Depleted uranium is WMD

[struggle4progress]

Leuren Moret

My grandfather, U.S. Army Col. Edwin Joseph McAllister, was born in Battle Creek in 1895. He does not know that his first grandchild is an international expert on depleted uranium. I have worked in two U.S. nuclear weapons laboratories, and in 1991 I became a whistleblower at the Livermore lab. Depleted uranium is very, very, very nasty stuff: <snip>

Since 1991, the U.S. has released the radioactive atomicity equivalent of at least 400,000 Nagasaki bombs into the global atmosphere. That is 10 times the amount released during atmospheric testing which was the equivalent of 40,000 Hiroshima bombs. The U.S. has permanently contaminated the global atmosphere with radioactive pollution having a half-life of 2.5 billion years. <snip>

DU on the battlefield has three effects on living systems: it is a heavy metal "chemical" poison, a "radioactive" poison and has a "particulate" effect due to the very tiny size of the particles that are 0.1 microns and smaller.

The blueprint for DU weaponry is a 1943 Manhattan Project memo to Gen. L. Groves that recommended development of radioactive materials as poison gas weapons - dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets. <snip>

http://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050809/OPINION02/508090332/1014/OPINION

[wtmusic]

1. DUs toxicity has no strategic value

it's used because it's heavy. That's all. That statement calls this source into question.

[salib]

3. Huh?

What "statement calls this source into question"?

[wtmusic]

16. This one

"The blueprint for DU weaponry is a 1943 Manhattan Project memo to Gen. L. Groves that recommended development of radioactive materials as poison gas weapons - dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets."

That is patently absurd. There are far more poisonous items to throw at the enemy than DU, and in fact if that was the goal the military would use U-235 instead of U-238.

DU is used for armor-piercing shells because it has more mass per unit volume than any other naturally-occurring substance.

[salib]

28. I think you are over-reacting, though

That statement from the article, while sensational, has many interpretations. I think your reaction is equally sensational. To simply dismiss the entire article based upon a claim of "blueprint", or perhaps "conceptual ancestry" (or any other similar interpretation), for DU projectiles with "dirty" weapons, is also very sensational.

[struggle4progress]

6. It may depend on what you consider "strategic value." Modern ..

.. landmines are sometimes designed and marketed for maximum infliction of pain, on the theory that the enemy soldier -- who hears his compatriot shrieking with pain from the not-immediately-fatal destruction of extremities -- is demoralized and disheartened by such sounds of human anguish.

Similarly, the morbidity associated with inhalation of uranium dusts (or ingestion by the swallowing of aspirated dusts trapped in nasal or pharyngeal mucus) may be appealing to some strategists.

While I'd expect careful military speakers to be unlikely to laud in public the toxicity of depleted uranium as a military advantage, that doesn't mean that nobody behind the scenes thinks about such effects in considering whether to use such weapons.

[ovidsen]

7. Yup.

Depleted uranium makes great armor. Unfortunately, it's really toxic. Very unfortunately, that toxicity harms Americans, allies and "enemies" equally. Strictly speaking, it ain't a WMD, but it is a killer. And it's uncontrollable lethal properties give it... no strategic value.

A case where the cure may be worse than the disease.

[Gato Moteado]

2. jeeeeeezis....that stuff is almost as nasty as freepers' underwear!

nt

[firefox]

4. Some say it violates the Geneva Conventions

Only the UK and US have these weapons. Considering the DU will be radioactive for three and a half billion years, I would agree. It is worthy of a thread asking "Is depleted uranium a war crime?" I have to think it is and the deliberation would be very short once the criteria are established.

It could be that future generations of Americans will be paying reparations once US political dominance ends.

[acmejack]

9. A lot of things violate the Geneva Conventions!

For example, shotguns are illegal under it. I carried a shotgun in the service. White Phosphorous, a really nasty substance. We use it for "smoke", google willie peter.

I do agree about the reparations, on top of the economic situation we're in should make for some very strange times indeed...

[JohnyCanuck]

5. Presentation on Depleted Uranium by Thomas Fasy MD PhD

Posted to democraticunderground.com by reprehensor

By the early 1900s, uranium was well recognized to be a kidney toxin. By the mid-1940s, uranium was known to be a neurotoxin. By the early 1970s, uranium was recognized to be a carcinogen based on mortality studies of uranium workers and on experiments with dogs and monkeys. The first evidence that uranyl ions bind to DNA was reported in 1949 and by the early 1990s, uranium was shown to be a mutagen. Also, in the early 1990s, uranium was shown to be a teratogen, that is, an inducer of birth defects. The toxic effects of uranium on the kidney and on the nervous system typically occur within days of exposure and radiation probably plays little or no role in mediating these effects. In contrast, the carcinogenic effects of uranium have a delayed onset. The teratogenic effects of uranium might be due to exposure of one parent prior to conception as well as to exposure of the mother to uranium early in pregnancy.

Now let us briefly consider the routes of exposure to uranium. In the context of the dust particles derived from depleted uranium weapons, this means exposure to uranium oxides. By far the most dangerous route of exposure to uranium oxides is the inhalational or respiratory route. Absorption of uranium oxides through the gastrointestinal tract, the skin and the conjunctivae is possible but quite limited.

More at:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4124449

Dr Asaf Durakovic, formerly a Nuclear Medicine specialist at the Veterans Affairs medical facility in Wilmington, Delaware and a Professor of Nuclear Medicince at Georgetown University has this to say:

......According to Dr. Durakovic there are two main reasons for the Pentagon's DU-paranoia - and they both involve money: compensation for those suffering from DU-contamination, and the exorbitant costs of battle theatre clean up. But money seems a petty concern when we are talking about changes to the human gene pool. "Deformities among children born to Gulf War vets are well-documented as is the rising incidence of birth malformations in Iraq," Dr Durakovic points out. "What will happen in future generations? I have seen the effects of radiation worldwide. The consequences of DU are immeasurable."

Dr Durakovic believes DU weapons will one day be strictly outlawed. "There is no alternative," he says. "The threat to the human race is too great. If we continue with the irresponsible contamination of the biosphere, and denial of the fact that human life is endangered by the deadly isotope uranium, then we are doing disservice to ourselves, disservice to the truth, disservice to god and to all the generations who follow."

http://www.nuclear-free.com/english/durakovic.htm

Dr. Durakovic got shit canned by the VA after speaking out about the hazards of DU ammo, but he continues his research work through the Uranium Medical Research Centre. See www.umrc.net

[NNadir]

8. "Atomicity equivalent?"

Are the radiation stupid now inventing new words.

For the record the so called depleted uranium has been here for the entire existence of the earth.

There are more than 4 billion tons of Uranium in the oceans alone. I guess the radiation stupid should avoid swimming.

If you dare (and if you're not scientifically illiterate and therefore incapable of doing the math), you can calculate it for yourself:

Concentration of uranium in seawater:

http://www-odp.tamu.edu/publications/169_SR/chap_04/c4_4.htm

Volume of seawater:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/SyedQadri.shtml


Density of Seawater:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/EdwardLaValley.shtml

No wonder our nation is lead by the likes of George W. "intelligent design" Bush. We are a nation of complete idiots.

[acmejack]

11. Is not DU actually less radioactive than Uranium ore?

I am by no means an expert but I thought DU was the dregs remaining after the enrichment process (those pesky centrifuges again).

[struggle4progress]

13. I don't think so. The radioactivity of radium ores may be due ..

.. mainly to radium.

Ignoring U-234, the ratios of U-235 to U-238 are small (a fraction of a percent) before and after enrichment, and the halflives aren't really different enough to produce much difference between the unenriched and the the depleted metal.

[JohnyCanuck]

12. You don't generally breath seawater into your lungs.

It appears that what the experts who are raising the alarm on DU munitions are saying is that the danger from the DU is that it explodes into very minute fragments which are then inhaled and become trapped inside the soft tissues of the body where through irradiation or heavy metal toxic affect they remain to cause damage to DNA and the cells.

Thomas Fasy MD PhD:

Now let us briefly consider the routes of exposure to uranium. In the context of the dust particles derived from depleted uranium weapons, this means exposure to uranium oxides. By far the most dangerous route of exposure to uranium oxides is the inhalational or respiratory route. Absorption of uranium oxides through the gastrointestinal tract, the skin and the conjunctivae is possible but quite limited.

Following impact with hard targets, uranium metal undergoes combustion releasing large quantities of very small uranium oxide dust particles into the environment.

These dust particles derived from depleted uranium weapons are drastically different from the natural uranium that is normally present in rocks and soil.

Soil particles contain uranium at very low concentrations, typically less than 5 parts per million; the vast majority of these soil particles, however, are too large to be inhaled deep into the lungs. In contrast, the dust particles derived from depleted uranium weapons contain very high concentrations of uranium, typically more than 500.000 parts per million; moreover, most of the D.U. dust particles are sufficiently small to be inhaled deep into the lungs. Thus, compared to the uranium naturally present in the environment, D.U. dust contains uranium in a form that is vastly more bio-available and more readily internalized.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4124449

Dr. Chris Busby:

"I'm horrified. The people out there - the Iraqis, the media and the troops - risk the most appalling ill health. And the radiation from depleted uranium can travel literally anywhere. It's going to destroy the lives of thousands of children, all over the world. We all know how far radiation can travel. Radiation from Chernobyl reached Wales and in Britain you sometimes get red dust from the Sahara on your car."

The speaker is not some alarmist doomsayer. He is Dr. Chris Busby, the British radiation expert, Fellow of the University of Liverpool in the Faculty of Medicine and UK representative on the European Committee on Radiation Risk, talking about the best-kept secret of this war: the fact that by illegally using hundreds of tons of depleted uranium (DU) against Iraq, Britain and America have gravely endangered not only the Iraqis but the whole world.

For these weapons have released deadly, carcinogenic and mutagenic, radioactive particles in such abundance that-whipped up by sandstorms and carried on trade winds - there is no corner of the globe they cannot penetrate-including Britain. For the wind has no boundaries and time is on their side: the radioactivity persists for over 4,500,000,000 years and can cause cancer, leukemia, brain damage, kidney failure, and extreme birth defects - killing millions of every age for centuries to come. A crime against humanity which may, in the eyes of historians, rank with the worst atrocities of all time.

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20050429121615724

Dr. Asaf Durakovic (fomerly a Nuclear Medicine Specialist at the Department of Veterans Affairs):

Dr. Durakovic explains that when depleted uranium is blown up at high temperatures, it changes to tiny particles. If inhaled, the uranium particles can get into the bloodstream and can be lodged in the bone, lymph nodes, lungs or kidneys causing damage by emitting low-level radiation in the body over a long period of time. The price can be cancer, necrosis and genetic deformity. Inexplicable, then, the Pentagon's refusal to comply with a 1993 congressional mandate to study the health effects of inhaled and ingested depleted uranium dust.

http://www.nuclear-free.com/english/durakovic.htm

From the web site of the Uranium Medical Research Centre:

The danger posed by DU in weapons:

1. When DU weapons hit a target, a fine aerosol of uranium oxides is formed. The majority of particles (46 - 70%) are less than 10 microns.

2. The aerosol-like particles (dust) are easily inhaled into the lungs.

3. These fine particles can be spread by the wind and are readily re-suspended by modest breezes or vehicle and personnel movements. There is no existing study measuring the distance traveled by such particles. However, there is a documented instance were particles were physically captured 42 km from a test site. (Dietz 1999).

4. This only proves migration beyond the specific site but does not preclude the possibility that particles can travel a great many times more kilometers. Fluid dynamic studies report that particles fewer than 5 microns can remain almost permanently suspended in the atmosphere.

5. While some of the DU is soluble, the majority (in the form of other oxides) is insoluble and remains in the body for years. Once in the body, DU slowly spreads from the lungs, mainly into the lymph nodes and bone. Excretion from the body is very slow.

6. The uncontrolled use and spread of uranium goes against the scientifically established conventions for handling radioactive substances and contravenes international laws. See the case made by Karen Parker at the UN that DU weaponry is illegal under existing human rights and humanitarian (armed conflict) law

7. It is estimated that 300 - 800 metric tons of DU were deposited in the battlefield in Iraq and Kuwait in 1991. Dr. Doug Rokke (DU expert and former US army physicist) estimated that 120 to 480 million grams of DU would be aerosolized if 40% of the DU were burnt up.

8. These airborne and respirable sized particles will be radioactive for billions of years into the future.

http://www.umrc.net/uranium_and_weapons.aspx

[ScrappyDem]

21. Some DU study info

http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/

----SNIP----
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) concluded, "Natural uranium is radioactive but poses little radioactive danger because it gives off very small amounts of radiation."<52> Studies have associated lung cancer reported in uranium miners with exposure to other substances, e.g., radon decay products and tobacco smoke.<53> More specifically, ATSDR found that no human cancers have ever been associated with natural or depleted uranium exposure.<54> To illustrate this point more clearly, ATSDR reported, "Éthe mass equivalents for natural and depleted uranium for potential radiological effects are 3,600 and 76,500 times higher, respectively, than the occupational exposure limits (short-term exposure) recommended by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
----SNIP----

The low levels of radiation DU emits and the results of scientific studies indicate DU does not cause bone cancer. In fact, scientists have never observed bone cancer in populations exposed to any form of uranium, including enriched uranium, which is much more radioactive than DU.<56> As to other possible health effects, the ATSDR concluded it would not expect any radiological health hazard from exposure to inhaled or ingested natural or depleted uranium because their radioactivity is low.<57>

----SNIP----
The Army Environmental Policy Institute (AEPI) reported that a spent DU penetrator could deliver a skin dose of about 0.2 rem per hour from beta and gamma radiation.<58> DU's alpha radiation does not penetrate the dead layer of the skin. AEPI also reported a dose rate of 0.00124 rem per hour between two rows of M829 A2 120mm munitions in storage.<59> Those exposure scenarios involved a few pounds of DU in the spent penetrator up to hundreds to thousands of pounds of DU in stored rounds. For comparison, one pound of cobalt-60 (60Co) -- a radioactive material used in cancer treatment sources -- delivers a radiation dose of more than 800,000 rem per hour to someone standing 3 feet away. Even one minute's exposure (13,333 rem) to that source means certain death because the dose is almost 17 times the lethal whole body dose.<60>
----SNIP----

I am sure that some of you will refuse to read, absorb or understand this because it is a Military study, but of the original work not all of it is military, and much of it is civilian research.

[newyawker99]

23. Hi ScrappyDem!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[struggle4progress]

29. The material you quote appears to discuss only external exposures.

The source does also discuss internal exposure through battlefield inhalation and ingestion but limits the amount ingested to something like 0.082 mg.

This figure may be unrealistic: since it is relatively easy to find estimates of the order of 10 mg/year for post-conflict civilians in regions where DU munitions have been deployed, it is perhaps unlikely that persons in combat -- when the munitions are mostly likely to appear as fine particulate matter in smoke or dust -- will inhale less than 1% of the amount ingested by civilians in later years.

It is also noteworthy that your source apparently emphasizes kidney doses, while inhalation of potentially insoluble particles and subsequent permanent deposition in lung tissue may be a major route of exposure. Under this scenario, localized foci surrounding oxide grains could be exposed to levels rather higher than background levels.

[SeaRust]

14. glad someone noticed that wordsmithing

"Atomicity equivalent" Never quite seen that before.

As an ex-Mil, I can state without question that he first post here gives the reason for the use of Depleted Uranium in projectile weapons. It's Heavy---It's Really heavy ---It's actually te heaviest (most dense) material that can be practically used.

Depleted Uranium is not a chemical or radiological weapon, and the previously stated report does not really apply to depleted Uranium. There is a serious boogieman factor at work with the word uranium and that seems to be the overriding factor in most of the fears of it. The posts pointing out that upon impact it will form spall, and a cloud of heavy particulates are correct, yet the breathing of material from the impact of a DU projectile and a copper or titanium covered lead projectile are about the same. You are dead.

On the field and in training I personally would believe that the quantities of Lead would have a much greater impact on the environment than DU weaponry.

Just my $.02 to take or leave.

[wtmusic]

18. Exactly

Lead poisoning is a far more serious problem

welcome to DU!

:bounce: :toast: :bounce:

[JohnyCanuck]

19. Contrary to your position

there are other recognized medical/radiation experts who are expressing grave concerns that the damaging side effects of Depleted Uranium munitions are worse than non-DU munitions and they further charge that these side effects are not being acknowledged by the military authorities. Could you let us know your scientific/medical credentials and whether or not you are employed by the military or in the defense or nuclear industry, just as an aid to assist a non scientist like myself in asessing your credibility vs. the credibility of the depleted uranium detractors.

Thanks

"I'm horrified. The people out there - the Iraqis, the media and the troops - risk the most appalling ill health. And the radiation from depleted uranium can travel literally anywhere. It's going to destroy the lives of thousands of children, all over the world. We all know how far radiation can travel. Radiation from Chernobyl reached Wales and in Britain you sometimes get red dust from the Sahara on your car."

The speaker is not some alarmist doomsayer. He is Dr. Chris Busby, the British radiation expert, Fellow of the University of Liverpool in the Faculty of Medicine and UK representative on the European Committee on Radiation Risk, talking about the best-kept secret of this war: the fact that by illegally using hundreds of tons of depleted uranium (DU) against Iraq, Britain and America have gravely endangered not only the Iraqis but the whole world.

<snip>

On hearing that DU had been used in the Gulf in 1991, the UK Atomic Energy Authority sent the Ministry of Defense a special report on the potential damage to health and the environment. It said that it could cause half a million additional cancer deaths in Iraq over 10 years. In that war the authorities only admitted to using 320 tons of DU-although the Dutch charity LAKA estimates the true figure is closer to 800 tons. Many times that may have been spread across Iraq by this year's war. The devastating damage all this DU will do to the health and fertility of the people of Iraq now, and for generations to come, is beyond imagining.

<snip>

Despite all that evidence of the harm done by DU, governments on both sides of the Atlantic have repeatedly claimed that as it emits only 'low level' radiation DU is harmless. Award-winning scientist, Dr. Rosalie Bertell who has led UN medical commissions, has studied 'low-level' radiation for 30 years. 2 She has found that uranium oxide particles have more than enough power to harm cells, and describes their pulses of radiation as hitting surrounding cells 'like flashes of lightning' again and again in a single second.2 Like many scientists worldwide who have studied this type of radiation, she has found that such 'lightning strikes' can damage DNA and cause cell mutations which lead to cancer.

Moreover, these particles can be taken up by body fluids and travel through the body, damaging more than one organ. To compound all that, Dr. Bertell has found that this particular type of radiation can cause the body's communication systems to break down, leading to malfunctions in many vital organs of the body and to many medical problems. A striking fact, since many veterans of the first Gulf war suffer from innumerable, seemingly unrelated, ailments.

