The drillers don���t care how they leave the land. In ���ve,10, 20 years down the road, this land will be useless.��� Fighting the Frack What can nurses do on the job and in their communities to ���ght fracking? On the job ��� Take very detailed patient health histories. Consider taking an environmental history. Learn the right questions to ask. The Center for Disease Control���s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (atsdr.cdc.gov) lists many resources. ��� Help people ���gure out ways to decrease their exposure. ��� Encourage patients to come up with pre-event data to establish a baseline, whether that���s well water testing results, bloodwork, or other biomonitoring information. ��� Work with your professional practice committee to make sure your workplace is prepared for both patients and staff who may be exposed to fracking chemicals. In your community ��� Push for your state and local health departments for health impact assessments of your community. ��� Lobby your local, county, and state agencies for bans or moratoriums on fracking. ��� Work with your union to prevent or overturn gag provisions applied to medical professionals. ��� Get involved and stay in the loop! Join many of the advoca- cy groups that exist around the country to stop fracking. For more information, please visit ProtectingOurWaters .wordpress.com and gdacoalition.org. 14 N AT I O N A L N U R S E In addition to gag rules binding healthcare providers, many antifracking activists are also extremely worried about the con���dentiality and nondisclosure rules that are automatically written into drilling lease agreements and into legal settlements that injured homeowners and workers enter into when seeking restitution for damage done to their property and their health. In the latter case, the families are often suffering from a major emergency, such as lack of clean and safe water, and desperate for a solution that the gas company can pay for. Rodriguez said he works at many of the main hospitals in northeastern Pennsylvania and is surprised he has not seen more fracking cases. He suspects that affected patients may be going to company-approved doctors. It���s hard to determine, because none of this is public information. On Dec. 6, 2011, Tammy Manning ���ushed her toilet and the water that ���lled the bowl was dark grey. When her husband went out to check the well, he found so much pressure built up inside that water was spraying out of the well. The Mannings have a hydraulic fracturing well about 4,000 feet from their house in Susquehanna County near the northeastern border of Pennsylvania, and another about 7,000 feet away. Calls to the state Department of Environmental Protection and the gas well operator led to tests that revealed their well water had extremely high levels of methane, at one point, up to 82 percent. ���You could see vapors coming off the top of the well,��� said Manning, who is 44 and cleans houses for a living. This is the ���rst house she and her husband have been able to buy, and they live there with their daughter and grandchildren. Of���cials advised them to keep a faucet running at all times to relieve the well pressure, to keep the doors and windows open, and to stop using their gas stove for fear of blowing up the place. Every time she was at work someplace in town and would hear the whistle of the nearby ���re station, she would panic and start texting her family to make sure it wasn���t their house that was on ���re. They started collecting plastic jugs for clean drinking water, which Manning���s husband would take over to his mother���s house to ���ll. They bought a 5-gallon camp shower and rigged it up so that the grandchildren would not have to bathe in the contaminated water. But the adults still took showers in the milky white well water (even though the steam made them cough), and they still washed their clothes and dishes in it. Around this time, Manning���s 6-year-old granddaughter, whose bedroom sits above the kitchen, started vomiting a few days a week upon ���rst waking up in the morning. They didn���t think it was related to the water situation; after she threw up, she seemed ���ne. But once the gas company in March hooked up their plumbing to a mobile water tank ���lled with municipal water and they no longer had any exposure to their well water, Manning noticed that the child immediately stopped vomiting. They can use the tank water for washing, but must still buy bottled water for drinking and cooking. ���I think there���s something completely wrong with the system where they can get away with something like that,��� said Manning, who has retained an attorney to represent them in their case, which is still under investigation. The Mannings, who do not have health insurance, are asking for health monitoring, coverage of future medical costs, W W W. N A T I O N A L N U R S E S U N I T E D . O R G O C TO B E R 2 0 1 2 AMY SUSSMAN | CORBIS; OPPOSITE: �� JACQUES-JEAN TIZIOU | WWW.JJTIZIOU.NET hydraulic fracking wells. One day, he had been splashed by fracking ���uid from an accidental ���blowout,��� when pressure forces the ���uid to erupt out of the well. The ���uid had melted his gloves together. After Rodriguez stabilized his patient, he tried to learn from the company what exactly was in the fracking ���uid. ���That���s when we ran up against the ���rewall,��� he said. ���They keep telling me the stuff ���s benign, just soap and emulsi���ers. And I say, ���Just send me the sheet.��� They say, ���We can���t do that. It���s not allowed.������ As of October, Rodriguez still hasn���t gotten the information. Now his patient, unable to work and uninsured, must undergo dialysis every other day to stay alive. Rodriguez, whose own family���s water comes from a well, was so upset by the gag provisions in Act 13 that he decided to ���le a federal lawsuit in July to get rid of it. He thinks the provision is unnecessary and was purposely left vague so it can be interpreted too broadly. ���I lose my First Amendment rights,��� he said. ���It doesn���t say how long I have to keep this con���dential, or if I can discuss it with other experts who may need this info.��� So far, his lawsuit has not progressed any further.