Depleted Uranium (DU)

[walker 0]

Hi Kuja

First Decent military info I have seen on the subject.

I will look through it and give a critique.

Well done for finding it.

Kind Regards Walker

[walker 0]

Hi Kuja

Well your info looks good.

If you look at the

Quote[/b] ]Estimated upper limit for depleted uranium (DU) intakes, kidney concentration, and radiation dose (committed effective dose equivalent, CEDE) calculated by Office of the Special Assistant for Gulf War Illnesses2

You can ignore the soldier in the tank hit by a round in Level One that case is obvious.

You can also ignore all the ones in catogories Level Two and Level Three they are masked up for decom.

The only relevant bit is

Quote[/b] ]Soldiers who entered US vehicles to rescue occupants immediately after friendly-fire DU impacts

They had doses that "Exceeds health guide"

Other than that there is no info on your two links that deals with the scenario we talking about:

The Scenario is

People in the area not in Decom suits directly exposed to ingestion of Aerosolised DU.

If you have a study of that it wil be very relevant but thanks for the effort and proof that DU exposures for those not suited up for decom exceed health guidelines.

Please continue with your search as I am sure wiith your skills you can come up the kind of data that will allow us to access the obvious risks of using DU.

Kind Regards Walker

[walker 0]

Hi all

320 tons of DU used in gulf

10%–35% (with a maximum of 70%) of the original depleted uranium metal forms into an aerosol when it hits a hard target

Acuracy of rounds is an unknown

dito rounds that hit a hard surface is uknown

We know Upon impact, the DU core partially vaporizes producing uranium oxide in particulates of between 0.5 and 5 microns(micrometers) in size.

60%–69% of the dust is resporable (0.5 and 5 microns(micrometers) in size)

We now need to asses amount that can get into an individual

7.1% of the gulf vetrans not in the heavy exposure group showed higher than normal Uranium levels in their urine

The test group was only 169 selected individuals.(statiscal significance is small sorry not my fault military study)

From the info given there is no per particle dosage info but we can take this info from the US Institute for Molecular Medicine: "If even one particle of uranium oxide, of less than five micrometers(microns), is trapped in the pulmonary system, the lungs and surrounding tissues can be exposed over a year up to 272 times the annual radiation dosage permitted radiation workers by US regulations."

THE FOLLOWING IS A GUESS (can one of the more mathmaticly minded among us give the figures?)

Since these exposures to inhaled particles are likely to be across a bell curve we can assume exposures on average of about 130 times the annual radiation dosage permitted radiation workers by US regulations using the 5 micron level as 272 times.

END OF GUESS

THE FOLLOWING IS A GUESS (perhaps someone can supply proper figures?)

Gulf War vetrans were exposed for three months post GW I when the dust was about.

END OF GUESS

THE FOLLOWING IS A GUESS

There must be a reduction in local area exposure as the cloud of DU dust is dispersed by weather. The spread will not affect exposure levels in total merely spread them wider but over time DU will become locked into none threatening parts of the environment I am guess 90% ends up out of harms way within a year.

END OF GUESS

Now lets do some back of the envelope math

For risk assesment prposes upper end figures used. If someone wants to do lower end it would be uesful

320 tons 35% = 112 tons (converted to dust)

112 tons 69% = 77.28 tons (resperable for the first year)

reducing by 90% per year

77.28 10% = 7.728 tons (resperable for the second year)

Please note the DU is still in the environment just not resperable

We now need to spread those 7.728 over the affected area. Then work out how many people actualy inhaled a particle for which we need assess the risk of inhailing a particle in a square metre of ground.

But from kujas excelent info that over the first three months 7% of people will be exposed to 130 times the annual radiation dosage permitted radiation workers by US regulations

Out of the GW vetrans that is aprox 7% of 500,000 US soldiers so 35000 will have been exposed to 130 times the annual radiation dosage permitted radiation workers by US regulations.

Somone want to do that for the Gulf population?

Of course this is all speculation what is realy needed is a proper UN mass survey of DU in the GW I vetrans and Gulf citizens. Which the US DOD will not permit.

Kind Regards walker

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Quote[/b] ]

From the info given there is no per particle dosage info but we can take this info from the US Institute for Molecular Medicine: "If even one particle of uranium oxide, of less than five micrometers(microns), is trapped in the pulmonary system, the lungs and surrounding tissues can be exposed over a year up to 272 times the annual radiation dosage permitted radiation workers by US regulations."

Now do the calculations for depleted uranium

[walker 0]

Now do the calculations for depleted uranium

Hi

Just checking my sources but if you want to reduce the figures by 40% (for the radiaoctivity of DU versus worst case Uranium Fuel) I wont mind

EDIT

Just checked my original sources that data is correct for Depleted Uranium so don't take the 40% figure off.

END EDIT

In the mean time here is a materials safety sheet from a supplier most notable for all the bits where it says "No specific information is available" as the US DoD prevents research.

Material Safety Data Sheet

Kind Regards Walker

[Sigma-6 29]

Quote[/b] ]Now do the calculations for depleted uranium

Would you stop saying that? Would you read the data?

Depleted Uranium is Uranium 235, which is 238 with its fissionable component removed. It's called depleted by the nuclear power industry because it can't be used as fuel, not because it's functionally any less dangerous.

Saying that just demonstrates that you don't understand the physics.

On top of that, I want to make it *quite* clear that in the context it has been described in this thread, saying that Uranium 235 is 'harmless' can only be done in defiance and ignorance of sixty to seventy years of physical evidence (the study of the core sciences, specifically physics, since about 1930) that many people (scientists included; some of whom I have studied in great detail (particularly Feynman) have died to collate. This is patently absurd. It flies in the face of everything we know about radioactivity, and as time goes on, it has succeeded only in eroding the credibility of the DoD.

In short:

You *Can't* prove (either enthusiasts, or the MDs at the DoD) that U235 doesn't have the effects described, it's already been proven by decades upon decades of repeatable experimentation and peer review.

Read the handling precautions for crissake! They're there foir a reason. It amazes me (and every freaking physicist I talk to) that the DoD can simultaneously publish its handling precautions and also expain that they're pointless when it comes to being accountable when they're not used.

[Sigma-6 29]

Quote[/b] ]Even assuming that DU rounds do in fact cause harm to the environment and other life in the vicinity of combat usage, I don't think the term NBC could really be stretched to include DU rounds.  As others have said, the lead core of a bullet could be considered an NBC under such classification guidelines.  I imagine that a fair amount of lead would be deposited on the insides of enemy soldiers when the current rounds employed in the M16-A2 fragment - is the M-855 a chemical weapon?  In addition, DU rounds are not employed with the intention of causing harm through NBC means, they're used as a kinetic penetrator against armour...so...

The lead core of a bullet is not radioactive. (you're comparing apples and oranges)

DU is radioactive. Inhaled dust causes cancer. [thus] DU is a radiological weapon. You'll see where it's quite clear on "any weapon or device that is intended, or has the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to a significant number of people through the release, dissemination, or impact of - (A) toxic or poisonous chemicals or their precursors; (B) a disease organism; or © radiation or radioactivity."

Which is to say, whether you intended it to or not, it fits this classification if it meets any of these criteria. (you can't claim 'we didn't know')

Incidentally, the quality of those Australian reports is precisely what concerns me. They're medically sound (in terms of the types of studies they did; we had similar ones here in Canada, and they failed to include any of the possible vectors that are being explored onsite in Iraq, the same as these, and the DoD's do), but they don't have the scientific credibility to be considered an in-depth study by anyone's reckoning as a scientist. Science is based on repeatability and peer-review. Which means that even if we don't like what we learn, if our peers can prove we're wrong, we accept their proof. Asking a military to provide doctors to study (in clinical conditions) the effects of a weapon in a totally alien environment under completely different conditions, and then preventing further (independent) study from having any effect on your data doesn't fit the bill.

[walker 0]

Hi all

A lot of people wanted info on the inhaled particles of Depleted Uranium Oxide and I have found some on this site

http://www.umrc.net Uranium Medical Research Centre the site well researched with peer reviewed articles.

Here is the relevant section but have a look at the whole site

Quote[/b] ] Tiny as it is, the 2.5 micron Depleted Uranium Oxide pellet contains 210 billion atoms (2.1 x 10 to the power of 11) of U238. Each year, the pellet will emit an average 32.3 alpha particles. It also contains U234, 235, 236 which together yield an additional 5.3 alpha particles per year. Thus a single pellet of Depleted UO2 will produce a total of 37.6 alpha particles per year.

The 37.6 alpha particles will deliver a radiation dose of 17 rads/year. With an RBE (Relative Biological Effectiveness) factor of 10, the dose rate is 170 rem/year for the surrounding body tissue. In the US, the Code of Federal Regulations regarding energy specifies an annual limit of 0.17 rem/year and a specific limit of 0.5 rem/year for an individual in the general population.

A quick calculation shows one single pellet delivers 1,000 times the annual limit. This number is multiplied by the total number of pellets present in the body. For example, if a single or series of exposures resulted in the presence of 10 pellets then the annual limit is exceeded by 10,000.

Another factor to consider is "permanence". Objects or particles less than 5 micron in diameter are considered respirable, meaning that it is small enough to enter into the lungs and become permanently trapped. If the body does not manage to somehow release it then the radiation is internalized and the dosage is permanent during the individual's lifetime and even remains in their physical remains after death.

Note the 1,000 times the annual limit is for the general public listed above are the same as the levels of 272 times the annual radiation dosage permitted radiation workers by US regulations I was quoting before from my original source a well written paper on DU Exposure in Gulf War Vets

Contamination of Persian Gulf War Veterans and Others by Depleted Uranium by Leonard A. Dietz

Kind Regards Walker

[Acecombat 0]

Victim blows lid on uranium risk

By Lawrence Smallman

Thursday 27 November 2003, 11:04 Makka Time, 8:04 GMT  

Depleted uranium affects soldier and civilian alike

Related:

Iraq's real WMD crime

US veterans sue firms that helped Saddam

Tools:

 Email Article  

 Print Article  

 Send Your Feedback  

A British man is suing a civilian company over radiological contamination allegedly suffered while unknowingly working with depleted uranium.

Richard David was an engineer and machinist from 1985 to 1995 in an aerospace firm based in England.

His job required him to fine finish metal components with a scouring pad, producing a dust resembling talcum power.

David now believes this powder was an alloy which included depleted uranium - a material of which ordinary workers had no knowledge.

His throat caused him immense pain even after the first few months of work, but when he eventually left for health reasons – his lungs and wind-pipe had suffered irreparable damage.

Toll on health

Fifty-year-old David has seen his health deteriorate over the last 15 years and has watched former middle-aged work-mates die of all types of cancers and disease.

His manager died within months of retiring – a victim of throat cancer.

The daily breakfast routine includes pain killers, a steroid inhaler, medication for lowered potassium, and diuretic tablets.

By 2000, he was also faced with chronic fatigue, various lumps growing upon his skull and a rare kidney disorder called Gitlemans syndrome.

Richard David does not expect a

cure, just action on DU issue

But as news of depleted uranium and its effects on Iraqis and veterans of the first Gulf War began to seep out, the engineer began to suspect what may have happened to him.

No doctors had been able to explain his breathing problems, his joint pain, muscular spasms and lung scarring, despite consultations with London specialists.

But no one had considered radiological contamination.

Proving his case

Now, independent testing from the Uranium Medical Research Centre in Canada, run under the auspices of Professor Durakovic, has proven undisputedly that his body was contaminated with depleted uranium.

Further testing in Berlin shows chromosomal damage - which can only occur through exposure to radiation.

But as David sought compensation, he stumbled across the much bigger picture.

DU is not only a military concern. The stark reality is this waste material is a danger to the general public and surrounds them in places they do not even know.

Many unsuspecting victims have been contaminated without realising.

DU for civilian use

After the El Al plane (with still unknown cargo) crashed in Amsterdam in 1992, over 800 families and many clean up workers reported similar symptoms to those of Iraqis and Gulf veterans.

Hundreds of kilograms of DU counterweights in the plane burned in the crash, contaminating the neighbourhood with deadly uranium oxide smoke.

The aerospace industry still uses this heavy metal, but this is only the tip of the ice-burg.

Uranium based metals are increasingly used within civilian life.

Boeing 747s were built with DU

counterweights, gradually being

replaced with tungsten alternatives

In the US, some advocates of recycling DU have hinted that such metals could be used in everyday house-hold products, with DU reportedly having been used some years ago in the dental industry, and within the building industry also.

In the UK, this concern is already being realised with some union representatives claiming these metals have already proliferated into a vast array of various products such as flywheels and car clutches.

Effects

No amount of exposure to radiation is too small to cause damage. DU is an alpha-particle emitter that remains radioactive for hundreds of millions of years.

The findings and case studies from Afghanistan, the Balkans, and Iraq - where DU and uranium weapons were and are used - fully illustrate that the long term prognosis is very bleak indeed.

Use of depleted uranium in weapons is illegal according to the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights.

In particular, the 2002 and 2003 reports prepared by Chief Justice Yueng Sik Yuen clearly indicate that weapons with depleted uranium are necessarily indiscriminate and cause superfluous and unnecessary suffering.

This makes their use incompatible with existing rules of armed combat.

But no matter if DU is vaporised in the heat of battle, or when metal is drilled or sanded in a factory, or when aircraft crash into residential areas - the physical effects are the same.

Richard David’s body is failing him now, he describes how he exists rather than lives – robbed of the joys of being a husband, father and friend.

Link

Old discussion but this is new news...

[Major Gripe 0]

So his throat caused him 'immense pain' after a few months but he continued to do the job for 10 yrs.   Does that sound ridiculous to anyone else? I mean if it hurts, you stop doing it or find out a way to do it without causing yourself pain, otherwise the body's pain response would be useless!!  

BTW

Quote[/b] ]Richard David’s body is failing him now, he describes how he exists rather than lives – robbed of the joys of being a husband, father and friend.

This paragraph was brilliant, fair and objective journalism.    

[bn880 5]

Here goes something I can only pass as rumour...

Sometimes when DU ammo is going of in Iraq the soldiers in the field know they should not be around as they are exposed to radiation, the reporters comment on this as well. I don't know how "educated" their concerns are, but heck, they are right there in combat.

edit: ok I'll let everyone whine about my post as I turn the PC off, gotta end this day as I've not achieved anything much, ffs

[Guest]

Lets also not forget the fact that cows have a major part in polluting our enviroment with methane, maybe there should be a lobby for the extermination of all cows?

McDonalds?

[Acecombat 0]

So his throat caused him 'immense pain' after a few months but he continued to do the job for 10 yrs.   Does that sound ridiculous to anyone else? I mean if it hurts, you stop doing it or find out a way to do it without causing yourself pain, otherwise the body's pain response would be useless!!  

BTW

Quote[/b] ]Richard David’s body is failing him now, he describes how he exists rather than lives – robbed of the joys of being a husband, father and friend.

This paragraph was brilliant, fair and objective journalism.    

You know what he didnt probably 'knew' at that time that the thing which he was dealing with could have been the cause.

If i go to work at someplace and get sick i dont start blaming people at my workplace for it

Quote[/b] ]while unknowingly working

Objective journalism?

So now a persons personal pain written with a pen and paper is called that ? I wonder how much of a brave person you are in Real life because i dont think i can endure the pains that come with such diseases especially cancer. I have seen first hand what it can do to a person and how much he has to suffer from it.

I am sorry if your point was something else but i am interpreting it as a poke towards the reports crediblity over the guys suffering.

[walker 0]

Hi all

@Acecombat

As I have not been able to track your Aljazeera.Net - Victim blows lid on uranium risk to original sources or to a second reputable source. I took the liberty of posting this email to a few UK news Services. The BBC and Guardian being two.

Quote[/b] ]Dear Sir/Madam

While reading this thread

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....7;st=75

in a forum to which I contribute I came across a link to an article in the Arab media group Aljazeera.Net

The link is: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR....CDA.htm

I have not been able to track it to original sources as they do not apear to post them.

The gist of the story is that a Mr. Richard David is suing a UK Aerospace firm for radiological contamination allegedly suffered while unknowingly working with depleted uranium.

The person who wrote the story Lawrence Smallman is named as though he is a national of an english speaking nation.

As the person involved is a UK national and apears to be suing a UK firm I thought it would have made the news here. Yet I have found no metion of it in your site or anywhere else on the web. Or in any other UK media site.

As you have court reporters I find it hard to believe if such a case were lodged you would have missed it. So maybe it is only an intention to sue and the case has not yet been lodged. An other option is that the article is ficticious. With your resources I am sure you can clear this up.

Kind Regards Ian Walker

If you have secondary sources or the original source please let us know it Acecombat it is not that I dont trust Aljazeera.Net it is that as with all news media I either want two reporter sources or better still the original Multiple original sources and expert testimony are better still.

Kind Regards Walker

[EiZei 0]

Wasn't al-jazeera originally BBC Arabic television or something like that?

[walker 0]

Hi all

A little bit of searching and I found this source

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/11/282063.html

It is an independant anachist media site. Involved in several issues such as globalisation so judge its bias accordingly.  

First up the name they have is his prefered name "Nibby David" but Richard David is his birth certificate name and it is listed in the article so it is the same person. The article is an interview which makes it original source.

As the source is the original it is better I would still prefer a 2nd major news source to confirm it but now I can do a search of relevant court reports for original sources as this interview gives specifics.

Kind Regards Walker

[Acecombat 0]

No Walker i dont have a secondary source atm.

I read that Al-jazera one last night so i didnt get the time to check CNN or BBC for it.

I'll read your link later too , thanks for the find.

[bn880 5]

Here goes something I can only pass as rumour...

Sometimes when DU ammo is going of in Iraq the soldiers in the field know they should not be around as they are exposed to radiation, the reporters comment on this as well. I don't know how "educated" their concerns are, but heck, they are right there in combat.

edit: ok I'll let everyone whine about my post as I turn the PC off, gotta end this day as I've not achieved anything much, ffs

Ok this might be less rumor now... 10MB file

Military Du awareness

Sorry for the shitty quality. (or maybe this was mentioned here before)

[Eviscerator 0]

http://www.mod.uk/issues/depleted_uranium/index.htm

http://www.mod.uk/issues/depleted_uranium/documentation.htm

http://www.mod.uk/issues/depleted_uranium/misconceptions.htm

http://www.mod.uk/issues/depleted_uranium/facts.htm

http://www.mod.uk/issues/depleted_uranium/middle_east_2003.htm

I have just found this very interesting website from the British Ministry of Defence on the use and facts concerning depleted uranium. Although it will probably be disregarded here as bile seeing as it does not support abandoning DU as a weapon but i am much more inclined to believe this evidence and the various sources it is taken from than the bunch of anarchists hell bent on 'rebelling' against anything slightly resembling a government. Also, i would take anything Al Jazeera report with a bucket of salt, i have just visited their site and on one of their pages they resort to showing pictures of deformed bloody foetus', a truly sickening tactic of getting people to believe these deaths are attributable to DU, even though the deaths and malformities could be caused by many naturally occuring illnesses and no evidence is put forward to back up their claim that DU was in fact to blame.

Quote[/b] ]Didn't use of DU in the 1990-91 Gulf Conflict lead to cancers and birth defects in Iraq?

Media reports of DU-induced cancers and birth defects in Iraq have not been substantiated with credible scientific evidence. Many other factors need to be considered as possible causes, for example, some scientists have blamed the former Iraqi Government's use of chemical weapons on its own citizens.

The Royal Society's report on "The Health Hazards of Depleted Uranium Munitions" Part II states that "Modelling of the amounts of DU resuspended from soil in the years following a conflict indicates that the estimated inhalation intakes will not lead to any increase in the incidence of lung cancer or any other cancers among children or adults. Nor are they likely to lead to any significant effects on kidney function."

With regard to reports of foetal deaths and malformations in children born after conflicts, the Royal Society's aforementioned reports conclude that "These reports are of obvious concern but are very difficult to interpret as reliable data on the rates of foetal death and malformation prior to and following these conflicts are not available." Also, "the WHO has initiated studies to ascertain whether reproductive health in Iraq has declined since the Gulf War. If there have been increased rates of foetal death and malformation it will again be difficult to know whether this is due to DU as the population of Iraq has been subjected to multiple toxic exposures". Furthermore, "It should also be remembered that malnutrition can increase the incidence of malformations (eg the link between neural tube defects and folic acid deficiency is firmly established)."

[Acecombat 0]

Also, i would take anything Al Jazeera report with a bucket of salt

Surely the same can be said of any US govt website which tells us that DU is as harmless as sand

Al-Jazeera cant concote anything out of itself all it does is sensationalize the news a crime which every media outlet these days is to be blamed for not only them.

If they showed pics of the deformed foetus then its to attract Int'l attention which is otherwise glued to their bloody seats hoping those elusive WMDs would be found sometime soon that theres another crisis in Iraq too one which no one is looking up to. But yeah for you it will be some gruesome tactic unless CNN showed it otherwise then it will be medical crisis or some other fancy term i guess....

I am not siding with any one here just asking to keep a balanced opinion.

[walker 0]

Hi Eviscerator

Yes Very Good info on DU I quote from the same site

Quote[/b] ]ACTION ON ENTERING CONTAMINATED AREA OR CLOSE TO DU-STRUCK AFV

8. Monitoring. Dose rates near DU munitions are low and most personnel do not need monitoring. Those who handle DU munitions on a regular basis (e.g. tank crews and EOD personnel) or are likely to find themselves in close proximity to 'unboxed' DU munitions (e.g. REME turret crews) are to be issued with Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs), as supplied by DRPS complete with instructions for use. Sensitive low level monitoring (rather than NBC) equipment is required to check whether a strike is caused by DU. Some UK units (and possibly US Forces) have this equipment and may be deployed to monitor suspected DU strikes as necessary. It is recommended that databases be created at unit level where appropriate to monitor and record TLD readings. Individual readings should be recorded as per paragraph 16 below. This information should be preserved for future use after operations and their medical and personal records annotated as appropriate.

9. Recognition. If a DU projectile misses the target it may eventually come to rest on the surface and be recognised thus: a. MBT Projectiles. These will take the form of a long thin rod, pointed at one end, with short stubby fins on the other (although the latter may become detached by passing through a soft target). They will look like brass (US) or be black (UK). The projectile may also be broken up into segments. If the projectile passes through a soft target (e.g. canvas) it may leave a circular or star-shaped hole. The exit hole will be slightly larger than the entry. A hard target struck by DU will emit a much brighter flash than normal, usually with a greenish tinge. Impact will result in DU dust settling on the target exterior and in the immediate area, and, if penetrated, inside the target. DU dust looks like soot or lumps of charcoal. It may, over time, develop a green and/ or yellow tinge. b. Ground Attack Aircraft Projectiles. These are about 4 inches long and half an inch in diameter, pointed at one end. They may still be in their windshield (similar to a MBT round sabot) when their diameter will be about one inch.

10. Nevertheless, it will often be difficult to know when an AFV has been struck by DU shot. It should therefore be assumed on encountering struck AFVs that the shot was DU and suitable precautions taken against DU dust as detailed below, until the vehicle can be surveyed for DU contamination.

11. Avoidance of Contact. Personnel should not touch, pick up or retain souvenirs from struck AFVs or DU fragments, unless ordered to do so as part of an authorised clean-up operation. When doing so, they must use a shovel or similar implement as fragments can also be very sharp. Note that the discarded sabots from DU rounds may occasionally be very slightly contaminated. There is no significant health risk, but hands should be washed after handling sabot fragments.

12. Personnel should not climb onto or into vehicles or structures possibly hit by DU rounds unless required to do so. Personnel should avoid the surrounding area by at least 50m and attempt to stay upwind of fires involving DU, such as AFV casualties. Above all, smoking, eating or drinking should not be conducted near a target struck by DU.

13. Entry into DU Contaminated Areas. When it is necessary to enter DU contaminated areas, exposed skin is to be covered and especially any exposed wounds. If practicable, NBC rubber gloves or leather gloves and a dust mask, such as Mask, Air Filtering Disposable (NSN 4240-99-156-3608) should be worn. If no mask is readily available, a handkerchief, shemaugh or sweat rag (wet better than dry) should be used to cover nose and mouth. Full NBC IPE is not necessary unless prolonged dust-raising activities are to be carried out, such as extensive repair or vehicle recovery activities. As little time as practicable should be spent on the task, attempting to keep general dust disturbance to a minimum. As soon as possible after task completion, dust should be brushed off clothing in a controlled and marked site, any nose/mouth and glove protection being maintained until contaminated clothing has been removed. Outer clothing should be changed at the first convenient opportunity and laundered in the normal way before being worn again. Hands should then be washed before eating, drinking or smoking.

14. When operational conditions dictate that DU contaminated areas must be entered immediately, or when the wearing of IPE is not possible, dust-raising activities should be kept to a minimum as far as possible. Damp cloths or similar should be used to wipe down and decontaminate surfaces. Whenever practicable, precautions should be taken to limit the spread of DU dust when moving items that may be contaminated. Decontamination, covering the equipment with a tarpaulin or sealing the contamination in place with paint can be considered.

15. Medical. Wounds that may contain DU must be cleaned at the earliest opportunity under running water and covered with a dry dressing. The Surgeon General's Department has disseminated separate medical instructions to medical staff. Medical staff should, if practicable, wear filter masks, plastic aprons and double-layered surgical gloves. Apron and gloves should be changed between patients. Patients should be wrapped in a blanket for transport. Contaminated clothing should be cut off and bagged.

16. Recording. Personnel that may have been contaminated with DU are to have that fact annotated in their medical and personal records. After the operation, they are to be advised by DRPS of their access to biological monitoring.

Source

http://www.mod.uk/issues/depleted_uranium/gulf_safety_instructions.htm

As you can see this makes explicit the risks of DU once it forms an Uranium Oxide Dust. I also makes clear that ingestion is deadly witness 50m exclusion zone

I agree with you on the "waiving bloody stumps around" not good evidence but as the US DOD has blocked all atempts to study the effects of Depleted Uranium Oxide Dust. So we are reduced to hunting for snippets and falling back on common sense but with your help by finding little jewels like this I am sure we can get the the Message that Depleted Uranium Oxide Dust is deadly across to more people especialy those placed at risk in the millitary.

By the way Anarchist me Guilty as charged always will be a member of the awkward squad I hope.

Kind Regards Walker

[Eviscerator 0]

Also, i would take anything Al Jazeera report with a bucket of salt

Surely the same can be said of any US govt website which tells us that DU is as harmless as sand  

Al-Jazeera cant concote anything out of itself all it does is sensationalize the news a crime which every media outlet these days is to be blamed for not only them.

If they showed pics of the deformed foetus then its to attract Int'l attention which is otherwise glued to their bloody seats hoping those elusive WMDs would be found sometime soon that theres another crisis in Iraq too one which no one is looking up to. But yeah for you it will be some gruesome tactic unless CNN showed it otherwise then it will be medical crisis or some other fancy term i guess....

I am not siding with any one here just asking to keep a balanced opinion.

The links i have posted are from the British MOD, not the US Government. Also, following links from that page you can find several other independant reports on the effects of depleted uranium, for instance the Royal Society information on DU (including reports).

Quote[/b] ]A recent United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) report giving field measurements taken around selected impact sites in Kosovo (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) indicates that contamination by DU in the environment was localized to a few tens of metres around impact sites. Contamination by DU dusts of local vegetation and water supplies was found to be extremely low. Thus, the probability of significant exposure to local populations was considered to be very low.

World Health Organization DU Links

UN's Post-Conflict Assessment Unit

Also, any news report/website or channel that shows graphic images without displaying a warning first is wholly in the wrong, the images i saw on the Al Jazeera website could have been viewed by anyone and were by far enough to give children nightmares. A bloody malformed corpse of a baby, whether it be shown by Americans or Arabs is something that should never be broadcast, the loss of a baby should be mourned, not waved around to further someones political views and aims.

[walker 0]

Hi all

I saw from the excelent site Eviscerator gave us that the UK Ministry of Defence is asking for scientists to conduct research into the medical effects of DU.

http://www.mod.uk/issues/depleted_uranium/du_research.htm

of particular interest to this thread is the

Quote[/b] ]3.2 Source Characteristics

3.2.1 Radioactivity

3.2.1.1.

where it says.

Quote[/b] ] For internal radiation exposure, account must be taken of the different degrees to which the various radiations (alpha, beta and gamma) damage tissue. Alpha radiation is 20 times more damaging to tissue than is beta or gamma.

(Use of bold is mine)

Source

http://www.mod.uk/issues....rce.htm

and further

Quote[/b] ]3.5 Impact Effects On Striking Hard Targets

3.5.1. DU is pyrophoric and during hard target (e.g. armoured vehicle) interactions a series of complex oxides are formed in addition to DU dust and fragments. In such interactions between 10 and 35% of the penetrator may be aerosolised (13). The actual percentage will vary according to the circumstances; the specific area of impact, the hardness of the target; the velocity and angle of impact and the pathway through the target are all factors. The main oxide formed by combustion is U3O8 along with UO2 and UO3 (14,21). Unburned DU will also eventually oxidise in the environment to produce these oxides (see (13) - TAB M, "Characterising DU Aerosols" for a comprehensive account of KE penetrator encounters with hard targets. See also (41-45)).

3.5.2. Aerosol and dust arising from hard target impacts poses the significant risk as a potential inhalation hazard, particularly for those troops manning the target vehicle and surviving the impact. The nature of the inhaled material, its morphology, its mass, its particle size distribution and its solubility will all be significant factors in assessing any potential risk to health. Extensive test firings have recently been carried out in the US to characterise the aerosol formed during DU impacts with hard targets and the US has advised that an unclassified report of the test and its results will be published. The MOD will evaluate the results of these tests and seek to participate in any future test firings being conducted in the US. Resuspension inside damaged vehicles is an important issue and some work on this topic has already been carried out in the US. Publicly available results are summarised in (46). Information from UK test firings at Eskmeals has been provided to the Royal Society DU Working Group (47).

(use of bold is mine)

They will also be looking into Decay particles. These are sources for Alpha but also Beta and Gama radiation and are created by DU as it decays consequently these are an external and not just an ingested contaminant danger They may pose a higher long term risk than plain DU. The science of this has already been explained earlier in this thread and is a well known to any Degree Level Science Student.

Now look at

Quote[/b] ]3.2 Source Characteristics

3.2.1 Radioactivity

3.2.1.1.

on the same page in that section is the bald Statement about ingested DU Oxide Dust

Quote[/b] ]However, the hazard is increased if DU is inhaled, ingested or there is absorption into the body through fragment penetration or open wounds.

Something we have been saying in this thread since the start.

Of further interest is the data on the actual amounts of Dust created 10% to 35% this will help in the risk calculations back in this thread. The exact levels of dust that is aerosolised is in the currently classified US report that the US has promissed to declassify; as mentioned in the page.

As serving in the Gulf may already be affecting their present and future medical insurance expences, I would suggest to any serving or former US Gulf War Veterans to push their governments excelent freedom of information laws to declasify this as soon as possible.

Once again I think we should aplaud Eviscerator for finding such an excelent source of rational information on the obvious dangers of Depleted Uranium Oxide Dust.

Kind Regards Walker

[T.S.C.Plage 0]

"Inspired" by a post from FireflyPL I want to start a discussion about the (mis)use of Depleted Uranium (DU) in the military sector.

I just quote some important posts at the beginning so we've a starting point and know what was said before...

well, but fact is fact, that DU is toxic... i'm not talking about nuclear arsenal which is huge on both sides and not talking about it's testings... just depleted uranium rounds...

you guys, think it's modern weapon, i think it's unhealthy weapon used in war...

don't know how to say... no other nato or not nato countryes don't use this kind of rounds in war and i support them...

Sorry, but You can even eat pure Uranium as Uranium's molecule is very big and can't be inhaled by human's digesting system. It's green's propaganda that talks about DU.

...

What's more, far more damage to enviroment is daily done by cars and coal/oil energy plants than all nuclear energy plants. Greens are liers as they don't care about enviroment,...

Inform yourself before stating bs!!!

Quote[/b] ]DU is poryphor! At impact it ignites and burns at 3.000°C. A new hightemperatur-chemical which produces hightoxic and cancerous substances is the result. This substances fall out as Uraniumoxid. These DU-dust-particels are extremly small-sized. They have a diameter of 0,001 µmeter (10 Angstroem) up to 0,1 µmeter. Particels of this size behave like gas. That means they are moving up into the atmosphere and there they are moving around the planet with the atmospheric airstreams. In Bosnia DU was found in areas where no battles where fought.

The submicroscopic DU-particels are inhaled. In the lung they come in contact with the blood and it's bloodcells, the so called Erythrozyten and Leukozyten. A Erythrozyt(e) has the size of 7 µmeter, DU-dust 0,1-0,001 µmeter. The dustparticel absorbes the bloodcell and penetrates it. All, defnitly all parts of our body are reached by our blood and in this way also by DU.

Parts taken and translated from "Curse And Tragedy Of The Uranium Misuse (German; Version 1.3)" by Prof. Dr. A. Schott (Head of the World Depleted Uranium Center - WODUC) http://www.woduc.de/Html/Downloads_DE.htm

Well, this is just an opinion of one guy, and as I can see this is site with certain "vision" of Uranium. The fact is that even ordinary shell can cause toxic gas, not mentioning that AFAIR tank armours are reinforced with DU as it is one of the hardest materials (and is quite cheap)..

Take for example this World Health Organisation report on DU

http://www.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA54/ea5419a1.pdf

"Depleted uranium has several peaceful applications: as counterweights or ballast in aircraft,

radiation shields in medical equipment used for radiation therapy and containers for the transport of

radioactive materials."

"For the general population, it is unlikely that the exposure to depleted uranium will significantly exceed the normal background uranium levels."

"CONCLUSIONS: RESEARCH

Gaps in knowledge exist and further research is recommended in key areas that would allow

better health-risk assessments to be made. In particular, studies are needed to clarify our understanding

of the extent, reversibility and possible existence of thresholds for kidney damage in people exposed to

depleted uranium. Important information could come from studies of populations exposed to naturally

elevated concentrations of uranium in drinking-water."

So still there are no scientific proof that DU can do more harm than natural existing Uranium.

Oh and there is something about Balkans too

http://www.who.int/inf-pr-2001/en/pr2001-22.html

"Measurements of environmental DU at selected sites in Kosovo (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) indicate localized contamination (within a few tens of meters of impact sites) at the ground surface. This suggests that the likelihood of health consequences to the local population is very low unless people are active at the impact sites or the DU progresses in significant quantities to the food chain or ground water."

@ FireflyPL:

You didn't understand what I wrote! You're maybe right that DU as itself is relativly harmless and is used in medical-equipment for example but what we're talking about is Uraniumoxid aka Uranium-dust that is produced during the chemical reaction at an impact of a DU-projectile.

As I wrote above particels are produced that can be inhaled and absorbed by the human-body and will defnitly cause cancer and other physical and psychological problems!

The man I mentioned in my post above (Prof. Dr. A. Schott) is as stated the head of the WODUC and was Professor at the Free University of Berlin and did research for German governmental institutions. He and a team of other scientists visited Iraq and took samples in the near of tank-wrecks that were destroyed by DU-ammo.

During this shorttime of three weeks he already absorbed so much radioactiv and toxic material that he and some of his team already got irreparable disease...think about the people that (have to) live there for years!!!

For example there's a village in Bosnia which name I don't remember. Serbian tanks were in position close to that village and NATO-aircrafts attacked and destroyed these tanks with DU-bombs. A couple of years later 1.500 of the 3.500 villagers died from cancer. And you think there's no relation!?!

Please read and visit:

Submitted Evidence

Attachment 1

Attachment 2

Attachment 3

Resolution

Toxicologie of Uranium - Research for the German Scientific Institution of Agriculture

Generally http://www.woduc.de ...check the "Links" page for other usefull infos.

I'm really not "green", a pacifist or whatever but this is a really alarming thing and I think it's important to know about what's going on. It's defnitly not harmless!!!

Greetz

Plage

[Monkey Lib Front 10]

Iv'e seen alot of pictures of soldiers standing atop of Iraqi tanks/armoured vehicles hit by DU rounds which have consequently set on fire all that radiation in the air cannot be good.

tbh i don't have a clue what i'm talking about but i'm sure i saw a documentry that when a vehicle after being hit and serts on fire the amount of radioactive material in the surrounding atmosphere increases.