In addition, recent research by Eric Wright, Professor of Experimental Haematology at Dundee University, and others, have shown two ways in which such radiation can do far more damage than has been thought. The first is that a cell which seems unharmed by radiation can produce cells with diverse mutations several cell generations later. (And mutations are at the root of cancer and birth defects.) This 'radiation-induced genomic instability' is compounded by 'the bystander effect' by which cells mutate in unison with others which have been damaged by radiation-rather as birds swoop and turn in unison. Put together, these two mechanisms can greatly increase the damage done by a single source of radiation, such as a DU particle. Moreover, it is now clear that there are marked genetic differences in the way individuals respond to radiation-with some being far more likely to develop cancer than others. So the fact that some veterans of the first Gulf war seem relatively unharmed by their exposure to DU in no way proves that DU did not damage others.

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20050429121615724

Dr Durakovic believes DU weapons will one day be strictly outlawed. "There is no alternative," he says. "The threat to the human race is too great. If we continue with the irresponsible contamination of the biosphere, and denial of the fact that human life is endangered by the deadly isotope uranium, then we are doing disservice to ourselves, disservice to the truth, disservice to god and to all the generations who follow."

http://www.nuclear-free.com/english/durakovic.htm

[wtmusic]

20. Lead bullets are worse than DU

"There are several reports in the news about the implied toxicity of depleted uranium used for projectiles and shielding material in modern warfare. It has been suggested to be a potent carcinogen and leukemia inducer."

"The toxicity of uranium has been under study for at least 50 years including life span studies in small animals. Depleted uranium is only very weakly radioactive, and virtually all of the observed or expected effects are from nephrotoxicity associated with deposition in the kidney tubules and glomeruli damage at high doses. The radiation doses from depleted uranium (specific activity only 15 Bq/mg)(U-238 has a 4.5 billion year half life) are very small compared to potential toxic effects from uranium ions in the body (primarily damage to kidney tubules). The main route of potentially hazardous exposure is inhalation since gastrointestinal uptake is very small (<1/10,000)."

<>

As to its "heavy metal" toxicity, the closest analogy is lead. However, metallic lead has considerably higher toxicity than metallic uranium. Compounds of lead are much more hazardous than compounds of uranium since uranium tends to form relatively insoluble compounds which are not readily absorbed into the body. Also, lead within the body affects the nervous system and several biochemical processes, while the uranyl ion does not readily interfere with any major biochemical process except for depositing in the tubules of kidney where damage occurs if excess deposition occurs. Glomeruli damage has been reported at high doses as well. The kidney damage is dosage dependent and somewhat reversible. Lead bullets are probably more dangerous than uranium bullets.

http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jdw/dutoxic010112_1_n.shtml

[JohnyCanuck]

24. We've been using lead in bullets and cannon balls

since the introduction of gunpowder sometime in the 14th century. Yet it's only after the introduction of Depleted Uranium in the munitions that we now find such widespread reports of veterans and inhabitants of war zones suffering and dying from the debilitating Gulf War Syndrome, leukemias and other cancers and giving birth to rising numbers of deformed babies.

IMHO, Anyone who discounts the opinion of the medical doctors, health care professionals and radiation experts warning about the adverse health effects of DU and ventures into a war zone believing that, should they survive the direct military action itself, they have more to fear from lead dust than the depleted uranium dust is nuts.

Over 200,000 US troops who returned from the 1991 war are now invalided out with ailments officially attributed to service in Iraq-that's 1 in 3. In contrast, the British government's failure to fully assess the health of returning troops, or to monitor their health, means no one even knows how many have died or become gravely ill since their return. However, Gulf veterans' associations say that, of 40,000 or so fighting fit men and women who saw active service, at least 572 have died prematurely since coming home and 5000 may be ill. An alarming number are thought to have taken their own lives, unable to bear the torment of the innumerable ailments which have combined to take away their career, their sexuality, their ability to have normal children, and even their ability to breathe or walk normally. As one veteran puts it, they are 'on DU death row, waiting to die.'

Whatever other factors there may be, some of their illnesses are strikingly similar to those of Iraqis exposed to DU dust. For example, soldiers have also fathered children without eyes. And, in a group of eight servicemen whose babies lack eyes seven are known to have been directly exposed to DU dust.

They too have fathered children with stunted arms, and rare abnormalities classically associated with radiation damage. They too seem prone to cancer and leukemia. Tellingly, so are EU soldiers who served as peacekeepers in the Balkans, where DU was also used. Indeed their leukemia rate has been so high that several EU governments have protested at the use of DU.

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20050429121615724

[wtmusic]

26. I'm nuts

worth considering is the idea that many health problems arising from lead likely go unreported. Not that DU isn't bad shit--but there is a serious psychological component at work here.

[struggle4progress]

15. Are you claiming that ingesting seawater, with its tiny uranium ..

.. concentration, poses a greater toxic hazard than inhaling or otherwise ingesting uranium aerosols associated with the high impact disintegration of uranium shells used in combat?

Your calculations have a hallucinatory quality. I'd expect it to be easy to ingest, say, at least half a milligram of uranium shell dust in unfavorable combat situations, by aspiration, with the majority of the material trapped in nasal or pharyngeal secretions and later swallowed. Using the 3.3 ppb figure for seawater U concentration, one should be required to swallow something like 1500 kilograms of seawater to obtain the same effect. This is more than 10 times body weight for most people, and electrolytic disruptions effects would have mortal effects well before anyone swallowed that much seawater.

[NNadir]

25. And are you claiming that the "more than Hiroshima" uranium is aerosols?

Because it's aerosol for about 20 minutes, until the dust settles. Or is the implication that every shell magically focuses itself on a fetus to mutate, that it crawls across the desert floor until it finds someone to kill? The implication of the original post starting this thread is that this uranium is the equivalent of some absurd number of Hiroshimas. Don't you think humanity would have noticed more dead people if this were the case? Hiroshima killed tens of thousands of people in a few minutes after all. Or is it just more stupid hyperbole?

This of course is complete misleading nonsense of the type that one hears from people who know zero physics, zero chemistry and zero science in general.

In the past, speaking to radiation paranoids/ignoramuses on the environmental health forum I referenced a recent paper in Chemical Reviews that establishes that all this depleted uranium nonsense is well, nonsense.

It serves the interest of anti-environmental anti-nuclear radiation paranoids to raise fears about uranium, which is a widely distributed naturally occurring element with the same crustal abundance as tin. This is because they have their heads of their asses and are terrified that the obvious (and only workable) solution to global climate change, the broad and rapid expansion of nuclear energy will be adopted, as it must be if we are to survive as a species.

Uranium occurs widely in the soils of New Jersey where I live. People generally don't fall over here and die when the fields are being plowed on a windy day and dust blows around here.

There are enough atrocities in the war in Iraq to demand the end of it without this dopey "thousands of Hiroshimas" hyperbole. Everybody on the planet knows that these atrocities are occurring because of fossil fuels, not nuclear issues. To the extent that nuclear issues were involved, it came from Dick Cheney and Colin Powell who used (the dumb) fear of uranium to justify criminality. When people use this depleted uranium stupidity to make a specious (and unnecessary) atrocity claim about this subject with respect this terrible war, they are just making the serious and important issue of opposition look ridiculous.

[struggle4progress]

30. The estimates appear to originate with Katsuma Yagasaki, who

appears to be a member of the physics faculty at Ryukyus University, Okinawa, as indicated by the following citation:

M3-57 THERMOPOWER OF Fe2P IN MAGNETIC FIELDS UP TO 15T
T. Nakama, T. Kohama, T. Shimoji, H. Niki, A. T. Burkov and K. Yagasaki, College of Science, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa 903-01, Japan View Abstract <snip> http://www.physics.monash.edu.au/~icm97/titles/21titweb.htm

C3-5 The effect of MAGNETIC FIELD AND Al-CONTENT on resistivity AND thermopower of Y(AlxCo1-x)2 alloys.
A.T.Burkov, T.Nakama, T.Kohama, T.Shimoji, K.Shintani, R.Shimabukuro, K.Yagasaki, Department of Physics, College of Science, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa 903-01, JAPAN View Abstract
http://www.physics.monash.edu.au/~icm97/titles/18titweb.htm

Anomalous magnetotransport in (Y1–xGdx)Co2 alloys: Interplay of disorder and itinerant metamagnetism
A. T. Burkov and A. Yu. Zyuzin
A. F. Ioffe Physico-Technical Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint-Petersburg 194021, RussiaT. Nakama and K. Yagasaki
Physics Department, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa 903-0213, Japan
http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=PRBMDO000069000014144409000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes


Here's a summary of some of what he has been saying:

Judgement In The People Vs George Walker Bush
Tuesday, 16 March 2004, 10:21 am

Press Release: International Criminal Tribunal For Afghanistan
NOTE: A report on this judgement was published in the Japan Times

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR AFGHANISTAN AT TOKYO

THE PEOPLE Versus
GEORGE WALKER BUSH President of the United States of America

<snip> The third witness before the Tribunal on the issue of the use of DU weapons as a War Crime , Professor Katsuma Yagasaki , Prosecution documents Ex. E 158 and 159 presented oral and documentary evidence clarifying that the term "depleted "seems to convey the incorrect impression that DU is uranium that does not contain radioactivity any more , which is not the case ; as DU ammunition causes radioactive contamination and is no less serious than nuclear weapons .Even one DU particle has adequate capacity to cause cancer and once absorbed into the body can transform genes , cells and affect all the organs and lymph nodes . Professor Yakasaki deposed that the total amount of 235U dispersed in Hiroshima was 61.2 kilograms ; since it was estimated that about 500-600 tons of DU weapons were used in Afghanistan ,DU pollution in Afghanistan is 8,170 tons more than in Hiroshima ; that the adverse effects of radioactive contamination in Afghanistan and the internal radiation risk is beyond our imagination, as the alpha ray from the DU damages the DNA irreversibly and that the entire concept of low radiation risk was misleading with respect to internal exposure, as DU is absorbed by inhalation and internal contamination.

Professor Yagasaki in the paper on record before this Tribunal presented at the ‘World Uranium Conference Weapons Conference’ in October 2003 ; calculated that 800 tons of DU is the atomicity equivalent to 83,000 Nagasaki bombs. The amount of DU used in Iraq is equivalent to 250,000 Nagasaki bombs. Professor Yagasaki affirmed that DU shells are atrocious radioactive weapons which should not be used ; and that DU has a long life of 4.5 billion years remaining in the soil , air ,water in all affected zones .

The Tribunal on an issue vital for this trial had to deal with the ambiguity of the WHO report ; this report Prosecution document Ex. E-123 was placed before Professor Yagasaki by the Tribunal, to elicit his scientific response to the document , since it was relied on by amicus curiae to defend the use of this weapons system by the Defendant ;stating that the WHO report did not refer to such horrific consequences ;the WHO report was found to be vague and evasive, partly admitting , partly in denial , not in conformity with the overwhelming and authoritative evidence from 1943 , deposed to by the witnesses; moreover the WHO report was not signed ; no scientist or panel of scientists had authenticated this report. <snip>

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0403/S00215.htm

[NNadir]

31. From his publication list he is clearly an expert of uranium biochemistry

at least in the mind of small minded scientifically illiterate twits who think that any scientific publication makes one an expert on uranium.

It may have escaped the preternaturally stupid, who frequently use the logical fallacy of Appeal to Misleading Authority mostly because they don't understand doodly squat about science. I'm sorry but the guy's papers don't even touch on the subject of uranium.

Professor Yagasaki is clearly a complete idiot on the subject of uranium.

Anyone who claims that DU is the equivalent of 83,000 Nagasaki's is clearly an idiot, and anyone who repeats such an assertion is also clearly an idiot.

Oh, and by the way, speaking of idiots, the Nagasaki bomb was a plutonium weapon. It didn't contain uranium at all. So much for this idiot's understanding of the matter.

Oh, and the Nakasaki bomb killed about 100,000 people. I know that radiation paranoid idiots can't do math, but 83,000 * 100,000 = is 8,300,000,000 much larger than earth's current population.

What an idiot.

[struggle4progress]

33. I clearly identified the papers cited as evidence of affiliation. eom

[struggle4progress]

36. Shall we hold you to this same standard and credit nothing you say ..

.. outside of any realm of expertise you might (perhaps) be able to exhibit from your publication record?

[NNadir]

38. I have no interest in your response to me.

My only interest in you is as a foil. I don't care what you think; I find you dull and uninteresting. You may at any time ignore me, in which case I will note that the level of discourse will be rising.

I make my level of expertise clear by what I say, not by posting irrevelent lists of publicatons written by people on subjects that have no import on the subject at hand.

Personnally I am uninterested in anyone who can refer to the current war as 10's upon 10's upon tens of Nagasakis or Hiroshimas.

I think I've made it clear to all but illiterates that I regard such people to be idiots.

Now if you would like to prove that I am wrong, then calculate the total radioactivity (in units of curies or units of energy) released in say, the Hiroshima bomb and compare them to the activity associated with DU shells. Consider the volume of exposure, and demonstrate the possible routes of exposure, cumulative effects and the size of the same that will definitely exposed to the effects claimed and total energy released, and type of energy.

Now personally, I expect that most radiation anti-envirnomental antinuclear paranoids don't know how to do such calculations, because they don't know any science. So without googling up some obscure physicist with a strange and illiterate perception of DU, show us not what he claims, but what you can calculate. In other words don't expect us to belive the dunderhead doctor you google out of cyber space. Show us that you understand it so clearly you can explain itself.

Come on big boy, show us how you calculate.

[struggle4progress]

39. Equally well may we consider how you calculate: say, a multiplication ..

to obtain some estimate of the total amount of uranium in the ocean or of the K-40 in the earth, which you promptly use as a surrogate for CEDE, arguing that, since such large quantities do not produce immediate death, therefore there is nothing but paranoia behind any and all concerns about radiological exposures.

Caught promulgating such nonsense in the thread above with respect to the oceans, you immediately reproduce the argument with respect to uranium in New Jersey soils.

[struggle4progress]

40. And again I say: I identified the papers as evidence of affiliation. eom

[struggle4progress]

41. Your style typically shows rhetorical rather that scientific objectives.

Consider, for example, an assertion of the form our Japanese physicist seems to be making -- that the radiological hazard from DU far exceeds that of the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

There are interpretations of this statement that make it seem unlikely and interpretations that would suggest a need for more careful investigation.

Nothing the physicist says, however, suggests that he is comparing the possible hazard of the DU to the immediate blast effects in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This, of course, does not discourage you from misrepresenting his assertion in this manner: you are bright enough to know he is unlikely to have meant anything of the sort, but you are apparently not sufficiently dedicated to scientific inquiry to argue such a matter in detail, if you can take rhetorical cheap-shots instead.

A more plausible interpretation might be along these lines: the long-term residual radiation effects associated with DU use exceed the long-term residual radiation effects associated with the bomb. Such an interpretation would be consistent with two of my other posts in this thread, regarding experiences in Iraq and Bosnia/Kosovo.

[wtmusic]

17. "Atomicity"

sounds real scientific-like :silly:

[struggle4progress]

32. Apparently quoted from words of a non-native speaker of English. eom

[struggle4progress]

34. Here's an oncologist from Basra on suspected effects of Gulf War DU

"It's been just terrible ever since the Gulf War. Basra and elsewhere in southern Iraq have seen enormous increases in respiratory problems, stomach and intestine problems, all sorts of serious disorders. Cancer patients increase every year. I suspect the same thing happened among the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Speaking was Dr. Jawad Al-Ali (55), director of the Oncology Center, who had just returned to his office after finishing his rounds in the oncology ward. Having lived for many years in Great Britain, he returned to Basra, his hometown, in 1984 and began practicing and teaching at this hospital.

"In 1988, only thirty-four cancer patients died in hospitals in Basra. Ten years later in 1998, that number was 428. Last year, we reached 500. When I think of the future..." <snip>

http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/iraq5_e/000620.html

[struggle4progress]

35. A UK representative to the European Committee on Radiation Risk ..

Dr. Chris Busby produced this little epidemiological investigation suggesting DU effects on Italian Military Personnel Involved in Operations in Bosnia and in Kosovo:

The question of whether there has been an increase in leukemia/lymphoma or other cancers in occupants of or peacekeepers deployed in the Balkans has been a source of argument of a similar order and type as the question of increases in leukemia/lymphoma and birth defects in Iraq. In the case of the Balkans, there is very little hard evidence (e.g cancer registry data) which is available for independent scrutiny, and indeed some of the problems associated with the kinds of population movements that follow a major conflict would make such analyses very difficult. There has been a leak of a table of cancer incidence in Sarajevo from the cancer registry there which suggests a more than 10-fold increase in leukemia and lymphoma (Table 1 below) even allowing for a doubling in the base population. <snip>
http://www.greenaudit.org/depleted_uranium.htm

[struggle4progress]

42. Non-native speakers sometimes mangle English. eom

[sintax]

10. Dep. Uranium has immense strategic value

The DOE and the Nuclear Industry have thousands of tons of nuclear waste that is a political and PR nightmare. So they brainstorm and dispense with it in many ways such as spoons, rebar, road building materials and of course weapons. This is of great strategic value to the psycopaths in the Pentagon as it saves tons of cash and takes care of a PR problem.

Minor details like birth defects and everlasting contamination of soils-food poisoning, constant recycling of particulates in the air, etc. are of no consequence.

The Pentagon knew of the effects of Dep. Uranium and went on a massive PR blitz to convince the public and politicos "it wasn't a problem".

Leuren Moret's research is vast and thorough.

[anarchy1999]

22. just go and google doug rokke.

I rest my case. DU is agent orange on steriods and then some.

[ScrappyDem]

27. ok done

and in one of his tirades he asks in large letters:

I ASK: WOULD ANY OF YOU WANT HUNDREDS IF NOT THOUSANDS OF RODS OF SOLID URANIUM WEIGHING UP TO 10 POUNDS EACH LYING IN YOUR BACKYARD?
http://sftimes.editthispage.com/stories/storyReader$61

and I would ask ---what kinda rent would I get. I've got a big backyard. Because I would have no problem at all with it.

I also googled Leuren Moret who seems to be the impetus for the original post.

These people all seem to be "whistleblowers" and have been "sacked" or "fired" for speaking out---(This may be the new tin-foil-hat catchphrase.) ---all of them seem to give speeches and interviews, yet none of them can point to peer reviewed documentation or studies, or I should say studies that are not in media that have an agenda to promote.

A modicum of common sense needs to be used here as well as a skeptical eye to "who" is telling the "facts" and whether the "facts" may in fact be non-facts. I would be very interested in seeing other studies on DU, but please lets have them scientific and peer reviewed and not skewed or anecdotal.

[Fire Walk With Me]

37. Lies about WMD, are WMD

Sorry, off-topic.