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: 2670
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

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 322.

#8. To: tom007 (#0)

My best guess is that the DU dust is physically toxic metal, similar to inhaling cyanide dust. It's not that much to do with the radiation.


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-28   1:53:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: SKYDRIFTER (#8)

The basic gist of this is...

Lead used as a projectile is JUST as big a deal as DU being used as a projectile.

The only reason that DU is such a big deal, is because it has Uranium in the name, and they can create a huge public problem with it.

It is just as dangerous as lead is, BUT, that is it....

SO, if you are going to freak out about DU, then you had better freak out about lead as well, otherwise, forget about it.....

Aric2000  posted on  2005-04-28   2:17:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Aric2000, Zipporah (#10)

According to Dr. Rokke, DU is not purely DU, but is chocked full of other byproducts from nuclear fission, including highly radioactive elements.

It's basically low grade radioactive waste. Nothing to worry about, I'm sure. < /sarcasm >

Arator  posted on  2005-04-28   9:13:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Arator, Aric2000, Zipporah, SKYDRIFTER (#13)

According to Dr. Rokke, DU is not purely DU, but is chocked full of other byproducts from nuclear fission, including highly radioactive elements.

It's basically low grade radioactive waste.

Whoever this Dr. Rokke is, their wrong. Aric2000 has it right, but actually overstated the problem. Lead is more chemically toxic than DU and DU is far less than 1/2 as radioactive as natural (3% U235) uranium. The half life of U238 is in the billions of years, so its decay rate is extremely low.

The radioactive waste remark is ludicrously off base. Even if the DU were made from radioactive waste (which it isn't; it's made from natural uranium ores as a byproduct of enrichment), other radioative isotopes could not be present because of the process used.

Uranium is reacted with fluorine to produce uranium hexafluoride gas. At this point, most other radioactive elements are exclude because they don't react with fluorine under the same conditions.

Then the gas is centrifuged over and over and over to separate the U238 and the U235 based on the slight difference in density. Any other gaseous radioactive compounds that MIGHT be present would have densities so low that they would all be separated out with the U235. This is purely theoretical because, in practice, they don't exist.

The gas is converted back into nearly pure U238. The only contaminate possible is residual U235, but the level is monitored closely.

Because DU comes from natural uranium and because of the production process and the monitoring of U235 levels, the resultant DU poses less of a radioactive risk than other natural and man-made sources.

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-28   10:08:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Kyle (#16)

the resultant DU poses less of a radioactive risk than other natural and man-made sources.

me-thinks you are in denial Mr. Kyle. I've read and heard from several experts who were paid by the US government to look into this, and they concluded that DU is deadly. There's also people paid by the UN to study this and they've concluded the same.

My goodness, a VA sponsored scientist concluded that DU killed 11,000 US soldiers from Gulf War 1 and you are still in denial over this.

I guess you can't handle the truth.

Red Jones  posted on  2005-04-28   10:16:19 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Red Jones, christine, Zipporah, Arator, Kyle, Aric 2000 (#17)

Hey you guys--why would two people who regularly drink the poisoned Kool-aid of the repukelican propaganda machine be worried about the poisonousness of DU?

Any points you make with these shills, no matter how rational the points, will not be absorbed. They just aren't programmed to think independently. They are only programmed to regurgitate what their masters tell them to spew.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-04-28   10:30:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t, Red Jones, christine, Zipporah, Arator, Aric 2000 (#19)

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t: Hey you guys--why would two people who regularly drink the poisoned Kool-aid of the repukelican propaganda machine be worried about the poisonousness of DU?

Red Jones: me-thinks you are in denial Mr. Kyle. I've read and heard from several experts who were paid by the US government to look into this, and they concluded that DU is deadly. There's also people paid by the UN to study this and they've concluded the same.

My goodness, a VA sponsored scientist concluded that DU killed 11,000 US soldiers from Gulf War 1 and you are still in denial over this.

1) I've never read anything from the administration on this subject. My information is based purely on my knowledge of the subject matter from independent sources.

2) I've yet to see anything purporting to 'prove' that DU is deadly, or that it has killed any significant number of people (except in the intended manner), that didn't have all the earmarks of crackpottery.

Do you deny any of the facts that I posted? That the half-life of U238 is in the order of billions of years and therefore has very, very low radioactivity? That DU contains virtually nothing except U238 and trace amounts of U235 and cannot contain other radioactive isotopes by virtue of the manufacturing process? That the chemical toxicity of U238 is much lower than that of the the principle alternative, lead?

Name calling and charges of brainwashing aren't an argument. I gave you facts.

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-28   11:41:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: Kyle (#33)

Do you deny any of the facts that I posted? That the half-life of U238 is in the order of billions of years and therefore has very, very low radioactivity? That DU contains virtually nothing except U238 and trace amounts of U235 and cannot contain other radioactive isotopes by virtue of the manufacturing process? That the chemical toxicity of U238 is much lower than that of the the principle alternative, lead?

Name calling and charges of brainwashing aren't an argument. I gave you facts.

Reading the thread, I think what you are giving these people is your half baked unsupported opinion. Like the other times you have argued on this forum, you present NOTHING to back up the shit that spews from your mouth.

No facts.

No figures.

No supporting documents,

No logic.

Just spew from the mind of a 14 year old.

You stated above that lead is much more poisonous than DU. Why should anyone believe you? You are not qualified to make this statement. You have no facts to defend it. Lead has been in the environment for centuries. It's very common. A great deal is known about the toxic properties. DU on the other hand is not common, studies have only just begun and the sample group is still small.

Can you give us a basis for your childish opinion that doesn't come from Newsmax or some other equally silly piece of propaganda?

crack monkey  posted on  2005-04-28   12:42:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: crack monkey, h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t, Red Jones, christine, Zipporah, Arator, Aric 2000 (#34)

Can you give us a basis for your childish opinion that doesn't come from Newsmax or some other equally silly piece of propaganda?

Suck on this:

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

A short review of depleted uranium toxicity

By Prof Otto G Raabe PhD, CHP Institute of Toxicology & Environmental Health University of California

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

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

Consider, for example the deposition of a respirable particle of depleted uranium dioxide in the human lung. If that particle is approximately spherical and has a diameter of 1 micrometer (aerodynamic diameter about 3 micrometer), it will emit an average of only one alpha particle every 100 days. Meanwhile the cells of the lung are being irradiated in a milieu of even more energetic alpha particles from natural radon and its decay products that are present in all the air on the surface of the earth. The total radiation dose to the lung from even relatively high exposures to airborne depleted uranium particles is not remarkable. The TLV is 0.2 mg/cubic-meter based on chemical toxicity.

After inhalation, uranium will be slowly mobilized and enter the systemic circulation. The uranyl ion is the form of mobile uranium within the body. It deposits at bone surfaces and remains in the bone matrix with a half time of up to one year. It is slowly cleared to the blood and excreted via the kidneys. While in the bone, alpha radiation is emitted, but with very low intensity since depleted uranium is not very radioactive. The range of alpha radiation in the bone is about 30 micrometer and the radiation is very diffuse, so the bone marrow is not effectively irradiated by uranium in the bone. Radiation induction of leukemia requires effective high dose-rate irradiation of the bone marrow. There is no known or expected leukemia risk associated with small amounts of U-238 in the bone because the marrow is not efficiently irradiated. [The same is true for much more highly radioactive radium-226 and plutonium- 239.]

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

References: "Handbook of the Toxicology of Metals", Friberg et al.(1990), "Uranium, Plutonium, Transplutonium Elements", Hodge et al. (1973),

"A five-year inhalation study with natural uranium dioxide", HEALTH PHYS 25, 230-258 (1973),

"Depleted Uranium In The Gulf": http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-28   12:54:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: Axenolith, AdamSelene (#37)

Chemist/Physicist ping.....review and feedback requested?

Starwind  posted on  2005-04-28   13:13:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   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   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 322.

        There are no replies to Comment # 322.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 322.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest