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: 2636
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 (1-15) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#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   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   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: tom007 (#0)

It is a HUGE irony that the propaganda those who rule over us used to justify their war on Iraq prominently claimed that Iraq represented a WMD threat, and then we invaded, and then we left behind DU which is upon close examination a WMD.

There are many among the regime that rules who will lie blatantly on this issue. The experts that our government has paid to look at this and have then concluded that DU is extremely bad news are just pushed to the side and not funded anymore. But these people have spoken. Only a few Americans will even hear them. Such is the nature of the propaganda coming down on the Americans.

Red Jones  posted on  2005-04-28   10:23:58 ET  Reply   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   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Red Jones (#17)

I guess you can't handle the truth.

I know that he's never passed a Geiger counter over a piece of the stuff. Compared to anything you'll encounter in normal life, the stuff is hot as hell, many, many times what normal background radiation is. I wonder what he thinks he's getting out of spreading this bullshit.

Esso  posted on  2005-04-28   10:36:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Esso (#20)

I know, I read some comments above, they seem surreal. People are saying that because DU has only half or some portion of the radiation of refined uranium, then it is OK. I guess we should sprinkle it on cereal in the morning because it is only half the health problem as refined uranium.

Look DU is the stuff they use to actually create the material that goes in bombs. But they're unable to take all the radiation out of the DU, a lot still remains in it. After it is exploded and made a very fine dust it travels in the air, people who breathe it die, they get cancer, they produce birth-defect kids.

For crying out-loud there's been hundreds of thousands of American children born with birth-defects in the last 15 years whose daddies were exposed to this while in the military. and the bush-bots just can't face this reality.

Red Jones  posted on  2005-04-28   10:43:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Zipporah (#12)

Zipporah, I am NOT wrong.

DU has HALF the radioactivity of NATURAL Uranium, in other words very low, natural uranium is NOT toxic, except when swallowed, and again, ONLY because it is a heavy metal.

So please, get a grip on reality, DU is as dangerous as lead, PERIOD, end of story, it is just as dangerous as ANY OTHER heavy metal, the radioactivity is so far below TOXIC levels that it is NOT even worth discussing.

So, PLEASE, quit with the propaganda crap and listen to science, and COMMON SENSE!!!

Aric2000  posted on  2005-04-28   10:48:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Red Jones (#21)

Oh please, get a GRIP, it would NOT be the radioactivity, DU is NOT that hot, it has HALF the radioactivity of NONREFINED NATURAL URANIUM!!!

SO please, ALL of you, GO GET A FRICKING EDUCATIONS.......

PLEASE!!!

Aric2000  posted on  2005-04-28   10:50:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Aric2000 (#23)

Have you read what the physicists have to say? Or are you just way smarter than those guys. Yeah, that's it.

robin  posted on  2005-04-28   10:52:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Aric2000 (#22)

like I said, medical doctors and scientists hired by the US Army, hired by the VA, hired by the UN, hired by UN associated NGOs, and others working for private charities have investigated this stuff and found it to be extremely harmful.

They use this DU material to make nuclear bombs. But it is not radioactive, and it is not dangerous you say.

Red Jones  posted on  2005-04-28   10:53:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Red Jones (#25)

It is just as toxic as any other heavy metal......

Please, I have worked with this crap for years, it is NOT harmful unless A: you are sniffing it like Coke, or are sprinkling it on your breakfast cereal.

M-1 armour uses Depleted Uranium, and has for over 20 years, so for you to start hoppiong up and down about HOW radioactive it, when in fact IT IS NOT, and how dangerous it is, WHEN in fact it is just as dangerous as ANY OTHER heavy metal is beyond me.

Go ahead, get suckered, I don't care, but I have worked with the stuff, I have fired the stuff, and it is just as dangerous as ANY OTHER HEAVY METAL.

It has URANIUM in the name, so these people you quote can make a BIG deal out of it.

It is NOT that big a deal, I wouldn't want to breathe the dust, because just like lead, it can be toxic, but the radioactivity of DU is NIL, you'd need to bathe in the shit for a year before getting the eqivalent of an X-ray.

Aric2000  posted on  2005-04-28   11:00:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Red Jones (#25)

They use this DU material to make nuclear bombs. But it is not radioactive, and it is not dangerous you say.

ROFLMAO!!!

Oh please!! Get a grip on reality, if you used DU in a nuclear weapon it would NOT go off, DU is NOT a fissile material.

No matter what you did to DU, it could NEVER, EVER explode in a nuclear reaction, NEVER. It is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.

It would be just like using LEAD as the fissile material.

You're NUTS, totally and absolutely NUTS.

DU used in nuclear weapons.....ROFLMAO!!!

Aric2000  posted on  2005-04-28   11:03:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Aric2000 (#27)

DU is a by-product of the process that is used to create the material that is used in nuclear weapons. and the majority of the radioactivity remains in the DU after this process is done. It may be a weaker concentration, but it is still there. And regardless, actual experience with this material shows it to be a very bad killer. Many people have confirmed this.

Red Jones  posted on  2005-04-28   11:10:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: Aric2000 (#22)

So, PLEASE, quit with the propaganda crap and listen to science, and COMMON SENSE!!!

I could very well tell you the same thing.. as I sugguested, read or watch the video from Dr. Rokke and then let me know your thoughts on what he has to say..

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-28   11:15:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Esso (#20)

the arrogance is astounding, isn't it?

christine  posted on  2005-04-28   11:20:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: Aric2000 (#22)

Aric shutting down and not taking in any information.. from BOTH sides of an issue.. not looking at primary documentation is more than foolish and more than closeminded... Seems your ranting has caused you to ignore the info that robin and others have posted.. not propaganda but science.. so if you chose to ignore the facts then so be it but to tell others that they are not using common sense is absolutely ridiculous.

here is an entire plethora of links on DU..

The Trail of a Bullet series

Also.. this is from the military.. :

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-28   11:28:42 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t (#19)

They just aren't programmed to think independently. They are only programmed to regurgitate what their masters tell them to spew.

Independent thinkers they are not.. and the use of critical thought is apparently a foreign concept. What is astounding
is that they totally shut down.. how dare anyone believe anything other than the official BS?
Of course the government would NEVER do anything other than be benevolent.. LOL!

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-28   11:38:07 ET  Reply   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   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   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Red Jones, Aric2000 (#28)

DU is a by-product of the process that is used to create the material that is used in nuclear weapons.

True.

...and the majority of the radioactivity remains in the DU after this process is done.

Unadulterated BS. It is virtually all removed, because virtually all of the U235 is removed. U238 has a half-life in billions of years.

It may be a weaker concentration, but it is still there.

In trace amounts

And regardless, actual experience with this material shows it to be a very bad killer. Many people have confirmed this.

Many flakes. This is almost entirely a politicized issue.

Aric - Your statement that DU is not used in nuclear warheads is not technically true. It is not used in the fissile core, because it cannot sustain a chain reaction. It is used in the shell of thermonuclear devices because it will 'fast fission' under the bombardment of neutrons from the fusion reaction. In fact, this fast fission represents most of the yield of what are commonly referred to as fusion devices. This is just a technical corection and does not refute your absolutely correct position that DU is not capable of chain reaction and has very, very low radioactivity.

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-28   12:49:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Kyle (#33)

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

Where did I call you any names?? Seems that crap was started not by me ..

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-28   12:52:55 ET  Reply   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   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: christine (#30)

the arrogance is astounding, isn't it?

I don't know what's going on here or why, but what I do know is that when I was trained in the use of radiation detection equipment over 20 years ago, the source that was used for practice detection was depleted uranium plates about 1/4" thick and 2" by 10" long. The Geiger counters would detect this with no problem. I no longer remember the exact ranges that we used, but to say that it is not a radiation source is ludicrous. The instructor explained that even though it was a low level radiation source, exposure to it should be kept to a minimum.

As far as this BS about "natural uranium", it doesn't occur naturally anymore than steel does. It has to be refined, processed and enriched.

The next thing we'll be hearing is that the "spent" fuel rods from nuke plants can be used as swizzel sticks. Sheesh.

Esso  posted on  2005-04-28   12:55:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Zipporah (#36)

Do you deny any of the facts that I posted?

Apparently not.

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-28   12:56:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Kyle, robin (#39)

Apparently not.

Nor did you address any of the facts that robin posted ..so lets see you address those.. then I'll address those..

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-28   12:58:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: Esso (#38)

i don't know what's going on either, but i can guess. it's spelled s-h-i-l-l.

christine  posted on  2005-04-28   13:02:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Kyle (#37)

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

A short review of depleted uranium toxicity

I asked if you could give us a basis for your childish, over the top opinion that wasn't based on some propaganda journal like Newsmax or Janes or somebody else who works hand in glove with the international weapons cartel.

In response, you cite Janes, the journal of the international weapons cartel.

YOU ARE FULL OF BULLSHIT.

Give us a source.

Try again.

crack monkey  posted on  2005-04-28   13:02:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: Kyle (#37)

Suck on this:

OK.

So the people who make millions manufacturing and selling DU think it's great stuff.

Do you have a source that doesn't make us laugh at you? Or is Janes the best you can do?

crack monkey  posted on  2005-04-28   13:04:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: Zipporah, robin (#40)

Nor did you address any of the facts that robin posted ..so lets see you address those.. then I'll address those..

2 words: LEUREN MORET

That is the ultimate source for most of it. Besides Moret's OBVIOUS conspiracy theorist biases that are revealed in Robin's posts, you might be interested to know that Moret claims that DU will wipe out all life on the planet. Moret has zero credibilty. Zero.

Kyle  posted on  2005-04-28   13:10:27 ET  Reply   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   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Aric2000 (#10)

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

That's like comparing coffee to heroin.

Get real.

The problem is that the effects of DU have been propagandized - not revealed.


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-28   13:14:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: Kyle (#35)

...and the majority of the radioactivity remains in the DU after this process is done.

Unadulterated BS. It is virtually all removed, because virtually all of the U235 is removed. U238 has a half-life in billions of years.

I heard a discussion of this on the radio. There was 1 fellow representing peole who'd studied this. Another fellow was a worker at Livermore Labs who actually made the bomb making material from what is DU after this process is done. They both agreed that about 85% of the radioactivity remains in the DU after the rest is extracted.

Red Jones  posted on  2005-04-28   13:14:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Kyle (#44)

You havent addressed Dr. Rokke's position on DU nor why the UN called for a ban:

Also in 1999, a United Nations subcommission considered DU hazardous enough to call for an initiative banning its use worldwide. The initiative has remained in committee, blocked primarily by the United States, according to Karen Parker, a lawyer with the International Educational Development/Humanitarian Law Project, which has consultative status at the United Nations.

And if DU is not harmful, then explain the high radioactive levels on the Highway of Death:

"DU shell holes in the vehicles along the Highway of Death are 1,000 times more radioactive than background radiation, according to Geiger counter readings done for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer by Dr. Khajak Vartaanian, a nuclear medicine expert from the Iraq Department of Radiation Protection in Basra, and Col. Amal Kassim of the Iraqi navy.

The desert around the vehicles was 100 times more radioactive than background radiation; Basra, a city of 1 million people, some 125 miles away, registered only slightly above background radiation level.

But the radioactivity is only one concern about DU munitions.

A second, potentially more serious hazard is created when a DU round hits its target. As much as 70 percent of the projectile can burn up on impact, creating a firestorm of ceramic DU oxide particles. The residue of this firestorm is an extremely fine ceramic uranium dust that can be spread by the wind, inhaled and absorbed into the human body and absorbed by plants and animals, becoming part of the food chain."

And the research and links from the National Gulf War Resource Center, Inc.

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-28   13:21:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Kyle (#16)

It's not necessarily about radiation, dip-shit! It's about metabolizing the ingested material. Similar to the ingestion of minute quantities of Cyanide.

Who are you to question an MD? I thought you lived & breathed for authority?


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-28   13:22:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: christine (#41)

i don't know what's going on either, but i can guess. it's spelled s-h-i-l-l.

Looking at the support Kyle offers for his arguments, my guess is that Kyle's primary purpose here is to punish people who dare voice opinions that diverge from the RNC party line.

Sort of an FR enforcer on loan from FR.

I think if you could pin him down on his political position he would claim to be an "independent" who often criticises Bush.

If you looked a little harder you would find that he has never cast a non-RNC vote in his life and that his "critique" of Bush consists of an unvoiced objection to a few aspects of Bush's immigration policy.

I don't think you'll ever see him present a useful or well supported piece of knowledge on the forum.

I do think you'll see him use intimidation tactics to keep others from voicing opinions that don't conform to the bot orthodoxy.

crack monkey  posted on  2005-04-28   13:28:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: crack monkey (#43)

So the people who make millions manufacturing and selling DU think it's great stuff.

LOL.. 'the love of money is the root of all evil'.. is apripos here..

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-28   13:30:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: SKYDRIFTER (#49)

It's not necessarily about radiation, dip-shit! It's about metabolizing the ingested material. Similar to the ingestion of minute quantities of Cyanide.

This is true. I was told in chemestry class that all heavy metals are poisonous in a similar manner. Mercury, lead, etc. The explanation I heard is that we have no good mechanism for cleaning them from our system and that they destroy emzines necessary for life. Constant low level exposure to anything from that region of the periodic table builds up in our systems and is eventually toxic.

crack monkey  posted on  2005-04-28   13:32:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: Kyle (#35)

    ...and the majority of the radioactivity remains in the DU after this process is done.

Unadulterated BS. It is virtually all removed, because virtually all of the U235 is removed. U238 has a half-life in billions of years.

Kyle,

You dumb-shit! U-238 is a variant of U-235 - and radioactive! What does the term "Half-life" tell you about U-238? You can't even comprehend what you write!

You may as well argue that U-239 isn't radioactive! Jesus jumpin'-up-Christ. How stupid do you want to portray yourself as?

I keep telling you how freakin' stupid you are, but you just won't listen!


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-28   13:36:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: crack monkey (#52)

The problem is that if the DU is as dangerous as I fear it is; there are going to be about 150,000 GIs waiting to die a horrible death; with the rest living in terror of delayed symptoms.

That with Bush cutting the VA benefits.


SKYDRIFTER  posted on  2005-04-28   13:38:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: SKYDRIFTER (#54)

with the rest living in terror of delayed symptoms

This is what you get with lead and mercury and some of the more exotic heavy metals.

Another problem is that the symptoms arn't well quantified for anything except lead and mercury. Here the variation in symptoms are understood because large numbers of people have been exposed and studied over long periods of time.

With DU, some of the effects might not even be recognized yet. The stuff has only been used for a very short time. For all we know it could be similar to asbestos - everyone gets sick after a certain minimum exposure, but sometimes the symptoms take 20 years to appear.

I think this danger to our troops and to the population should be balanced against the fact that we really don't need the stuff in Iraq. I recall the Uranium shells and sabots being developed for long range tank battles with the Russians. Nothing like that is taking place in Iraq. I would like to know what the uranium shells accomplish that can't be accomplished with normal ammo?

crack monkey  posted on  2005-04-28   13:46:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: SKYDRIFTER (#54)

The most serious problem IMO is that it's "genotoxic"..chemically altering DNA, switching on genes that would otherwise not be expressed. Also Alexandria Miller (radiobiologist with the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Bethesda, Maryland):

"Miller has found one way this may happen. She has discovered the first direct evidence that radiation from DU damages chromosomes within cultured cells. The chromosomes break, and the fragments reform in a way that results in abnormal joins (Military Medicine, vol 167, p 120). Both the breaks and the joins are commonly found in tumour cells."

More crucially, she has recently found that DU radiation increases gene activity in cultured cells at doses of DU not known to cause chemical toxicity (Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry, in press). The possible consequences are made all the more uncertain because no one knows if genes switched on by DU radiation enhance the damage caused by genes switched on by DU's toxic effects, or vice versa. "I think that we assumed that we knew everything that we needed to know about uranium," says Miller. "This is something we have to consider now when we think about risk estimates."

Zipporah  posted on  2005-04-28   13:54:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (57 - 488) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest