4um: Depleted U - An impromptu interview w/ a Career Tank Specialist

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Health
See other Health Articles
Title: Depleted U - An impromptu interview w/ a Career Tank Specialist
Source: me
URL Source: http://none.com
Published: Apr 27, 2005
Author: Tom007
Post Date: 2005-04-27 22:07:28 by tom007
Keywords: Specialist, impromptu, interview
Views: 2829
Comments: 488

Had an intesting conversation with a man I have known for about 5 months. He delivers to my store, handles alot of cash and is a "straight up" kind of guy. I like him, and I am sure his employer does as well. A steady Eddie man, the kind that makes the country run.

We somehow got talking about the ME, and he mentioned he had been to Egypt, and really did not care for any of it. I asked him how it was that he found himself in the ME and he said he was in the service of the military.
Naturally I wanted to know in what type of service he was in. Well, he was drafted into 'Nam, and did twentyfour years, and tanks were his thing. He started out in a tank designation I did not know of. I know a little about M1A1' and wanted to know some things about them, and the man was very evidently the real deal, no swagger, no he man stories etc. He is who he claims.
After some talk of tactics, guns, how to disable an M1A1, exploding armor, all of which he had the knolwedge of a solider who had spent many years with this type of equipment. He was pretty high up in the system.
Then I asked him about DU. Well turns out he was one of the men on the ground testing it at Aburdeen Proving grounds, shooting various things, like mounds of earth, then digging into it to estimate the ballistics, etc.
Did this many time, and my friend related that one time a DU projectile fragmented into the mound of earth. They were to go dig all the pieces of the remenents out. As he tells me, there was a hole that one of the fragments had made, and as they were poking around, a field mouse was scared up and scampered into that hole made by a fragment.
He just sat back and waited for it to come out-; it didn't. After a few minutes, he saw that it was dead.
He went and got the General of the testing operation, and showed him what he had discovered. The General and his men looked at the situation and told all the testers to go away. For three weeks the site was closed, except to the investigators.
Three weeks later, the investigation was complete. The report said the mouse died of "starvation". My friend looked at me, eye to eye, and laughed. "That mouse damn sure didn't die of starvation", he said emphatically.
He said when the DU rounds hit a tank, he could "see a mushroom cloud", formed (Note, alot of high intensity heat will form a mushroom cloud event).
He said "if you take a giger counter into one of the tanks with DU munitions it will beep like crazy". He said that the explosiom of a DU round into steel was" basically a miniature explosion of a nuclear bomb".
He said they would put goats in the test tanks, and around them. He stated that " for twentyfive meters around the tank, hit by a DU round, all the goats would be dead, ten meters, mangled, turned inside out".
He believed DU dust to be alot more dangerous than the military was allowing.
This man is much more creadible, to me, much more, than the talking hairdoo's reading spin points from the Pentagon.
Draw your own conclusions, this is what I heard today, from a man with incontrovertable creadibility with me. He was there.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-153) not displayed.
.
.
.

#154. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#152)
What an ignorant maroon you turned out to be.

That's what always happens when I post factual, verifiable information that is contrary to the conspiracy theory. After they can no longer refute what I post, they just throw insults.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 17:15:24 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#155. To: Kyle (#154)
Spin, spin, spin. You'll still be an unethical liar. Maybe you'll look back when you grow up and regret your immaturity.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut posted on 2005-04-28 17:16:30 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#156. To: Kyle (#153)
Link please

http://www.highbeam.com/library/doc3.asp?DOCID=1G1:50224830&num=2&ctrlInfo=Round9l%3AProd%3ASR%3AResult&ao=
(Subscribe to High Beam Research for access)
U.S. DOD: DoD news briefing--Part 1 of 3

M2 Presswire
M2 Presswire; 8/7/1998
M2 PRESSWIRE-7 August 1998-U.S. DOD: DoD news briefing (C)1994-98 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD
RDATE:040898 1:30 p.m. (EDT)
* Dr. Bernard D. Rostker, Special Assistant for Gulf War Illnesses
Col. Bridges: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Today Dr. Bernie Rostker, the Special Assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense for Gulf War Illnesses will present the latest in a series of public releases of investigations his office has conducted on potential causes of Gulf War Illnesses.
In addition to releasing two new case narratives, he will also be releasing the first environmental exposure report, as well as announcing two new initiatives to help our veterans.
Dr. Rostker?
Dr. Rostker: Thank you very much. It's my pleasure to be here today.
As the Colonel said, we're going to release two case narratives in the series that deal with chemical and biological incidents. We'll also release the first of a new series that deal with environmental exposures. The case narratives on chemical and biological will be relating to French-Czech detections in An Nasiriyah. The narrative or the, now we're calling them environmental exposure reports, will deal with depleted uranium.
We'll also announce two initiatives, one following from the depleted uranium work that will have us assessing several hundred additional soldiers as to possible medical impacts of their exposures to depleted uranium, and the other an effort which we hope will be useful to our veterans. We've been able to locate many of the in-patient medical records from the Gulf and we've established a program that will allow them to request these records and to facilitate them obtaining the information that they desire.
First, in terms of Czech-French. When I took over the investigations we agreed that we would start over on all of the inquiries, and that included the inquiries about the reports of low level chemicals being developed by the Czechs and the French. In that regard we visited Prague and Paris. We had in our team a member of Senator Spectre and Rockefeller's investigating subcommittee, and we have shared with both the French and the Czechs the write-up that you're going to see today, in fact, an earlier version of that.
These exposures were well documented in the 1994 timeframe, and frankly, we can bring little new to the table. We've been able to confirm what was well known.
The area that represents new work is correlating these exposures with the bombing campaign. For the last year we've been working with CIA, DIA and NEMA, the old Defense Mapping Agency, to get a handle on the specifics of the bombing campaign -- exactly what was hit on what date. And this has turned out to be rather difficult. We've had to look at overhead photography; we've had to look at gun camera footage to determine what was actually attacked on what date.
Almost all of the attacks occurred later than the late January timeframe reported by the French and the Czechs. The only exception is that in the area of Mohamidiyah we're not able, yet, to sort out what occurred on what date.
A perfect example of this has to do with An Nasiriyah. We now know that there were chemicals at An Nasiriyah at the time of the bombing campaign. We know these chemicals were stored in Bunker 8 and Bunker 8 was not attacked. So here's where we can bring information from the bombing campaign and correlate it with the Czech-French detections.
Our conclusion in the French and Czech area has not changed. We believe the equipment was highly credible and could, in fact, detect to the low levels that were reported. The CIA had called these detections credible, and we continue that assessment.
In terms of the other reports that have not been confirmed by either the Czech government or the French government, we've made a call of indeterminate. We just don't know. They have not been able to provide us with any additional information that would shed any light on these detections -- either the magnitude of the detections or the source of any of the detections. So they remain open and we call them indeterminate.
Turning for a moment to An Nasiriyah, this is the third ammunition depot that we have examined. The first being, of course, Khamisiyah, then Talil, and now An Nasiriyah. An Nasiriyah is about a kilometer from Talil. It was examined by the United Nations and by the 82nd Division. They found no traces of chemicals in either site, although the United Nations tells us that chemicals were there in January. These are the chemicals that were eventually shipped to Khamisiyah and were, in the case of the 122mm sarin rockets, destroyed both in Bunker 73 and in the pit.
In the case of the 155mm artillery rounds that were filled with sarin, these are the rounds that the United Nations recovered and were subsequently incinerated.
An Nasiriyah is interesting because it is also the subject of several additional reports that we've been able to investigate... one of a mysterious helicopter that landed at An Nasiriyah. Samples were taken, and before the people who took the samples got back into the helicopter they took off their MOPP suits and they burned their MOP suits.
In the report you'll see documented the fact this was one of many missions that were looking for biological samples, and An Nasiriyah was a suspected biological site because it contained a 12 frame bunker that was refrigerated. You'll remember that the main thing the targeteers and the intelligence community were looking at the time were where the S-shaped bunkers were and where the 12 frame bunkers were.
So a mission was sent in to collect samples. We've talked to the pilot of the mission and he was the one who asked that the crew, when they came back in, to burn their MOPP suits. There was nothing specific in terms of what they had found. It was a general concern that he had for contamination.
The samples that were drawn that day have been identified. They were tested for biological agents. All of the tests were negative.
One of the samples was a melted TNT and came from a leaking artillery round. That was, again, one of the stories that veterans have been concerned about. It turns out that's not unusual to rounds that have been put under heat and pressure, which is what happened when we started to blow up those depots. This is one of the rounds that was not completely destroyed, was mysterious as far as the soldier was concerned. Samples were taken, and those samples have shown it to be TNT, which is what we had expected.
So with these last two chemical cases, we have brought to 16 the number of reports -- either case narratives or information papers -- that we've published that relate to chemical or biological exposures.
We continue to look in the chemical and biological area. We'll have, shortly, a paper on the 11th Marines. There's a paper on the incidents at a cement factory. We are looking at all of the 256 kit reports, the so-called Edgewood tapes are, again, reports that are in progress, and we'll be bringing those to you over time.
It's important, though, that we expand the horizons of the office to move it not only from just chemical and biological inquiries, but to other environmental inquiries. Right now we're actively engaged in looking at the impact of the oil well fires, of pesticides, and of depleted uranium. Today we're going to release the report on depleted uranium.
This report has been a long time in the preparation. Because of interest that some veteran groups have had in the subject, we wanted to make sure that there was complete unanimity of understanding within the federal government, certainly, as to what the science was concerning depleted uranium. So we have a list for you of the organizations that have coordinated, have chopped on the depleted uranium paper.
The paper really does three things. It first of all provides a short course, if you will, on depleted uranium. It points out its radioactive properties which are less than natural uranium, and that the major concern we have is for kidney damage as a result of it being heavy metal and the toxicity of heavy metals. The concern here is if the material could be ingested.
We then review the number of cases or incidences where we believe there was extraordinary exposure to depleted uranium and we've categorized those in terms of Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3. On page eight of the case narrative is a table which looks like the table here on the side, and here we've identified Level 1 which is of most concern, those who were involved in friendly fire incidents or immediately the retrieval of people or equipment from those vehicles; Level 2, those people who were involved in cleanup. Part of that Level 2 is those who were involved in the cleanup at Camp Doha which was a fire situation. Then all of the other people.
To date, 33 of the Level 1 people, actually 33 of these folks here have been monitored by the Department of Veterans Affairs. At their request we are extending that program to include all of those in Level 1 as well as, for safety's sake, extending the inquiry to all of the rest of Level 2 with the exception of Doha. If we find there are medical reasons to include the Doha group we certainly will do that and go even further.
Let me highlight for you the results so far of the VA's program monitoring the 33. I'm going to read a couple of short paragraphs to be very precise in this language. These can be found on page 128 and 129 of the case narrative and is also in the handout, the two page information handout that we are including with the information fact sheet we're sending to anybody we've contacted.
The important part here is that since 1993 the Department of Veterans Affairs has been monitoring 33 vets who were seriously injured in friendly fire incidences involving depleted uranium. These veterans are being monitored at the Baltimore VA Medical Center. Many of these veterans continue to have medical problems, especially problems related to the physical injuries they received during friendly fire incidents, and these physical injuries include burns and wounds from being in a tank or a Bradley that was hit by a depleted uranium round.
About half of this group still have depleted uranium fragments in their bodies. These are small, pin-sized fragments that cannot be removed surgically. Those with higher than normal levels of uranium in their urine since monitoring began in 1993, have embedded DU fragments. These veterans are being followed very carefully and a number of different medical tests are being done to determine if the depleted uranium fragments are causing any health problems.
The veterans being followed who were in friendly fire incidents but who do not have retained depleted uranium fragments generally speaking have not shown higher than normal levels of uranium in their urine.
For the 33 veterans in the program, tests for kidney function have all been normal. In addition, the reproductive health of this group appears to be normal in that all babies fathered by those veterans between 1991 and 1997 have no birth defects.
So that's the result of the work so far on 33. And as I said, we're going to extend it to all like people who have had heavy doses of depleted uranium, as well as those who worked around depleted uranium equipment.
Frankly, our expectation is that we would not see heavy concentrations of uranium in the urine except if unbeknownst to these folks they have embedded uranium fragments, so that's what we're going to be looking for, as well as to understand any kidney functions.
The report also highlights the various incidents where depleted uranium, where there were friendly fire incidents, where there was exposure to depleted uranium.
There are two other parts to our effort here. One is by CHIPM, the Army's environmental health unit at Aberdeen, and they are calculating what kind of dosages we might have expected from these various incidents. They have defined a worst case, and I say this is a worst case. It is a case that did not appear in the Gulf. It's more severe than anything we actually experienced in the Gulf. This would be where an Abrams tank, that was protected with depleted uranium armor, was hit by two depleted uranium rounds. And their calculation based on test data is that the amount of ingested depleted uranium oxide that would occur over a 15 minute period is equal to one REM which is 20 percent of the occupational limit for a year. So we're looking at exposures that are well below the occupational limit set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
In addition, the RAND Corporation has been working on a paper that somewhat parallels our effort that looks at the medical literature as it pertains to depleted uranium. I received today their final draft that we will put in interagency review and then they will react to that review and we will publish that later this summer or early in the fall. So there is additional work that's coming forward.
I mentioned CHIPM's work. In effect, CHIPM's work is based on test data and modeling. We have, unfortunately, people who actually have been exposed here in ways that we would never expose people in a laboratory and a test setting. We expect to be able to learn a great deal about residual uranium and kidney, the effects on the kidneys from the people who will be monitored by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The last program that we want to announce today has to do with medical records. As part of our inquiry, we became aware that the Army had in fact taken the inpatient records from the Gulf and had archived them and created a database, but this was not widely known and it did not facilitate the veteran's ability to retrieve this information.
We've been able to locate a good deal of the remaining health records from the Air Force and the Navy, and have created an expanded database of about 17,000 entries which identify people that we have health, inpatient records for, and we've been able to identify where those records physically are. They're generally in St. Louis, but we have been able to identify where specifically they are, what box they literally are being stored in.
If the veterans need this information, we'll be happy to facilitate that process. So we'll be working with the VSOs, the Veterans Service Organizations, to publicize this. We have an 800 hotline number. We can ascertain whether or not, if a veteran calls, whether his records are in fact in St. Louis. Then we will fill out the paperwork, requiring only the veteran's signature. We'll forward that to the veteran. If he or she will sign it, then the records can be retrieved.
We're also working with the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide that information in any claims processing to make sure, again, that individuals have the best information that we're able to provide them, even though this is seven years later.
We believe there were about 25,000 inpatient visits. About 8,000 were MEDEVAC'd out of theater and their records went with them, and are well scattered throughout the system. We're still looking for those in the major receiving hospitals and in their records. The Army had catalogued about 10,000 and we've been able to add to that about 7,000. So we think we're getting close to having all of the records accounted for, and we hope we can be of service to the veterans by facilitating the process with which they would be able to get those records.
I'll be happy to take questions. I'm joined here today by folks from the VA and from my medical department, as well as the analysts who did the actual work on Czech-French, An Nasiriyah and the depleted uranium papers, so I think we can have quite a useful dialogue. At times, I'll ask some of those folks to come up to the microphone and fill in whatever answers you need.
Q: It's my understanding that DU causes very specific kinds of kidney problems.
Dr. Rostker: Yes.
Q: Could you, in non-technical terms, could you tell us what those are?
Dr. Rostker: I think I'm going to ask Dr. Kilpatrick to...
Dr. Kilpatrick: As with all the heavy metals, the toxicity in the kidney is, as it comes through the kidney and is filtered from the blood and the urine, it hits the acidity of the urine, and then that heavy metal has a toxic effect on the cells in that area. That's in the collecting tube where the urine is first formed, so it's a very specific area.

Jethro Tull posted on 2005-04-28 17:16:56 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#157. To: Kyle (#154)
That's what always happens when I post factual, verifiable information that is contrary to the conspiracy theory. After they can no longer refute what I post, they just throw insults.

LOL.. uh huh.. just keep believing that one..

Zipporah posted on 2005-04-28 17:17:06 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#158. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#151)
Spin away, but you are the one who got caught trying to slip in your little propaganda as if it were the conclusion to a professional journal article. Now you're pissed because I caught your dishonesty and you would like nothing more than to distract and spin and turn it around.

What I did was unintentional. The conclusions that I did post are real. Your focusing in on this reveals that you've got little else to go w/ at this point. Hilarious.
If you want to make a substantive argument, tell me why the links and exerpts I've posted are wrong. Go ahead. This should be funny.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 17:18:12 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#159. To: Zipporah (#157)
That's what always happens when I post factual, verifiable information that is contrary to the conspiracy theory. After they can no longer refute what I post, they just throw insults.
LOL.. uh huh.. just keep believing that one..

I noticed you aren't making any substantive arguments either.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 17:18:58 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#160. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#155)
Spin, spin, spin. You'll still be an unethical liar. Maybe you'll look back when you grow up and regret your immaturity.

I've got grandchildren, punk.
I noticed you have stopped addressing substance completely.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 17:20:44 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#161. To: Kyle (#159)
I noticed you aren't making any substantive arguments either.

And what would be the point?

Zipporah posted on 2005-04-28 17:22:26 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#162. To: Kyle (#160)
I've got grandchildren, punk.

Sad..

Zipporah posted on 2005-04-28 17:23:17 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#163. To: Kyle (#160)
Implanted depleted uranium fragments cause soft tissue sarcomas in the muscles of rats. (Articles).
Environmental Health Perspectives
Environmental Health Perspectives; 1/1/2002; Hoover, Mark D.
In this study, we determined the carcinogenicity of depleted uranium (DU) metal fragments containing 0.75% titanium in muscle tissues of rats. The results have important implications for the medical management of Gulf War veterans who were wounded with DU fragments and who retain fragments in their soft tissues. We compared the tissue reactions in rats to the carcinogenicity of a tantalum metal (Ta), as a negative foreign-body control, and to a colloidal suspension of radioactive thorium dioxide ([sup.232]Th), Thorotrast, as a positive radioactive control. DU was surgically implanted in the thigh muscles of male Wistar rats as four squares (2.5 x 2.5 x 1.5 mm or 5.0 x 5.0 x 1.5 mm) or four pellets (2.0 x 1.0 mm diameter) per rat. Ta was similarly implanted as four squares (5.0 x 5.0 x 1.1 mm) per rat. Thorotrast was injected at two sites in the thigh muscles of each rat. Control rats had only a surgical implantation procedure. Each treatment group included 50 rats. A connective tissue capsule formed around the metal implants, but not around the Thorotrast. Radiographs demonstrated corrosion of the DU implants shortly after implantation. At later times, rarifactions in the radiographic profiles correlated with proliferative tissue responses. After lifetime observation, the incidence of soft tissue sarcomas increased significantly around the 5.0 x 5.0 mm squares of DU and the positive control, Thorotrast. A slightly increased incidence occurred in rats implanted with the 2.5 x 2.5 mm DU squares and with 5.0 x 5.0 mm squares of Ta. No tumors were seen in rats with 2.0 x 1.0 mm diameter DU pellets or in the surgical controls. These results indicate that DU fragments of sufficient size cause localized proliferative reactions and soft tissue sarcomas that can be detected with radiography in the muscles of rats. Key words: bioassay, carcinogenesis, depleted uranium, Gulf War, rats, sarcomas, soft tissues, tantalum, Thorotrast. Environ Health Perspect 110:51-59 (2002). [Online 15 December 2001]
Link

Jethro Tull posted on 2005-04-28 17:26:35 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#164. To: Kyle (#136)
More meaningless rhetoric. I guess I must have gotten through.

Not at all.. I just don't know what's left to say on the subject.
You read everything from the Material Safety Data Sheet your employer would use to treat you for DU exposure in any setting other than the tyrannical US Military. You read Nuke's Excerpts (which were excellent, btw) and Jethro's here now with an admission from the Pentagon... Christine threw some numbers your way and Esso says they're the Governments own figures.
To put it simply, Kyle.. I just think you're wrong and willfully so.

Jhoffa_ posted on 2005-04-28 17:26:44 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#165. To: Jethro Tull (#156)
Dr. Kilpatrick: As with all the heavy metals, the toxicity in the kidney is, as it comes through the kidney and is filtered from the blood and the urine, it hits the acidity of the urine, and then that heavy metal has a toxic effect on the cells in that area. That's in the collecting tube where the urine is first formed, so it's a very specific area.

What a complete joke. Next time, try posting just the relevant material. An the part you highlighted was self-serving and truncated. The TRUTH was buried in the 10 pounds of shit you posted:
The important part here is that since 1993 the Department of Veterans Affairs has been monitoring 33 vets who were seriously injured in friendly fire incidences involving depleted uranium. These veterans are being monitored at the Baltimore VA Medical Center. Many of these veterans continue to have medical problems, especially problems related to the physical injuries they received during friendly fire incidents, and these physical injuries include burns and wounds from being in a tank or a Bradley that was hit by a depleted uranium round.
About half of this group still have depleted uranium fragments in their bodies. These are small, pin-sized fragments that cannot be removed surgically. Those with higher than normal levels of uranium in their urine since monitoring began in 1993, have embedded DU fragments. These veterans are being followed very carefully and a number of different medical tests are being done to determine if the depleted uranium fragments are causing any health problems.
The veterans being followed who were in friendly fire incidents but who do not have retained depleted uranium fragments generally speaking have not shown higher than normal levels of uranium in their urine.
For the 33 veterans in the program, tests for kidney function have all been normal. In addition, the reproductive health of this group appears to be normal in that all babies fathered by those veterans between 1991 and 1997 have no birth defects.
So that's the result of the work so far on 33. And as I said, we're going to extend it to all like people who have had heavy doses of depleted uranium, as well as those who worked around depleted uranium equipment.
Frankly, our expectation is that we would not see heavy concentrations of uranium in the urine except if unbeknownst to these folks they have embedded uranium fragments, so that's what we're going to be looking for, as well as to understand any kidney functions.

I guess you are conceding when you get this deceptive.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 17:30:10 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#166. To: Zipporah (#161)
I noticed you aren't making any substantive arguments either.
And what would be the point?

Exactly. You can't refute the material I've posted and linked to.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 17:31:39 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#167. To: Jhoffa_ (#164)
To put it simply, Kyle.. I just think you're wrong and willfully so.

Then refute any of the material or links I've posted.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 17:32:27 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#168. To: Jethro Tull (#163)
Implanted depleted uranium fragments cause soft tissue sarcomas in the muscles of rats. (Articles).

That's nice. Let's stick to the matter at hand. I've posted the info. Deal w/ it.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 17:33:37 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#169. To: Zipporah (#162)
I've got grandchildren, punk.
Sad..

Sad that I'm an educated person who thinks for themselves and not a conspiracy theorist crank?

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 17:34:45 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#170. To: Kyle (#165)
and then that heavy metal has a toxic effect on the cells in that area. - Dr Kilpatrick

"That heavy metal" Dr K is talking of is DU. The "toxic effect" on the cells is what it is. Your comical defense of these imperialists is a typical 'bot response. May your grandchildren's grandchildren have their lungs filled with the shit. When they fall ill, they can think fondly of you (g)

Jethro Tull posted on 2005-04-28 17:39:37 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#171. To: Kyle (#167)
Then refute any of the material or links I've posted.

I did.. It's a hazard. The Navy's own document (AFTER an FOIA, I might add..) says so.
Jethro did. Nuke'em did. (Repeatedly)

All you seem to be able to do is cry "crackpot" when confronted with anything contrary to your view on Depleted Uranium.
Ya know, to turn this around a bit.. When you see admissions from the Government & the Military themselves, some of which would apply anywhere but a military setting, it makes your information look like 100% pure kookery.

I realize this upsets you, but you need to grow up and face reality at some point.

Jhoffa_ posted on 2005-04-28 17:39:55 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#172. To: Kyle (#160)
I've got grandchildren, punk.
I noticed you have stopped addressing substance completely.

Sure you do, little feller. hehehe Tell me another story, grandpa.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut posted on 2005-04-28 17:46:08 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#173. To: Kyle (#169)
Sad that I'm an educated person...

You just keep telling us how educated you are while simultaneously proving otherwise. You remind me of the trailer trash types who brag about how much money they've got.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut posted on 2005-04-28 17:49:30 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#174. To: Jethro Tull (#170)
Your comical defense of these imperialists is a typical 'bot response.

I'd like to see Kyle tell us how Agent Orange got a bad rap, too.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut posted on 2005-04-28 17:50:30 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#175. To: Kyle (#169)
Facts don't mean anything to these people Kyle.....
DU has Uranium in it, and therefore it must be radioactive, and therefore it MUST be dangerous...
BAH, clueless, just totally clueless.
Here are some more facts for them, but they are going to fight me on this as well, it says URANIUM, IT MUST BE DANGEROUS, sorry my Show immitation coming through.
Health aspects of DU
Depleted uranium is not classified as a dangerous substance radiologically, though it is a potential hazard in large quantities, beyond what could conceivably be breathed. Its emissions are very low, since the half-life of U- 238 is the same as the age of the earth (4.5 billion years). There are no reputable reports of cancer or other negative health effects from radiation exposure to ingested or inhaled natural or depleted uranium, despite much study.
However, uranium does have a chemical toxicity about the same as that of lead, so inhaled fume or ingested oxide is considered a health hazard. Most uranium actually absorbed into the body is excreted within days, the balance being laid down in bone and kidneys. Its biological effect is principally kidney damage. WHO has set a Tolerable Daily Intake level for U of 0.6 microgram/kg body weight, orally. (This is about eight times our normal background intake from natural sources.) Standards for drinking water and concentrations in air are set accordingly.
Like most radionuclides, it is not known as a carcinogen, or to cause birth defects (from effects in utero) or to cause genetic mutations. Radiation from DU munitions depends on how long the uranium has been separated chemically from its decay products. If thorium-234 and protactinium-234 has built up through decay of U-238, these will give rise to some beta emissions. On this basis, DU is "weakly radioactive" with an activity of 39 kBq/g quoted (12.4 kBq/g if pure).
In 2001 the UN Environment Program examined the effects of nine tonnes of DU munitions having been used in Kosovo, checking the sites targeted by it. UNEP found no widespread contamination, no sign of contamination in water of the food chain and no correlation with reported ill-health in NATO peacekeepers.
Thus DU is clearly dangerous for people in vehicles which are military targets, but for anyone else - even in a war zone - there is little hazard. Ingestion or inhalation of uranium oxide dust resulting from the impact of DU munitions on their targets is the main possible exposure route.

Aric2000 posted on 2005-04-28 17:52:26 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#176. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#174)
I'd like to see Kyle tell us how Agent Orange got a bad rap, too.

I want to hear about the magic bullet.

Dakmar posted on 2005-04-28 17:52:41 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#177. To: Aric2000 (#175)
DU has Uranium in it, and therefore it must be radioactive, and therefore it MUST be dangerous...

Do you have special glasses that allow you see whatever you believe you see? Most of this thread is about toxicity from inhalation.

Dakmar posted on 2005-04-28 17:55:55 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#178. To: Aric2000 (#175)
Nice try at spin. Nobody has indicated that DU is a hazard due to external radiological exposure. However, the evidence is overwhelming that it IS a hazard when taken internally, either as a radiological hazard as it accumulates in specific organs, or as a chemical hazard as it passes through the kidneys. Furthermore, all of the government studies are carefully controlled so as to evaluate only very carefully manufactured samples. Problem is, the bulk manufacturing of DU ammunition is not so controlled. Many other isotopes besides pure DU end up in the penetrators.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut posted on 2005-04-28 17:58:47 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#179. To: Kyle (#169)
Sad that I'm an educated person who thinks for themselves and not a conspiracy theorist crank?

well.. I won't address this statement but thats not what came to mind at all.. I was thinking the adage 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks' may have some validity..

Zipporah posted on 2005-04-28 18:02:39 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#180. To: Zipporah (#179)
I was thinking the adage 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks' may have some validity..

Hey, wait...wait... That isn't really true. Old dogs just take their time and get everything done in a thorough and efficient manner.
As for anyone being an "educated person," there are such things as educated jackasses.

Don posted on 2005-04-28 18:14:12 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#181. To: Don (#180)
Hey, wait...wait... That isn't really true. Old dogs just take their time and get everything done in a thorough and efficient manner.
As for anyone being an "educated person," there are such things as educated jackasses.

I did say 'some validity'.. there is also an adage about being educated beyond reason..

Zipporah posted on 2005-04-28 18:27:22 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#182. To: Zipporah (#181)
there is also an adage about being educated beyond reason..

There are people who have been educated beyond their reason.

Don posted on 2005-04-28 18:29:23 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#183. To: Don (#182)
There are people who have been educated beyond their reason.

Obviously :P

Zipporah posted on 2005-04-28 18:35:00 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#184. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#174)
I'd like to see Kyle tell us how Agent Orange got a bad rap, too.

Did he run away?

Jethro Tull posted on 2005-04-28 18:44:26 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#185. To: Jethro Tull (#170)
The "toxic effect" on the cells is what it is. Your comical defense of these imperialists is a typical 'bot response.

Blather on. I have posted sound, peer-reviewed science from the world over that says that the amount of uranium in the surface soil in the area of a large battle using DU rounds was increased 1%. You guys just ignore everything that doesn't fit w/ the CT rant.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 19:01:53 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#186. To: Jhoffa_ (#171)
I did.. It's a hazard. The Navy's own document (AFTER an FOIA, I might add..) says so.
Jethro did. Nuke'em did. (Repeatedly)

All you seem to be able to do is cry "crackpot" when confronted with anything contrary to your view on Depleted Uranium.
Ya know, to turn this around a bit.. When you see admissions from the Government & the Military themselves, some of which would apply anywhere but a military setting, it makes your information look like 100% pure kookery.

The MSDS as similar items say the obvious - there is SOME potential for hazard. Nobody denies that. You are intentionally blurring the issue. The issue is if the hazard is significant and what evidence is there that vets or local populations have suffered from DU. The solid science says that the hazrd is insignificant and that there is little to no evidence of actual DU injury.
The crackpots are crackpots. They aren't that difficult to spot. Why do you prefer the crackpots and dismiss the real science?

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 19:07:00 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#187. To: Kyle (#186)
The MSDS as similar items say the obvious - there is SOME potential for hazard. Nobody denies that.

Exactly.. I completely believe there is a risk.
Burning DU has been cited as dangerous, as has pulverizing it..
Look, ignore static tests and bricks comprised of the stuff.. think about the mechanics of this for a minute.
If you ask me about riding in an airplane which utilizes DU as a balance weight, I'd say it's probably fine. Inhalation/ingestion however is dangerous to proven some degree. It's obviously more dangerous with repeated exposure.
We're putting these things in tanks, where they rattle around and bump and bounce before ramming them in gun barrels and blasting them on the bottom with high explosives.. they then arc through the air and hit something and try to smash it to bits..
Kyle, if there's not some DU aerosol being created here, I'll kiss your foot.

Jhoffa_ posted on 2005-04-28 19:14:29 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#188. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut, Aric2000 (#178)
However, the evidence is overwhelming that it IS a hazard when taken internally, either as a radiological hazard as it accumulates in specific organs, or as a chemical hazard as it passes through the kidneys.

I posted multiple impeccable sources to the contrary. Why do you ignore them?

Furthermore, all of the government studies are carefully controlled so as to evaluate only very carefully manufactured samples.

What aboout the non-gov't studies and all the foreign studies and the studies of ACTUAL exposure on the battlefield? Didn't read those either?

Problem is, the bulk manufacturing of DU ammunition is not so controlled. Many other isotopes besides pure DU end up in the penetrators.

Already dealt with as well. I guess you didn't read that either. DU is produced while enriching U235. It is done via the uranium hexafluoride gas centrifuge method. As previously described, virtually nothing but U238 and residual U235 can get through. The Pu content is in parts per billion. Any amounts of radioactive U decay products are exceedingly small even if the DU is fairly old because nearly all of the U is U238 and it has a half-life of 4.5 BILLION YEARS!

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 19:16:27 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#189. To: Jethro Tull, Mr Nuke Buzzcut, Don, Zipporah (#184)
Did he run away?

ROTFL!!
No. I drove home from work. Now I'm going to eat dinner. I know it's hard for you guys to relate to people w/ jobs and lives. Far from running, I feel that I have made my points sufficiently well that any rational lurker would see the truth. You guys have long since stopped trying to defend your CT and psuedoscientific crap and never really attempted to refute the hard science. All you've got left is talking about me behind my back to buck each other up. So long losers.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 19:22:28 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#190. To: Jhoffa_ (#187)
Kyle, if there's not some DU aerosol being created here, I'll kiss your foot.

Of course there is. The question is to what effect. Early in this thread I posted numerous links to hard science that says that the risk is STILL minimal. Go back and read them.

Kyle posted on 2005-04-28 19:24:40 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#191. To: Kyle (#189)
I know it's hard for you guys to relate to people w/ jobs and lives.

So not true

It's hard for us to relate to *you* with a job and a life.

Jethro Tull posted on 2005-04-28 19:39:26 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#192. To: Kyle (#190)
Of course there is. The question is to what effect.

And that's a good question..
The guy's outside the military who come in contact with the stuff are being treated differently than the people behind the breach of the weapons firing it.
Like I said, they'd destroy your clothes and scrub you down in one scenario.. In another, you'd get to share a confined space with these aersol's
?

Jhoffa_ posted on 2005-04-28 19:45:22 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#193. To: Kyle, All (#189)
You guys have long since stopped trying to defend your CT and psuedoscientific crap and never really attempted to refute the hard science. All you've got left is talking about me behind my back to buck each other up. So long losers.

BushBots have this common failing. They are a legend in their own mind.

Don posted on 2005-04-28 19:50:53 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#194. To: Kyle (#190)
Makes one proud, doesn't it warmonger?

Soldier wins fight with Army over Gulf War illness; Tribunal rules contaminated shells were to blame.
The Daily Mail (London, England)
The Daily Mail (London, England); 2/4/2004
Byline: STEVEN HENRY
A FORMER soldier who claimed he was poisoned during the first Gulf War has won a victory against the Army.
Kenny Duncan, 34 , claimed he was contaminated by depleted uranium from exploded shells while serving as a specialist tank transporter in 1991.
The Ministry of Defence has refused to recognise that Gulf War veterans may suffer illness from so called 'tank-buster' shells, despite testing Kosovo and Bosnia veterans for effects of the radioactive substance.
However, Mr Duncan has just became the first veteran to win a war pension appeal after taking the MoD t o the Pension Appeal Tribunal Service.
The tribunal in Edinburgh found that Mr Duncan's exposure to the cancer- causing uranium could be attributed to his service in the Gulf.
Mr Duncan, a father of three from Clackmannan, said: 'It has been a long, hard fight but it has been worth it.
'Hopefully this will open up the door for other veterans to push forward. It brings the issue into the public eye, closer to the public inquiry that we all want.' His wife Mandy, 36, added: 'We're ecstatic. Shocked really.
It's a landmark recognition for depleted uranium sufferers.' Mr Duncan, who now works as a lorry driver, believes he inhaled the deadly dust while recovering tanks in Iraq as part of the Royal Corps of Transport.
Part of his job was to move Iraqi tanks destroyed by depleted uranium shells.
In the years following his return from the Gulf he claims his children, Kenneth, ten, Andrew, eight, and sixyearold Heather were born with deformed toes and other health problems.
Mr Duncan suffers joint pain, breathlessness and coughs up blood - all symptoms of depleted uranium poisoning.
Mr and Mrs Duncan believe the conditions he and his children suffer were caused by his exposure to depleted uranium.
The couple also hope the ruling will lead to an increase in his war pension, which currently stands at 50 per cent of his former salary.
Roy Gibson, who represented Mr Duncan in the appeal hearing, read from the judgment, which said: 'In our opinion, the appellant has succeeded in showing a reasonable doubt in this case and therefore the appeal succeeds.' The lawyer added: 'I am ecstatic. We have fought a number of depleted uranium cases and this is the first we have won.' Shaun Rusling, chairman of the National Gulf Veterans and Families Association, said the tribunal's verdict added to its call for a full public inquiry into Gulf War illnesses.
He said: 'The finding by the Pensions Appeal Tribunal was absolutely tremendous and extremely significant for Kenny Duncan.
' It proves that his ill health was due to depleted uranium poisoning and it is great news for Kenny and his wife to at long last have his condition recognised.
'The National Gulf Veterans and Families Association is extremely pleased that justice has been done.' According to the association, 606 Gulf servicemen have died from ill health and a further 5,933 have applied for a war pension due to disablement.
A spokesman for the MoD said: 'Once we have received the written decision by the Pensions Appeal Tribunal, we will consider any implications this may have for the Ministry of Defence.'
A key military element
DEPLETED uranium is a critical element on the modern battlefield, with uses both in attack and defence.
It is a very heavy substance, 1.7 times denser than lead.
When used in ammunition, this helps the shell punch through enemy armour.
When munitions made with DU strike a solid object, such as the side of a tank, the round penetrates the armour and hot metal fragments from it scatter inside the vehicle, causing injury to the crew and damage to the vehicle. In Desert Storm, the British Army fired 88 DU rounds, but the Americans used it much more extensively.
DU is itself radioactive, but its density makes it ideal for use in armour plating.
During the 1991 Gulf War, the armour on American M1-A1 Abrams tanks received a number of direct hits from Iraqi shells that did not penetrate, thanks to DU.
When a DU round impacts, the material can be vapourised and can contaminate the wreckage.

Jethro Tull posted on 2005-04-28 19:53:56 ET Reply Trace Private Reply

.
.
.
Comments (195 - 488) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

Freedom4um