Freedom4um

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: 2019
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  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-287) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#288. To: BTP Holdings (#286)

ANY heavy metal in Nano as they put it, will sicken a person, Lead will do this, tungsten will do this, ANY heavy metal will do it.

DU happens to be the densest material for projectiles etc, therefore we use it.

If it sickens someone because of the Nano, as they put it, then it is because they breathed in the nanoparticles due to war.

After impact, DU does NOT become MORE readioactive, it does NOT create birth defects etc.

It is QUITE impossible....

Yes, it may sicken a person, but ANY heavy metal will do the same.

So to say that DU is the boogeyman, is ridiculous in the extreme.

Shit, breathing in paint fumes will sicken you far more and far faster then DU ever will, and the chances of breating in paint fumes is MUCH greater then ever getting the chance of breathing in nanoparticles of DU, or any other heavy metal.

Aric2000  posted on  2005-04-29   1:40:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#289. To: Kyle, crack monkey (#64)

Kyle, you're still an idiot!


Yes, there is a soluable form of DU, which can be readily excreted - then, there's a ceramic dust version - that hangs around.

DU’s radioactivity is in the form of Alpha particles. Alpha particles are described by the military as the ‘weakest’ form of radiation, they can be stopped by skin. However, when aerosolized into ceramic dust they are easily inhaled and can stay in the lungs for years, irradiating lung tissues causing emphysema or fibrosis. In addition to being inhaled, DU dust can settle on plants where it can be eaten and on open wounds, common in a war zone, where there is no skin to block the alpha radiation from irradiating soft body tissues. In the USA particles of DU have been found in the filters of air- conditioning units over 20 miles from any known source.

In addition to its radioactivity, Depleted Uranium is also chemically toxic as a heavy metal. DU dissolves in water. This heavy metal toxicity can be absorbed byplants and pollute ground water reserves. DU ends up in the kidneys and gastro intestinal tract causing a host of illnesses in a similar way to lead poisoning.


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-29   1:41:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#290. To: SKYDRIFTER (#285)

Excuse me Sky, but DU is as radioactive as the earth itself, gamma and beta particles are an EVERYday thing, you are bombarded with these particles EVERY FRICKING DAY.

Are you dying Sky, have those radioactive particles sickened you?

Please, quit attacking Kyle for telling you the truth, you may NOT like the truth, but it is STILL THE TRUTH.

DU is HALF as radioactive as NATURAL Uranium, in other word Uranium that sits around on the surface and in mines. It is NOT deadly, only when it is concentrated and purified does it become dangerous, and the MORE pure DU is the LESS radioactive it becomes....

Aric2000  posted on  2005-04-29   1:43:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#291. To: Kyle (#66)

Kyle, the "U" metals are variants of each other. Some are fisionable - U235 & 239 - some are not; U-238. It all goes to atomic chemistry, as the numbers imply.

You don't know shit about chemistry, either. Yes, they are considered seperate elements; that's moot.

When it comes to Uranium, "half-Life is a radioactivity measure! You dumb shit!


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-29   1:48:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#292. To: Axenolith (#282)

If you drank a quart of antifreeze you'd better hit the JD...

Hah, Doctors orders!!

tom007  posted on  2005-04-29   1:58:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#293. To: Aric2000, crack monkey, Kyle, Christine (#290)

DU is HALF as radioactive as NATURAL Uranium,

Aric, you're dumb as a rock, as well! (Or, are you just doing disinformation?)

U-238 is the most common form of Uranium - it's "natural!" Given mined Uranium ore, U-235 has to be processed out, as it's in radically smaller proportion.

Yes, DU is 40% LESS radioactive than the common in-the-dirt variant. Yes, that's why it's called "depleted." It's still radioactive - and toxic. It still has a radioactive "half-life." Yes, God will one day see it turn to lead.

Until that day, it's still radioactive, still emitting dangerous alpha particles, and it's still a heavy-metal toxin to the body. Inhaled DU dust has a high probability of staying in the lungs, poisoning the hell out of the body. If the lungs were to be so lucky as to only inhale the soluable variant, you might not have any appreciable affects. If the ceramic variant is inhaled; different story. How lucky do you think one can get, when dealing with weaponized DU?

There's the rub, no one in "power" wants to know the answer; our Veterans are lab-rats. Check the statistics on "Gulf War Syndrome."


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-29   2:07:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#294. To: Aric2000 (#290)

you may NOT like the truth, but it is STILL THE TRUTH.

Why do you count yourself among the legions of professional disinformationalists that fight tooth and nail to pimp the patently untrue?

What do you get out of it? Warm fuzzies?

Dude Lebowski  posted on  2005-04-29   2:13:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#295. To: SKYDRIFTER (#293)

Then why aren't you bitching about all the above ground Nuke testing in the 40's & 50's also

Despot of the Delta  posted on  2005-04-29   2:40:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#296. To: SKYDRIFTER (#291)

t all goes to atomic chemistry, as the numbers imply.

You don't know shit about chemistry, either. Yes, they are considered seperate elements; that's moot.

Maybe atomic physics, not chemistry...

And they aren't "separate elements", they're isotopes and there's 14 (92U227 to 92U240) of them + an upper state isomer of 92U235...

Axenolith  posted on  2005-04-29   2:49:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#297. To: Kyle (#69)

I'll call you what I wish to call you, you malignant, traitorous, republican asshole.

Your so-called education didn't enable you to understand this:

"I don't believe you. It is very clear from your many posts on LP, and your posts here, that you have read plenty of propaganda, talking points, etc., from your administration. So there is no reason to suppose that you did not read about this subject."

In sum, I said I don't believe you, and I said why. But if that's not enough for you, then I will tell you that after reading your posts here and on LP, I conclude that you are a LIAR. You have, or think you have, some stake in the Bush administration, and as a result you jump through hoops like a trained monkey to defend it. Your bias is legendary here and on LP. That's why you are considered a LIAR.

We're not all that impressed with your so-called education. Is that what they call brainwashing nowadays--"education"? Because your main attribute is that you seem to be entirely brainwashed. Brainwashing = education, in your Orwellian Bushworld. Why not? To Bushistas like yourself, was is peace, freedom is slavery.

AS IF others here were not educated. We are.

You are irrational: you cling to your bias without even considering the mountains of evidence to the contrary which people here have wasted good hours putting before you.

This is inevitable. Everytime we post the truth and it conflicts with the pre- packaged administration propaganda on these boards, we are immediately labeled as "conspiracy theorists". That is a lame comeback - You can't support your position so you try to label us "conspiracy theorists".

You're not important enough to be part of any "conspiracy". You are just another "good German" who refuses to believe that evil is in power in our country. I doubt you care about dead Iraqi or Afghan civilians, so I will simply reiterate that the blood of over 1500 Americans is on your complicit hands, murderer. At the moment when you finally expire, remember that you sold out your own fellow Americans for the financial gain which you imagine you are getting from this fraudulent administration.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-04-29   7:14:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#298. To: Kyle (#71)

your looney

Your extreme bias is showing. Experts who disagree with the shit you're peddling are "loonies". You can't see your own mental illness: rigidity, refusal to listen to reason, extreme bias. You're like a Moonie. Makes sense; the Moonies are good friends of your administration.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-04-29   7:17:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#299. To: Jhoffa_, Kyle (#76)

In an effort to accomidate this, I give you the US Navy themselves, and you choke.

Oh, the U.S. Navy are "conspiracy theorists"?

Kyle's paranoid--sees conspiracy theorists everywhere. Seek professional help, Kyle.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-04-29   7:19:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#300. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut, Kyle (#79)

Kyle knows this. He knows damn well it is dangerous. He just doesn't care. Military be damned, civilians be damned, just so long as he gets to revel in the deaths of muslims.

...and to revel in the deaths of Americans. Kyle is complicit to murder.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-04-29   7:21:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#301. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut, Kyle (#88)

By the way, your posted conclusion is NOT the conclusion that goes with the abstract I posted. Just a bit deceptive on your part, there little feller.

Whaddya know. Kyle's been caught lying.

Is there no end to what the True Believers will do to support this murderous, traitorous, fraudulent administration and its false positions?

But then, the administration has been caught lying about WMD's, so it's not surprising that its supporters would be liars.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-04-29   7:24:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#302. To: Kyle, Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#91)

Do you think they have an axe to grind?

I think you have an axe to grind.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-04-29   7:25:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#303. To: Kyle, christine (#103)

the Gulf War 1 veterans who, btw, your "Help is on the way" administration has pretty much told to STFU and go away.

I know this government has a long, long history of lying to the American people.

"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy." ~ Henry Kissinger ~ January-February 2003 edition of Eagle Newsletter

Do you deny the above? I know I'll never get a straight answer. That's not what you shills--whether paid or unpaid--are about.

You are complicit to murder and torture.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-04-29   7:30:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#304. To: Kyle, Mr Nuke Buzzcut, Jhoffa (#102)

I've read hundreds of MSDS's and they always sound much worse than reality.

Hmm why is it that you've yet to address Dr. Rokke?? Seems you've repeatedly and conveniently ignored what he has to say regarding DU..

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-29   7:53:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#305. To: Aric2000 (#274)

Global warming is a false comparison, it is something being predicted; there is no concrete evidence only insufficient historical data.

~300,000 Gulf War Vets are on disability and 11,000 are dead. Far too many of their children are being born with birth defects as compared with the general population. In Iraq, the civilian population is also showing the effects. The DU dust is picked up the sandstorms and tradewinds. It is not confined to Iraq.

Already "uninjured" soldiers are returning from Iraq and dying from "unknown" causes.

THESE ARE THE FACTS. YOU are a DISinformer. READ the articles.

robin  posted on  2005-04-29   8:10:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#306. To: SKYDRIFTER (#293)

There's the rub, no one in "power" wants to know the answer; our Veterans are lab-rats. Check the statistics on "Gulf War Syndrome."

I posted a link that has a lot of documentation for this, but he and Kyle won't read it. If it doesn't fit into their preconceived notions, they won't see or hear it.

christine  posted on  2005-04-29   10:39:22 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#307. To: h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t (#302)

I think you have an axe to grind.

My axe is already ground to a razor edge. I just need to give it a heft and a swing.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-04-29   10:44:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#308. To: Aric2000 (#290)

DU is HALF as radioactive as NATURAL Uranium, in other word Uranium that sits around on the surface and in mines. It is NOT deadly, only when it is concentrated and purified does it become dangerous, and the MORE pure DU is the LESS radioactive it becomes....

Really? This is your "educated" opinion? Perhaps you could address the effects of radon for us - considering you're such an expert on the effects of radioactivity, heavy metals and their effect on the human body.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-04-29   10:51:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#309. To: robin (#305)

THESE ARE THE FACTS. YOU are a DISinformer.

this certainly isn't lost on anyone here.

christine  posted on  2005-04-29   11:19:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#310. To: Kyle (#69)

You're a liar. You're clearly neither educated, nor intelligent.


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-29   14:38:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#311. To: Aric2000 (#288)

So to say that DU is the boogeyman, is ridiculous in the extreme.

You still don't get it. Heavy metals such as lead, mercury and nickel will accumulate. So will DU, but the difference is the radioactivity.

You must not have read that article carefully. It says the radioactivity affects the genes and this is where the birth defects and cancer come in.

WAKE UP!

BTP Holdings  posted on  2005-04-29   14:53:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#312. To: christine, Kyle (#306)

I posted a link that has a lot of documentation for this, but he and Kyle won't read it. If it doesn't fit into their preconceived notions, they won't see or hear it.

Kyle is a dumb-ass; period. Whatever its gender, "it" distracts issues. There is some suggestion that "it" is good at that mission, however.

Kyle claims education, while not even being able to comprehend rather basic ideas; or even common sense, for that matter. Kyle clearly can't deal with Algebra 101 questions, while claiming a college math education.

Kyle is a liar, making BAC look like a saint.

You can always tell the trained disinformationists; they never consider that they could be wrong. The "good" people take a second look & contemplate that idea.

We all make mistakes; there's nothing wrong in that. I respect the person who says, "...let me clarify that;" or "I may have been wrong; let me look."

Kyle defends obvious ignorance with purported indignity. The educated person steps up to the plate. I've given Kyle several good and honest openings. "It" doesn't take them, as "it" can't recognize them.

Kyle has a serious cognitive disability. "It" can drop a ball; "it" can't recognize one.

I've also had fun with Kyles stupidity, as well. "It" deserves that much.

Kyle is finding out that I have no mercy on such obvious disinformationists. If the 'handlers-that-be' decided to give BAC a break; they sent in a weakling.

Funny, BAC & Sneaky don't engage me anymore. Maybe I hurt their feelings; do you think?


(Love those monkeys!)

{:-))


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-29   14:57:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#313. To: BTP Holdings, aric2000 (#311)

yes, and it is not only this article. Our actual experience with DU shows us it causes lots of death, cancer & birth defects over time. and he ignores that also.

Red Jones  posted on  2005-04-29   14:58:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#314. To: BTP Holdings, Jhoffa_, Mr Nuke Buzzcut, Aric2000, robin, crack monkey, Axenolith, christine, tom007, SKYDRIFTER, Dude Lebowski, h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t, Zipporah (#262)

Your 'experts' are not so expert and very obviously biased. They are radical Left wing types 'working' outside of their fields. A quick web search will reveal that you have a geo-scientist and two physicists making medical claims. They are also espousing all sorts of extreme Left stuff unrelated to DU and make their claims sound valid by creating groups with impressive names and websites that are primarily just them.

They also spout obvious lies. The 500,000 disabled US Gulf War I vets claim is absurd. That would be nearly all of them. It would be statistically impossible for that to be true and yet none of the several vets that I know have any medical issues at all. Hell, according to the VA, the VA has only treated less than half that number for ANY condition whatsoever!

The claims about birth defects are unsubstantiated. In some places, these people have claimed that 2/3 of the vets children concieved after the war have birth defects. That DESTROYS any credibility that they may have had; The New England Journal of Medicine:

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/336/23/1650

ABSTRACT

Background There has been suspicion that service in the Persian Gulf War affected the health of veterans adversely, and there have been claims of an increased rate of birth defects among the children of those veterans.

Methods We evaluated the routinely collected data on all live births at 135 military hospitals in 1991, 1992, and 1993. The data base included up to eight diagnoses from the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) for each birth hospitalization, plus information on the demographic characteristics and service history of the parents. The records of over 75,000 newborns were evaluated for any birth defect (ICD-9-CM codes 740 to 759, plus neoplasms and hereditary diseases) and for birth defects defined as severe on the basis of the specific diagnoses and the criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Results During the study period, 33,998 infants were born to Gulf War veterans and 41,463 to nondeployed veterans at military hospitals. The overall risk of any birth defect was 7.45 percent, and the risk of severe birth defects was 1.85 percent. These rates are similar to those reported in civilian populations. In the multivariate analysis, there was no significant association for either men or women between service in the Gulf War and the risk of any birth defect or of severe birth defects in their children.

Conclusions This analysis found no evidence of an increase in the risk of birth defects among the children of Gulf War veterans.

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-29   15:06:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#315. To: Jhoffa_ (#70)

There's a good source, for sure!

(Watch Kyle slither!)


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-29   15:09:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#316. To: Kyle (#314)

Your 'experts' are not so expert and very obviously biased. They are radical Left wing types 'working' outside of their fields.

You can repeat that until the cows come home, but mere repetition of the lie doesn't change reality. Numerous very qualified scientists and research studies have been quoted showing that DU is an extremely serious health hazard to both our own troops as well as the civilian populations in the region where it is used. On the other hand, you have the same folks who promised that Agent Orange was safe to drink assuring us that DU is equally benign.

It is you and your sources that are severely biased on this issue. Biased in the extreme!

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-04-29   15:09:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#317. To: Kyle (#314)

Putz. Your study is dated June, 1997. It's coming on 8 years old. The material you've chosen to ignore is current. Here's a dollar. Buy a clue.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2005-04-29   15:11:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#318. To: Kyle, BTP Holdings, Jhoffa_, Mr Nuke Buzzcut, Aric2000, robin, crack monkey, Axenolith, christine, tom007, Dude Lebowski, h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t, Zipporah (#314)


Fuck you and your disinformation atempts, Kyle! The military specs are clear, as to the hazards.

Ask the Gulf War vets. Even the Brits have the DU problem.

You're a piece of shit, Kyle!


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-29   15:12:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#319. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut, BTP Holdings, Jhoffa_, Aric2000, robin, crack monkey, Axenolith, christine, tom007, SKYDRIFTER, Dude Lebowski, h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t, Zipporah (#316)

It is you and your sources that are severely biased on this issue. Biased in the extreme!

It is duly noted that you made no attempt to defend the claims that I skewered. I sense that you know that the 500,000 disabled GWI vets is BS and absurd on its face, and that the NEJM findings are dead accurate. But to admit that would be to admit that the 'experts' that you are relying on have no credibilty, so you won't. No one is so blind as he who will not see.

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-29   15:14:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#320. To: Kyle (#319)

Putz. Your study is dated June, 1997

FLASH! BABE RUTH TRADED TO THE YANKEES!

Jethro Tull  posted on  2005-04-29   15:18:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#321. To: Jethro Tull (#317)

Putz. Your study is dated June, 1997. It's coming on 8 years old. The material you've chosen to ignore is current. Here's a dollar. Buy a clue.

So what are you saying, Jethro? Do you mean to imply that large numbers of children had RETROACTIVE birth defects in the last few years? Idiot.

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-29   15:19:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#322. To: Starwind (#45)

The explosion described in the article is most likely a pyrophoric effect and certainly not atomic.

I believe the primary risk of DU is heavy metal poisioning. I certainly wouldn't want to inhale DU dust.

Radioactivity risk is nil. I keep some hot uranium rocks under my bed for the healthful hormetic effects of elevated exposure.

AdamSelene  posted on  2005-04-29   15:47:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#323. To: Kyle (#321)

So what are you saying, Jethro?

I'm saying that your 8 year old material is refuted by current data. Take the time to read what folks posted to you.

BTW, can you say Bahhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaa?

Jethro Tull  posted on  2005-04-29   15:49:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#324. To: Kyle (#319)

It looks like the numbers change a bit when we aren't depending upon the Veterans Administration to provide the data. Source

Prevalence of birth defects among infants of Gulf War veterans in Arkansas, Arizona, California, Georgia, Hawaii, and Iowa, 1989-1993.

Araneta MR, Schlangen KM, Edmonds LD, Destiche DA, Merz RD, Hobbs CA, Flood TJ, Harris JA, Krishnamurti D, Gray GC.

Department of Defense Center for Deployment Health Research, Naval Health Research, Center, San Diego, California, USA. haraneta@ucsd.edu

BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic studies of birth defects among infants of Gulf War veterans (GWV) have been limited to military hospitals, anomalies diagnosed among newborns, or self-reported data. This study was conducted to measure the prevalence of birth defects among infants of GWVs and nondeployed veterans (NDV) in states that conducted active case ascertainment of birth defects between 1989-93. METHODS: Military records of 684,645 GWVs and 1,587,102 NDVs were electronically linked with 2,314,908 birth certficates from Arizona, Hawaii, Iowa, and selected counties of Arkansas, California, and Georgia; 11,961 GWV infants and 33,052 NDV infants were identified. Of these, 450 infants had mothers who served in the Gulf War, and 3966 had NDV mothers.

RESULTS: Infants conceived postwar to male GWVs had significantly higher prevalence of tricuspid valve insufficicieny (relative risk [RR], 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-6.6; p = 0.039) and aortic valve stenosis (RR, 6. 0; 95% CI, 1.2-31.0; p = 0.026) compared to infants conceived postwar to NDV males. Among infants of male GWVs, aortic valve stenosis (RR, 163; 95% CI, 0. 09-294; p = 0.011) and renal agenesis or hypoplasia (RR, 16.3; 95% CI, 0.09-294; p = 0.011) were significantly higher among infants conceived postwar than prewar. Hypospadias was significantly higher among infant sons conceived postwar to GWV women compared to NDV women (RR, 6.3; 95% CI, 1.5-26.3; p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION: We observed a higher prevalence of tricuspid valve insufficiency, aortic valve stenosis, and renal agenesis or hypoplasia among infants conceived postwar to GWV men, and a higher prevalence of hypospadias among infants conceived postwar to female GWVs. We did not have the ability to determine if the excess was caused by inherited or environmental factors, or was due to chance because of myriad reasons, including multiple comparisons. Although the statistical power was sufficient to compare the combined birth defects prevalence, larger sample sizes were needed for less frequent individual component defects.

PMID: 12854660 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-04-29   15:58:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#325. To: Jethro Tull (#323)

I'm saying that your 8 year old material is refuted by current data. Take the time to read what folks posted to you.

Children can't retroactively have birth defects. What are you saying? Is the NEJM lying? Is whatever looney you're refering to more credible than the NEJM?

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-29   15:59:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#326. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#324)

CONCLUSION: We observed a higher prevalence of tricuspid valve insufficiency, aortic valve stenosis, and renal agenesis or hypoplasia among infants conceived postwar to GWV men, and a higher prevalence of hypospadias among infants conceived postwar to female GWVs. We did not have the ability to determine if the excess was caused by inherited or environmental factors, or was due to chance because of myriad reasons, including multiple comparisons. Although the statistical power was sufficient to compare the combined birth defects prevalence, larger sample sizes were needed for less frequent individual component defects.

Not exactly earth shattering. The sample size was too small to compare most individual defects and the increase in overall defects was barely statistically significant. They can't conclude that it wasn't other factors or chance. That's a long way from 2/3 having gross defects.

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-29   16:04:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#327. To: Kyle (#326)

I figured you would jump on that sentence and misunderstand what it was saying. That's not uncommon for an uneducated immature kid like yourself. Try reading it again to see if you can sleuth out what it really means. If you get stuck and give up, I might even help you with the big words.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-04-29   16:05:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#328. To: Kyle (#319)

Correction: " It is duly noted that you made no attempt to defend the claims that I skewered skewed.'

AND also I referenced Dr. Rokke several times and you attempted to demonize him and then totally ignored my references to him and what he has said on DU.

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-29   16:06:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (329 - 488) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest