Depleted Uranium From Weapons: Risks And Cover-Ups

[Anonymous]

Arthur, did you cut yourself with it? You say the lump of DU is deteriorating, would any of it have gotten into any open wounds? If so, did you see a doctor?

I would certainly agree there are various things in and around us in miniscule amounts, too much of it in one place can lead to excessive ingestion of it which may have unpleasant effects.

I mean, too much spinach is a laxative, so too much DU?

Jerry, the unpleasant effects of DU have been proven, the thing in contention is whether or not the sharp rise in illnesses suspected to be caused by radioactive materials was in contention and may still be.

Also in contention is the idea that DU (although toxic and proven to be harmful if ingested (in any form) in sufficient quantities) is the cause of most or any illnesses, still birth, cancers and mutated babies in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Anonymous]

In addition - Arthur - I was rooting around the bbc site and found this article re arsenic poisoning water supplies;

About 140 million people, mainly in developing countries, are being poisoned by arsenic in their drinking water, researchers believe.

World facing 'arsenic timebomb'

This would appear to negate the idea that just because there are small amounts of anything around us, that it is harmless.

I did another search on depleted uranium while I was there. I found this;

Dr Keith Baverstock – now retired – was a senior radiation advisor with 12 years experience at the WHO – and was part of Dr Repacholi's editorial team at the time.

He says he came across research indicating that depleted uranium is a potentially dangerous carcinogen.

"When you breathe in the dust the deeper it goes into the lung the more difficult it is to clear. The particles that dissolve pose a risk - part radioactive - and part from the chemical toxicity in the lung - and then later as that material diffuses into the rest of the body, and into the blood stream a potential risk at sites like the bone marrow for leukaemia, the lymphatic system and the kidney."

This is called genotoxicicty. According to Dr Baverstock it could take decades before evidence of cancer starts to emerge...

...Asked why he thinks the study was, as he claims, suppressed he replies: "It is naive to think that in institutions like the United Nations one is free from political influences - the member states have their own agendas."

Questioned on whether he was saying that the WHO was pressurised by the likes of the United States to come to the right conclusion, he answers: "I think that could be the case – yes."

US and UK military continued to use depleted uranium weapons despite cancer warnings

I think you can see what I'm getting at - a senior WHO expert who was working on the research WHO used to say DU is harmless is saying the report was made to fit the wonts of the US and that it was not accurate. That in itself warrants concern IMO.

Moreover, as DU is a pyrophoric substance which takes localised aerosol form upon impact, it would allow it to be breathed into the lungs by civilians.

Oh, and it is in the water supply - and this has been going on for years.

By the looks of it, the US and UK have been loudly protesting against any ban on DU being used for ammunition or other weapon related uses - because they have a lot of nuclear waste and want to use it as it is an efficient penetrator and cheap to refine.

Also, people may want to buy the refined product.

Any studies or research, or recommendations from senior WHO experts indicating DU is harmful and research funded to inestigate further are discounted and banned from being published.

It is alleged that member states (the US and UK) have been heavy influences on the UN to ban such research and reports etc from being published.

Tin foil hats on folks - oh, and be careful where you get your water.

 

[techybloke666]

If you live on clay soil your 20m x 20m garden probably contains about 2 kgs of uranium. It’s perfectly safe. Background radiation is good for you, because it stimulates your immune system and reduces your risk of cancer. All soils contain elements such as copper, lead, arsenic and so on. These are what the planet is made of. They are part of our natural environment.

It's all around us. In the very fabric of your home, and the cells of your body

I,m not quite sure where to start with this !
Background radiation is good for ? can you provide some sources for this comment please, as to how it prevents cancers ?

also Radiation has types

Alpha particles from solid objects cannot pierce your skin, like your lump of DU, but we are talking about nano particles, Nano Alpha particles have been shown to cause mutations in DNA in Mice and rats when inhaled leading to cancer not preventing it, Hardly safe.

Raised levels of background radiation are not beneficial.

 

[ArthurASCII]

I'm not quite sure where to start with this !
Background radiation is good for ? can you provide some sources for this comment please, as to how it prevents cancers ?

A quick "Google" will probably provide you with many sources, but The American Physical Society discusses some of the studies carried out.

also Radiation has types

As an ex-serviceman, once involved in the storage and deployment of "sunshine" ordinance I am fully cognisant with Alpha, Beta and Gamma radiation and the differences between them.

Alpha particles from solid objects cannot pierce your skin, like your lump of DU, but we are talking about nano particles, Nano Alpha particles have been shown to cause mutations in DNA in Mice and rats when inhaled leading to cancer not preventing it, Hardly safe.

I heartily agree. My reply was designed to illustrate just that point. Some of the contributors to this thread seem to believe that DU is like Kryptonite; a green glowing lump that will weaken and kill anyone venturing too close! Most of the DU from shell cases is lying around as lumps and therefore poses only a minuscule health and safety risk. Once again IHMO, The dispersal by blast of nano particles over the surrounding area would make the chances of ingestion of a significant amount extremely small.

 

[techybloke666]

A quick "Google" will probably provide you with many sources, but The American Physical Society discusses some of the studies carried out.

hmmmm.

I googled , I read

If a little extra background radiation increases your life span, as they seem to be inferring, then why with a little extra in Iraq is their cancer statistics increasing with radiation type cancers ?

 

[wembley8]

then why with a little extra in Iraq is their cancer statistics increasing with radiation type cancers ?

If it's radiation-type, then it's not likely to be caysed by DU is it?

You still don't seem to have picked up on the point that it's not the radioactivity is not the problem with DU.

Besides, the only numbers provided suggest that the cancer rates in Iraq look rather low.

 

[wembley8]

what Wembley has said (he implied he knows about this stuff because he worked in an industry which involved nuclear materials).

No. it's because I've been involved in the defence industry - but probably not in the way you assume

A bunker is a permanent fixture, and an easy target. The only thing you need is an aircraft and enough powerful explosives to do the job.

Not really. You can't attack a bunker with standard bombs, which is why they use bunker busters (...which do not contain DU).

If that happens to be stuff that others have carelessly left around for people to steal, or just cars or other bits of junk that can be cobbled together or just piled up at the end of an apparent cul de sac then so be it.

Even if this peculiar scenario is true (and I'd love to know what you're basing it on), what makes you thinkl that DU rounds are being used?

If you check out descriptions of actions (or even watch the telly) you can see that it's a matter of small arms, missiles and airstrikes these days - not DU rounds.

 

[crunchy5]

You still don't seem to have picked up on the point that it's not the radioactivity is not the problem with DU.

Not proven, radioactivity might very well be a problem with DU.

 

[wembley8]

This would appear to negate the idea that just because there are small amounts of anything around us, that it is harmless.

Huh? it shows the opposite. It shows that some things (like arsenic) which are harmless in tiny quantities are dangerous in larger doses,

btw TB brought up Baverstock a few months back, but quickly stopped supporting him. I suspect it's because Bavertsock says DU has not done any harm in Bosnia according to his model.

By the looks of it, the US and UK have been loudly protesting against any ban on DU being used for ammunition or other weapon related uses - because they have a lot of nuclear waste and want to use it as it is an efficient penetrator and cheap to refine.

it isn't. I addressed this a ways back. Firstly, the amount of DU used in ammunition makes no impact on the total amount fo nuclear waste, and secondly it's at best about 1% cheaper than tungsten.

 

[wembley8]

You still don't seem to have picked up on the point that it's not the radioactivity is not the problem with DU.

Not proven, radioactivity might very well be a problem with DU.

Who has suggested that radioactivity is a major factor in DU health effects?

(Remember it's likely to be dwarfed by other sources of radioactivity in the body).

 

[wembley8]

A quick google reveals that infant mortality rates and stillbirth were associated with lead water pipes in England and that they may have caused other illnesses; this would appear to negate the point Wembley made regarding lead pipes not increasing mortality rates.

My point was not that lead has no health effects but they are relatively minor - and a ton of bullets left on a battlefield will put much less lead in the drinking water than a single lead pipe.

At any rate, the sheer volume of DU collectively used in localised areas all over Iraq in civilian areas and thus in the air and water supplies over the course of years would certainly have a noticeable effect on the civilian population living in these areas{/quote]

Nobody has yet detected this 'sheer volume' of DU you mention. I suspect there's a reason...

The bit Wembley said about dismissing numbers I do not like – of course I can dismiss them, they are only numbers and let’s face it, they are never 100% reliable.

And I in turn challenged you to find your own statistics on the natural abundance of uranium in the ground. How are you getting on? I can't see you finding any you'll like better...

 

[ArthurASCII]

On the subject of lead pipes and drinking water, most households when I was a lad had domestic water pipes made of lead. It was well known that the water might become tainted if left "lying" in the pipes, so we always ran the taps for a while before drinking in order to ensure a fresh supply (mains pipes were, of course, made of cast iron).

 

[techybloke666]

There is no rise in cancers in Iraq ???? Wembley

Last month, the Iraqi environment minister blamed the tons of the chemical dropped during the war’s “shock and awe” campaign for a surge of cancer cases across the country.

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/ ... r_problem/

The Iraqi Enviroment minister is lying then I suppose ?

 

[wembley8]

There is no rise in cancers in Iraq ????

Haven't we already done this one? Look at the numbers: why is the cancer rate in iraq so low compared to the UK?

There is certainly plenty of carcinogenic contamination in Iraq, but you can hardly claim DU is a big part of it.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/ ... r_problem/

The Iraqi Enviroment minister is lying then I suppose ?

Has she actually made that claim though? Only the Russians and the Iranians seem to think she has as far as I can make out.

 

[techybloke666]

Maybe that the case Ted, but they may be telling the truth we can't just say its lies becouse Iran and Russia say something.

Wembley , were not comparing the UK's cancer rates with Iraq's

Iraq's cancer rate has increased, many of these cancers are radiation linked types.

Their enviroment minister says they are DU related.

Your just moving the goal posts by comparing their stats with the UK.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

Maybe that the case Ted, but they may be telling the truth we can't just say its lies becouse Iran and Russia say something.

Wembley , were not comparing the UK's cancer rates with Iraq's

Iraq's cancer rate has increased, many of these cancers are radiation linked types.

Their enviroment minister says they are DU related.

Your just moving the goal posts by comparing their stats with the UK.

We can't just say it's lies because it's Iran and Russia saying something but, given their state of press freedoms and the animosities of their authorities towards Britain and America, should we neccessarily believe them? Again you repeat the claim although there doesn't appear to be any corroboration by any western or Iraqi source. Isn't that just choosing what you want to believe?

 

[Anonymous]

Thing is, the only knowledge I personally have of Iran and Russia is through the media - and their related internet sites.

I have absolutely no question that the media is always going to be biased and will put a bit of spin on a subject to get us to watch or buy the media.

How much is truth and how I interpret it after the spin has been put on it I have no idea.

So is Iran the one who started all this? Are they and Russia being defensive or offensive?

Is Iran being all balshey because of the way it feels it has been treated (putting aside the way they treat their women, child slavery in the Arab world etc etc)?

Also, what has this got to do with DU?

 

[lupinwick]

I suppose a lot depends on who you listen to (or prefer to listen to). A quick search on "iraq cancer rates" turns up and awful lot of stuff from the left wing publications (Socialism sites), the mainstream barely gets a look in.

However

BASRA, 31 May 2007 (IRIN) - Recent studies by medical colleges, and statistics from local morgues and hospitals, have shown a higher than expected number of cancer-related deaths in Iraq's southern provinces. According to specialists, the main causes are the increased use of unsafe products in agriculture and the long-term effects of war on health.

Psychological stresses and strains engendered by years of conflict, violence, displacement and uncertainty have weakened people's natural resistance to disease. This has been compounded by the lack of skilled medical staff and poor facilities and equipment.

"Lack of treatment for cancer patients and outdated radiotherapy and chemotherapy techniques have led to lower survival rates of patients. The shortage of oncologists, who have fled to neighbouring countries, has worsened the situation," said Hussein Abdel-Kareem, an oncologist and senior official in the Basra Health Secretariat.

"Exposure to radiation from old cluster bombs, the high use of chemicals in agriculture as well as water contamination is having a serious impact on the health of local people, since these factors are important promoters of cancer related diseases. Many of the patients could have been treated but they died because of lack of facilities," Abdel-Kareem added.

Study

According to a study entitled The Increase in Cancer Cases as Result of War Debris - published in early May by Basra University Medical College with input from researchers at the Ministry of Health - cancer-related diseases are now one of the main causes of a large percentage of deaths in the southern provinces.

"At least 45 percent of deaths in the southern provinces are caused by cancer. Some patients develop related diseases which worsen their condition, leading to a faster death. The statistics are having a serious impact on the health system and urgent funds are needed," said Imad Hassan, a health specialist and member of the commission which produced the study.

"Southern governorates have been seriously affected by wars, especially in the past 20 years and it is a region in which chemicals and pesticides are used in fishing and agriculture," Hassan said.

He added that in Basra, Muthana, Dhi Qar and Missan governorates, the drinking water has been found to be unsafe and in some places, especially in and near rural areas, the water was highly contaminated, including with pesticide residues.

Leukaemia, breast cancer

More cancer-related deaths among women and children have been found in Basra and Missan governorates, where leukaemia among children has increased substantially by 22 percent compared to 2005, and where a lot of women have developed breast cancer, with the figures showing an increase of 19 percent compared to 2005, the study said.

"Over the years the local population [in the south] has been exposed to the most serious radiation and chemical factors resulting from war, including the use of unsafe and cheap pesticides, and now we see the results," Abdel-Kareem said.

A number of children - some say at least three per day - are born in hospitals in the southern provinces without limbs or without organs. The phenomenon, specialists say, is a result of years of war. "We have had cases of children who showed cancer-related diseases after only four weeks of life," he added.

Specialists and the provincial heath secretary have called on the central government to provide funds to improve health services in the southern provinces.

"We need funds, new equipment and availability of medicines to try to save the lives of hundreds of innocent indirect victims of the war," Abdel-Kareem said.

Source

Suggests several other factors other than DU as a cause.

 

[Anonymous]

Hi Wembley

As regards the bunker busters being nuclear, I think I may have been confused by articles such as this one;

Bunker-busting nuclear weapons, also known as earth-penetrating weapons (EPW), are a type of nuclear weapon designed to penetrate into soil, rock, or concrete to deliver a nuclear warhead to a target. These weapons would be used to destroy hardened, underground military bunkers buried deep in the ground. In theory, the amount of radioactive nuclear fallout would be reduced from that of a standard, air-burst nuclear detonation because they would have relatively low explosive yield. However because such weapons necessarily come into contact with large amounts of earth-based debris, they may, under certain circumstances, still generate fallout. Warhead yield and weapon design have changed periodically throughout the history of the design of such weapons.

Source

I am of the impression that bunkers would be military places, and the insurgents might not have access to them, besides which I also got the impression that they were mixed in with the civilians (like the enemy did in Vietnam).

As regards the statistics re uranium, I regard these as unreliable (IMO all statistics are unreliable) and also as DU is man made and not naturaly occuring uranium, I think that the statistics re natural uranium are irrelevant.

As regards DU only being used on Saddams armed vehicles when he was there, if it is correct then by what you said about the amount of DU ammunition used and lying around (and I believe you since you worked in the defense industry, and industry heavily involved in ammunition and nuclear materials and their uses) then judging by what you said it has heavily polluted the area.

You said the ammunition went into the water supplies and agreed that when it hits steel etc then it vapourises, you also agreed that the prevailing winds might be able to carry DU in aerosol form or polluted dust further from the target than the very immediate area.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

Thing is, the only knowledge I personally have of Iran and Russia is through the media - and their related internet sites.

I have absolutely no question that the media is always going to be biased and will put a bit of spin on a subject to get us to watch or buy the media.

How much is truth and how I interpret it after the spin has been put on it I have no idea.

So is Iran the one who started all this? Are they and Russia being defensive or offensive?

Is Iran being all balshey because of the way it feels it has been treated (putting aside the way they treat their women, child slavery in the Arab world etc etc)?

Also, what has this got to do with DU?

It is related to DU because the opinion of the Iraqi minister for the environment was being put forward to support the view that DU is responsible for many deaths in Iraq. That opinion only seems to have been noted by groups who have a clear agenda to portray American actions in a certain light and are not neccessarily reliable sources. Therefore the question posed earlier regarding whether or not the Iraqi environment minister is lying is probably an invalid one, much like the supposed opinion itself.

 

[Seventh_Pilot]

That opinion only seems to have been noted by groups who have a clear agenda to portray American actions in a certain light and are not neccessarily reliable sources

If those groups include people whose agenda is to portray American action as being legal and moral, not to mention democratic then I totally agree with you.

 

[wembley8]

As regards the bunker busters being nuclear, I think I may have been confused by articles such as this one

Well, I'm slightly surprised as that is about the (now discontinued) nuclear bunker buster program. It doesn't even use DU as ballast...

As regards the statistics re uranium, I regard these as unreliable (IMO all statistics are unreliable) and also as DU is man made and not naturaly occuring uranium, I think that the statistics re natural uranium are irrelevant.

Without statistics I don't see how you're going to argue that DU causes an increase in health problems. Or anything else. ???

If you're going to doubt well-established geological data on uranium without coming up with any reason, it doesn't give much scope for discussion.

And why distinguish between 'natural' and 'man made' uranium in your body? It's the same stuff. The big difference is that DU is less radioactive.

judging by what you said it has heavily polluted the area.

Then I don't think you read what I wrote. I said that it would not add significantly to the natural amount of uranium present.

You said the ammunition went into the water supplies and agreed that when it hits steel etc then it vapourises, you also agreed that the prevailing winds might be able to carry DU in aerosol form or polluted dust further from the target than the very immediate area.

No, that's not what I said.
If you can find any evidence that DU is contaminating groundwater significantly, or that it does travel a significant distance from the target, I'd like to see it.
And if you can find any evidence that such contamination has major health effects I'd like to see that too.

 

[wembley8]

Wembley , were not comparing the UK's cancer rates with Iraq's

Iraq's cancer rate has increased, many of these cancers are radiation linked types.

If that's true, then why do you think DU is the problem rather than something which actually causes radiation-type cancers like the uranium yellowcake I previously posted about?

Their enviroment minister says they are DU related.

Allegedly, and she doesn't seem to be making much of the claim if she did make it.

And it's very convenient for her to blame it all on the US rather than on local sources, like the yellowcake.

Your just moving the goal posts by comparing their stats with the UK.

No, just pointing out that what they seem to think is a high cancer rate is actually a very low one compared to ours.

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

That opinion only seems to have been noted by groups who have a clear agenda to portray American actions in a certain light and are not neccessarily reliable sources

If those groups include people whose agenda is to portray American action as being legal and moral, not to mention democratic then I totally agree with you.

Perhaps but believing any old tat from groups whose legal, moral and democratic credentials are substantially weaker than America's could lead one to surmise that it's prejudice rather than reality which is dictating opinion. One would have to ask why there appears to be no coverage of this statement from those elements within the western press which have previously been critical of US foreign policy. Conspiracy? Or does it not matter as long as it confirms the prejudice?

 

[Anonymous]

Hi Wembley

Statistics are not 100% reliable, less so if they cover a large group and if they are commissioned by unreliable sources such as governments (who apparently make up statistics to prove a point they already came up with).

They are certainly not as solid as evidence as bodies, still births, cancers etc.

If you want me to do a search and quote bits where you have said DU ammunition goes into the water supplies...ok.

Here;

If we bombarded citizens with lead and it got into water sources, there would be an uproar.

???
But that's exactly what we do. How many millions of rounds have been fired in Iraq, and where do you think they end up?

If you want me to do a search and quote bits where you have said DU ammunition vapourises...ok.

Here;

Oh, and apparently DU is a pyrophoric substance. If it is, and it is used in incindary devices as well as ammunition and bunker busters etc, then it may well ignite once pulverised.

Yes, this is what makes it useful in anti-armour ammunition - and is closely related to why you get an aerosol when it goes through steel.

Source for both of the above quotes

Now then, prevailing winds...prevailing winds...where dost thou blow? I think they blow here, in concorde with my post;

I also disagree with the idea that DU dust does not travel far from the site of impact. I would say that depends on various circumstances not the least of which are the size of the explosion and the prevailing winds.

Fair enough

Source of above quote

As regards bunker busters no longer being nuclear - when exactly was it stopped? Was it after the first two or three years of the second invasion? I think it was - correct me if I´m wrong.

Ted - are you saying that the US is democratic? I propose that democracy involves consulting the demo part of the country - the people. Democracy involves consulting the people.

Do they? Are the US government a viable and reliable source of information regarding the Iraq war and the damage they do over there?

 

[ted_bloody_maul]

Ted - are you saying that the US is democratic? I propose that democracy involves consulting the demo part of the country - the people. Democracy involves consulting the people.

Do they? Are the US government a viable and reliable source of information regarding the Iraq war and the damage they do over there?

Well I'd say they were more democratic than Iran or Russia but that's missing much of my point. Anyone familiar with the recent history of Russia (or the still recent Soviet Union) will be familiar with the high level of premature although non DU related deaths to journalists. Likewise Iran has an unimpressive record on bloggers, for example. Where are the closed down blogs or journalistic corpses in the US or Britain?

In any case, the US government's information on DU-related deaths is not the issue here. The issue is why there are apparently no reports of the Iraqi minister's comments in the western media from sources which have previously reported DU stories (the BBC and the Guardian, for example).

 

[Anonymous]

Speaking of the Guardian - I found a lovely bit of DU conspiracy related nostalgia here...

By Nick Cohen
Sunday May 9, 1999
Guardian Unlimited

After much fretting and several bottles of whisky, my appalling use of moral blackmail, which included appealing to his love for his children, succeeded and he agreed to hand over a secret document he had spotted at the offices of the Atomic Energy Authority.

My informant had been astounded by its contents. He waited until he was alone, made a copy and fled.
The depleted uranium shells used by the Allied armies in the Gulf War had left 'at least 40 tons' of radioactive dust on the battlefields of Kuwait and Iraq, the authority said

Source

Apparently the dust can stay deep in the lungs for years, and the effects are released slowly. DU black dust gets blown about by sandstorms and winds etc, and gets everywhere.

Nice.

 

[crunchy5]

By Nick Cohen
Sunday May 9, 1999
Guardian Unlimited

After much fretting and several bottles of whisky, my appalling use of moral blackmail, which included appealing to his love for his children, succeeded and he agreed to hand over a secret document he had spotted at the offices of the Atomic Energy Authority.

My informant had been astounded by its contents. He waited until he was alone, made a copy and fled.
The depleted uranium shells used by the Allied armies in the Gulf War had left 'at least 40 tons' of radioactive dust on the battlefields of Kuwait and Iraq, the authority said

Source

I say, is that gun smoking, doesn't it know there's a ban .

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/

 

[Anonymous]

The issue is why there are apparently no reports of the Iraqi minister's comments in the western media from sources which have previously reported DU stories (the BBC and the Guardian, for example).

Maybe as the Iraq government is under the control of the US who established said government told the minister to keep schtum after his initial foray into the world of media?

I forgot to reply to the idea of the US or UK supressing the media...I think that heavily edited articles or politically correct articles are an indication, as with a ban on making articles considered sensitive.

Some questions do not get asked in articles as well, despite them being quite logical questions - although I do like it when Jeremy Paxman or Jon Snow have a go at politicians etc, they ask good questions that are of course never answered despite them being asked three times or more.