Effects of Depleted Uranium and Chemical weapons

[Makalakumu]

Anyway what did DU have to do with our countrymen being attacked and liberals believing that they "asked for it"?

It's off topic, there was a point made about civilian casualties and DU popped to mind. It probably deserves its own topic, but...

Additional issues arise: How are we to know these children were deformed by depleted uranium, as opposed to chemical weapons, which a) are known to cause birth-defects, b) were definitively used by the Iraqi government prior to, and during the first Gulf War?

70% of DU oxidizes on impact and drifts away from the battle field. UO2 is radioactive dust. This is a contributing factor that has been implicated in studies of increased amounts birth defects and cancers.

Saddam's use of chemical weapons wasn't widespread. There are little more then a half dozen reported instances and most of those were used against Iranian troops. When Saddam's stockpiles were bombed, a low level amount of chemical agent was spread far and wide.

Both of these things would have negative health effects on iraqi civilians.

 

[Rich Parsons]

70% of DU oxidizes on impact and drifts away from the battle field. UO2 is radioactive dust. This is a contributing factor that has been implicated in studies of increased amounts birth defects and cancers.

Could you provide a link or links for my education on this. Thank you.

Saddam's use of chemical weapons wasn't widespread. There are little more then a half dozen reported instances and most of those were used against Iranian troops. When Saddam's stockpiles were bombed, a low level amount of chemical agent was spread far and wide.

Birth defects also occur for other reasons, check out those in Mexico, where the hygene took a drop when industrialization hit certain areas.

As to chemical weapons, what is the study on the environment and biological influences. I am serious here, as I think this interaction into the environment and system would be as much or more so an influence, on the birth defect rate.

Both of these things would have negative health effects on iraqi civilians.

Yes, and in Japan the birth defects and radioactive levels in Hiroshima and Nagasaki (* Horrible from a humanitarian effect *) did not decrease at the normal rate of decay of the last 50+ years. Unfortunately I saw this on TV, and not sure which show, so I agree that this is here say at this point. It was found that there were some who knew the area would be "hot", so other "hot" by products were put there.

I agree that radioactivity can cause problems in large doses and over time for a total cummilation, yet, I have not read the studies that shows the DU to be the cause. Hence my request above for the links so I can read and learn.

Also, are there studies about US military persons who lived and or worked in those tanks for the year to 2 years plus while in Iraq, or eslewhere? ust curious.

 

[Makalakumu]

Rich

Before we get to far into this, could you split this off into a new topic? This is a pretty good topic and I think it would get more traffic...FWIW.

John

 

[Rich Parsons]

Rich

Before we get to far into this, could you split this off into a new topic? This is a pretty good topic and I think it would get more traffic...FWIW.

John

Thread Copied in whole to see development of topic. Thread renamed to new subject.

Old Thread can be found here Here


Rich Parsons
Martial Talk
Assistant Admin

 

[Tgace]

http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jan/24-107572.html

The Health Effects of Depleted Uranium
In March 2001, a World Health Organization report stated: "no increase of leukemia or other cancers has been established following exposure to uranium or depleted uranium."

A March 2001 European Commission report concluded, "taking into account the pathways and realistic scenarios of human exposure, radiological exposure to DU could not cause a detectable effect on human health."

A January 2001 NATO report said, "based on the data today, no link has been established between depleted uranium and any forms of cancer."

In 1999, a RAND Corporation study on depleted uranium concluded: "no evidence is documented in the literature of cancer or any other negative health effect related to the radiation received from exposure to natural uranium, whether inhaled or ingested, even in very high doses."

Perhaps the most dramatic illustration of the lack of a link between depleted uranium and cancer is the case of 20 Gulf War veterans who were struck by shrapnel from depleted uranium shells that hit the armored vehicles in which they were riding. Some have shrapnel pieces up to 20 mm long still embedded in their bodies. The veterans have very high levels of uranium in their urine samples, but not one has developed leukemia, bone cancer, lung cancer, or any kidney abnormalities, despite the fact that they are walking around with depleted uranium inside their bodies. In addition, none of the children born to any of these men has any reported birth defects. A 1999 study of these veterans concluded, "there is no evidence of adverse clinical outcomes associated with uranium exposure at this time in any of these individuals."

Accusations that depleted uranium has caused cancer in Iraqi newborns are groundless. In fact, Iraq's use of chemical weapons -- known cancer-causing agents -- is a much more likely cause of the cancers and birth defects blamed on depleted uranium.

Independent studies have shown large increases in cancers and birth defects where the Iraqi regime has used chemical weapons. According to Dr. Fouad Baban, Chairman of the Department of Medicine of Suleymania University in northern Iraq, "congenital abnormality rates" in Halabja, where the Iraqi regime killed 5,000 Kurds with chemical weapons in 1988, are "four to five times greater than in the post-atomic populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Dr. Baban says, "rare and aggressive cancers in adults and children are found at levels far higher than anywhere in the world."

For accurate, authoritative information on depleted uranium, see information from:
• The United Nation's International Atomic Energy Agency

• The U.S. Department of Defense's Health Deployment Directorate

• The UK Ministry of Defence

 

[Tgace]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Health_concerns


A 1997 report by the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) suggested that DU posed serious health risks. By contrast, other studies have shown that DU ammunition has no measurable detrimental health effects, either in the short or long term. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports, "based on credible scientific evidence, there is no proven link between DU exposure and increases in human cancers or other significant health or environmental impacts," although "Like other heavy metals, DU is potentially poisonous. In sufficient amounts, if DU is ingested or inhaled it can be harmful because of its chemical toxicity. High concentration could cause kidney damage." [4] The US military watchdog group Federation of American Scientists has come to similar conclusions.

 

[Makalakumu]

Good finds, Tom. Very informative.

However, it has been reported that WHO "suppressed" many findings.

http://www.sundayherald.com/40096

Here is another article on the deception over health risks...

http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0201-01.htm

 

[Makalakumu]

http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=61df8f4a14b74c178dac1386a7df9b4f&referrer=parent&backto=issue,2,5;journal,30,189;linkingpublicationresults,1:100675,1

Medical surveillance of a group of U.S. Gulf War veterans who were victims of depleted uranium (DU) "friendly fire" has been carried out since the early 1990s. Findings to date reveal a persistent elevation of urine uranium, more than 10 yr after exposure, in those veterans with retained shrapnel fragments. The excretion is presumably from ongoing mobilization of DU from fragments oxidizing in situ. Other clinical outcomes related to urine uranium measures have revealed few abnormalities. Renal function is normal despite the kidney's expected involvement as the "critical" target organ of uranium toxicity. Subtle perturbations in some proximal tubular parameters may suggest early although not clinically significant effects of uranium exposure. A mixed picture of genotoxic outcomes is also observed, including an association of hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyl transferase (HPRT) mutation frequency with high urine uranium levels. Findings observed in this chronically exposed cohort offer guidance for predicting future health effects in other potentially exposed populations and provide helpful data for hazard communication for future deployed personnel.

The UO^2 found in the urine has been observed to increase the level of mutations in surrounding tissues. This would include, by default, sexual organs and could very well explain instances of birth defects in offspring.

 

[Makalakumu]

Perhaps the most dramatic illustration of the lack of a link between depleted uranium and cancer is the case of 20 Gulf War veterans who were struck by shrapnel from depleted uranium shells that hit the armored vehicles in which they were riding. Some have shrapnel pieces up to 20 mm long still embedded in their bodies. The veterans have very high levels of uranium in their urine samples, but not one has developed leukemia, bone cancer, lung cancer, or any kidney abnormalities, despite the fact that they are walking around with depleted uranium inside their bodies. In addition, none of the children born to any of these men has any reported birth defects. A 1999 study of these veterans concluded, "there is no evidence of adverse clinical outcomes associated with uranium exposure at this time in any of these individuals."

Twenty is a very small sample size. A one in twenty chance or even a one in ten chance still has a very high probability of escaping notice. I would be more comfortable with the findings with a larger, more predictive, sample size.

Independent studies have shown large increases in cancers and birth defects where the Iraqi regime has used chemical weapons. According to Dr. Fouad Baban, Chairman of the Department of Medicine of Suleymania University in northern Iraq, "congenital abnormality rates" in Halabja, where the Iraqi regime killed 5,000 Kurds with chemical weapons in 1988, are "four to five times greater than in the post-atomic populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Dr. Baban says, "rare and aggressive cancers in adults and children are found at levels far higher than anywhere in the world."

I believe that it is perfectly logical to say that areas where chemical weapons stockpiles were destroyed by coalition forces would have similar levels of cancers. Iraq had many stockpiles spread far and wide across the country pre-1991.

 

[KenpoEMT]

http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/du_colloneng.htm

“When I was in Iraq, I started noticing these black specks all over my skin, so I reported it. My health started changing. I was getting sick, I couldn't control my bowels and my bladder anymore. They said it was something mechanical, you need to have it checked once you return back to the United States. So I started seeking answers, and as I did, I was threatened with losing my military career. aAn atomic veteran [one of the 250,000 soldiers—official U.S. figures—who have been exposed to radiation during American nuclear tests between 1942 and 1963] called me and said, ‘You have depleted uranium poisoning." In 1992 I was diagnosed by a civilian doctor as suffering from toxic exposure, chronic encephalopathy of the brain, an abnormal active immune system, a suppressed auto-immune system and antibody development and chemical poisoning.’”

“The army would not accept this as ‘mainstream medicine’ for my medical examination and I was discharged with ‘Bowel and Bladder Incontinence--Etiology Unknown.’ I have long-term/short-term memory deficit. I have toxic encephalopathy—a disease of the brain. I have developed thyroid deterioration. I have developed suspicious squamous cancerous cells of the uterus. I have tested twelve times for the military and they want to keep repeating my tests. My muscles have deteriorated. I have no control over my bowels or my bladder at all any more. Our babies are born with birth defects. We Gulf War veterans have our babies born without thyroids.”

It is an interesting link, but it the author isn't very specific with her sources. "A civilian doctor", "an atomic veteran," "official US figures," informatioin/sources should certainly be more specific.

It is easy to believe if no specific questions are asked.

Now this link is interesting: http://www.ccnr.org/du_hague.html [Gulf War Veterans and Depleted Uranium]

Uranium is both a chemical toxic and radioactive hazard: Soluble uranium is regulated because of its chemical toxicity, measured by damage to the kidney and tubules. Uranium is a heavy metal, known to cause uranium nephritis. Insoluble uranium, such as was released in the Gulf War, is regulated by its radiological properties, and not its chemical properties. Because of its slow absorption through the lungs and long retention in body tissues, its primary damage will be due to its radiological damage to internal organs rather than chemical damage to the renal system. Obviously, both types of damage occur simultaneously, therefore it is a matter of judgment which severe damage, radiological or chemical, occurs at the lowest dose level. However, with the lengthening of the time during which the contaminant resides in the body and the low overall dose, the risk of cancer death becomes greater than the risk of significant damage to the renal system.

Natural uranium in soil is about 1 to 3 parts per million, whereas in uranium ore it is about 1,000 times more concentrated, reaching about 0.05 to 0.2 percent of the total weight. Depleted uranium concentrate is almost 100 percent uranium. More than 99 percent of both natural and depleted uranium consists of the isotope U-238. One gram of pure U-238 has a specific activity of 12.4 kBq, which means there are 12,400 atomic transformations every second, each of which releases an energetic alpha particle. Uranium 238 has a half life of 4.51 E+9 (or 4.51 times 10 to the 9thpower, equivalent to 4,510,000,000 years).

Each atomic transformation produces another radioactive chemical: first, uranium 238 produces thorium 234, (which has a half life of 24.1 days), then the thorium 234 decays to protactinium 234 (which has a half life of 6.75 hours), and then protactinium decays to uranium 234 (which has a half life of 2.47E+5 or 247,000 years). The first two decay radioisotopes together with the U 238 count for almost all of the radioactivity in the depleted uranium. Even after an industrial process which separates out the uranium 238 has taken place, it will continue to produce these other radionuclides. Within 3 to 6 months they will all be present in equilibrium balance. Therefore one must consider the array of radionuclides, not just uranium 238, when trying to understand what happened when veterans inhaled depleted uranium in the Gulf War. It should be noted that uranium 235, the more fissionable fraction which was partially removed in enrichment, makes up only 0.2 to 0.3 percent of the depleted uranium, whereas it was 0.7 percent of natural uranium. It is this deficit which enables one to use analytical methods to identify the uranium found in veteran's urine as depleted and not natural uranium. The U 235 was extracted for use in nuclear weapons and nuclear reactor fuel. Depleted uranium is considered nuclear waste, a by-product of uranium enrichment.

Well, that was interesting. Maybe there is something going on with DU poisoning.

 

[KenpoEMT]

The voluntary Veterans Affairs DU Medical Follow-up Program was begun in 1993-1994 with the medical evaluations of 33 friendly-fire DU-exposed veterans, many with embedded DU fragments. An additional 29 of the friendly-fire victims were later added to the surveillance program in 1999. In 1998, the program was enlarged to assess the wider Gulf War veteran community's exposure to DU through close contact with DU munitions, inhalation of smoke containing DU particulate during a fire at the Doha depot or while entering or salvaging vehicles or bunkers that were hit with DU projectiles. The published results of these medical evaluations conclude that the presence of retained DU fragments is the only scenario predictive of a high urine uranium value, and those with retained DU fragments continue to have elevated urine uranium levels nine years after the incident. It is unlikely that an individual would have an elevated urine uranium result, and consequently any uranium-related health effects, in the absence of retained DU fragments. Those individuals with normal urine uranium levels now are unlikely to develop any uranium-related toxicity in the future, regardless of what their DU exposure may have been in the Gulf War. Those DU-exposed friendly fire individuals with elevated levels of urinary uranium nine years after the Gulf War have not developed kidney abnormalities, leukemia, bone or lung cancer, or any classical uranium-related adverse outcome. The DU Medical Follow-up Program will continue to evaluate these individuals with elevated urine uranium levels to enable early detection of potential untoward health effects in the future due to their continued chronic exposure to DU.

http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/faq_17apr.htm
"It is unlikely that an individual would have an elevated urine uranium result, and consequently any uranium-related health effects, in the absence of retained DU fragments."

Well, that is very interesting.

 

[Tgace]

So perhaps we shouldnt have bombed those stockpiles because of the "environmental impact" and instead have let them be used against our troops? I dont understand the implication there.

 

[KenpoEMT]

Me? I'm just looking at the different aspects of DU, that's all.

What I got out of the preceding articles was that only those soldiers with DU physically embedded in their bodies faced an increased risk of cancer and what-not.

 

[Tgace]

No Bud...not you.

 

[KenpoEMT]

 

[Tgace]

http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/health.shtml

What do the experts say on cancer risk?

RAND, 1999. "(N)o evidence is documented in the literature of cancer or any other negative health effect related to the radiation received from exposure to natural uranium, whether inhaled or ingested, even at very high doses."

Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in 1999 Toxicological Profile for Uranium. "No human cancer of any type has ever been seen as a result of exposure to natural or depleted uranium."

United Kingdom Royal Society in May 2001. "Even if the estimates of risk are one hundred times too low, it is unlikely that any excess of fatal cancer would be detected within a group of 10,000 soldiers followed over 50 years."

European Commission March, 2001 report. "Taking into account the pathways and realistic scenarios of human exposure, radiological exposure to depleted uranium could not cause a detectable effect on human health (e.g. cancer)."

World Health Organization April, 2001 report. "The radiological hazard is likely to be very small. No increase of leukemia or other cancers has been established following exposure to uranium or DU."

European Parliament April, 2001 report. "The fact that there is no evidence of an association between exposures – sometimes high and lasting since the beginning of the uranium industry – and health damages such as bone cancer, lymphatic or other forms of leukemia shows that these diseases as a consequence of an uranium exposure are either not present or very exceptional."

Swedish Military Headquarters Medical Department Study, January 2003. "Questionnaires, analysis of uranium in the urine and matching with the cancer register at the National Board of Health and Welfare failed to reveal any link between service on the Balkans and cancer or any other illness." In fact, average urine uranium levels in two separate groups troops deployed for six months to the Balkans decreased by 75 percent and 90 percent during their deployment. The study attributed this decrease to the high natural uranium levels in Swedish drinking water supplies.

DU Medical Follow-up Policy. On May 30, 2003, new guidance was issued by OSD/Health Affairs that clarifies who, why, when, and how the military should test for possible depleted uranium during and after deployment and combat operations. The purpose of the testing is to identify those who may have been exposed to significant levels of depleted uranium while deployed. After a decade of closely following many depleted-uranium exposed Gulf War veterans who were enrolled in the Veterans Affairs depleted uranium medical follow-up program, the medical community has yet to identify any untoward health consequences associated with depleted uranium exposures on the battlefield. Still, it is important to implement these new guidelines which standardizes the way depleted uranium tests are performed; directs the compliance with an approved medical protocol following sound clinical practices; and helps DoD meet its obligations for ensuring the health of our deployed personnel.

 

[elder999]

The major health concerns about DU relate to its chemical properties as a heavy metal rather than to its radioactivity, which is very low. As with all chemicals, the hazard depends mainly upon the amount taken into the body. Medical science recognizes that uranium at high doses can cause kidney damage. However, those levels are far above levels soldiers would have encountered in the Gulf or the Balkans. Most soldiers and civilians will not be exposed to dangerous levels of depleted uranium. However, in certain circumstances the exposures may be high and there would be a risk of heavy metal poisoning that could lead to long-term kidney damage for a few soldiers, as well as the increased risk of lung cancer. A small number of soldiers and civilians might suffer kidney damage from depleted uranium if substantial amounts are breathed in, or swallowed in contaminated soil and water. The kidneys of a few soldiers may be damaged if they inhale large quantities of DU after their vehicle is struck by a penetrator or while working for long periods in contaminated vehicles. Large numbers of corroding DU penetrators buried in the soil may also pose a long-term threat if uranium leaches into water supplies. Long-term sampling, particularly of water and milk, is required to detect any increase in uranium levels around areas where DU has been used on the battlefield.

 

[Makalakumu]

So perhaps we shouldnt have bombed those stockpiles because of the "environmental impact" and instead have let them be used against our troops? I dont understand the implication there.

Could there have been a better solution? Rather then spread the stuff all over lots of other people's backyards?

One thing that is becoming clear to me is that the health effects of DU pale in comparison to the health effects of the chemical weapons that were inadvertently spread around Iraq.

Regarding DU - I understand that the efficacy of this weapon is important. If I were a soldier and I wanted to live through an engagement, I would have no problem with using DU against my enemy. The health risk of cancer is much less then getting blown up in battle.

Tgace, as a former soldier, would you even think twice about using this weapon in combat? Would it's health risks concern you?

 

[Tgace]

This is just another "green issue" being hyped up by all the anti-nuke, anti-military, anti-flavor of the day crowd IMHO.

 

[Tgace]

Could there have been a better solution? Rather then spread the stuff all over lots of other people's backyards?

Thats what we pay all those West Point Graduates and military planners who do this for a living to make those decisions. Perhaps all those professional warfighters never thought about this?....doubt it. The risk of their use was the #1 issue IMO. Waste em. Spec Ops guys parachuting onto every WMD site and securing them before land forces can reach them is the stuff of movies, not real life.

I had to go through DU exposure training before going to Bosnia. And saw a number of wrecks that were brobably due to their use. If I was facing an armored vehicle in combat you bet your sweet booty Id want it lit it up with DU. DU penetrators part are what make our M1A1 Abrams MBT dominant on the battlefield. If it allows our boys to live and the enemy to die its good by me. Ive probably ****** myself up more on lead from all the shooting Ive done more than DU would ever do to me anyway. :shrug: