Reply #31: It appears that the latest research by scientists investigating [View All]

[JohnyCanuck]

the hazards of DU indicate that the radiation released by DU within the body can be more harmful than has been heretofore suspected.

The Vital Evidence

<snip>

Despite all that evidence of the harm done by DU, governments on both sides of the Atlantic have repeatedly claimed that as it emits only 'low level' radiation DU is harmless. Award-winning scientist, Dr. Rosalie Bertell who has led UN medical commissions, has studied 'low-level' radiation for 30 years. She has found that uranium oxide particles have more than enough power to harm cells, and describes their pulses of radiation as hitting surrounding cells 'like flashes of lightning' again and again in a single second.(2) Like many scientists worldwide who have studied this type of radiation, she has found that such 'lightning strikes' can damage DNA and cause cell mutations which lead to cancer.

Moreover, these particles can be taken up by body fluids and travel through the body, damaging more than one organ. To compound all that, Dr. Bertell has found that this particular type of radiation can cause the body's communication systems to break down, leading to malfunctions in many vital organs of the body and to many medical problems. A striking fact, since many veterans of the first Gulf war suffer from innumerable, seemingly unrelated, ailments.

In addition, recent research by Eric Wright, Professor of Experimental Haematology at Dundee University, and others, have shown two ways in which such radiation can do far more damage than has been thought. The first is that a cell which seems unharmed by radiation can produce cells with diverse mutations several cell generations later. (And mutations are at the root of cancer and birth defects.) This 'radiation-induced genomic instability' is compounded by 'the bystander effect' by which cells mutate in unison with others which have been damaged by radiation-rather as birds swoop and turn in unison. Put together, these two mechanisms can greatly increase the damage done by a single source of radiation, such as a DU particle. Moreover, it is now clear that there are marked genetic differences in the way individuals respond to radiation-with some being far more likely to develop cancer than others. So the fact that some veterans of the first Gulf war seem relatively unharmed by their exposure to DU in no way proves that DU did not damage others.

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20050429121615724

As for the defense establishment's assertion that chemical exposure to DU was insignificant, Dr. Asaf Durakovic, who in 1991 was chief of the Nuclear Medicine Clinic at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Wilmington Delaware, discovered significant evidence of uranium exposure in his patients, severe pathology of the renal and geneto-urinary systems. After two of the Gulf War patients died, Dr. Durakovic insisted on expanding the tests. He wanted samples of the patients' skeletal systems. The tests were not performed, medical charts disappeared, the uranium Registry Office was dismantled, and Dr. Durakovic was laid off in 1997. (Dr. Durakovic is presently professor of radiology and nuclear medicine and radiology at Georgetown University.)

http://www.hermes-press.com/depluran.htm

Aerosol DU (Depleted Uranium) exposures to soldiers on the battlefield could be significant with potential radiological and toxicological effects. (...) Under combat conditions, the most exposed individuals are probably ground troops that re-enter a battlefield following the exchange of armour-piercing munitions. (...) We are simply highlighting the potential for levels of DU exposure to military personnel during combat that would be unacceptable during peacetime operations. (...DU is..)... a low level alpha radiation emitter which is linked to cancer when exposures are internal, (and) chemical toxicity causing kidney damage. (...) Short term effects of high doses can result in death, while long term effects of low doses have been linked to cancer. (...) Our conclusion regarding the health and environmental acceptability of DU penetrators assume both controlled use and the presence of excellent health physics management practices. Combat conditions will lead to the uncontrolled release of DU. (...) The conditions of the battlefield, and the long term health risks to natives and combat veterans may become issues in the acceptability of the continued use of DU kinetic penetrators for military applications.

<snip>

- Excerpt from the July 1990 Science and Applications International Corporation report: ' Kinetic Energy Penetrator Environment and Health Considerations', as included in Appenix D - US Army Armaments, Munitions and Chemical Command report: 'Kinetic Energy Penetrator Long Term Strategy Study, July 1990'

It was only after the war had ended that the following warning was issued to US troops:

"Any system struck by a DU penetrator can be assumed to be contaminated with DU. (...) Personnel should avoid entering contaminated systems (and) personnel exposed to DU contamination should wash exposed areas and discard clothings."

US Army Armament, Munitions and Chemical Command message, March 7th 1991, as cited by Dan Fahey in 'Depleted Uranium - The Stone Unturned' March 28th 1997


On July 12th 1991, a fire broke out at the US Army base at Doha in Kuwait. During six hours of explosions and eighteen hours of residual fires, a large amount of equipment and munitions were burnt, including 9720 small caliber DU rounds, 660 large caliber DU rounds, and four tanks with DU armour. In such severe fire conditions the DU rounds will have burned and completely oxidised into powder. Of the 9006 pounds of DU penetrators lost in the fire, several thousand pounds were oxidised, scattered around the compound by violent explosions, and carried to the Southeast by a steady 8 knot wind. Whilst the fire was raging, and Explosive Ordnance Disposal team en route to Doha explicity warned commanders to move their soldiers out of the downwind smoke plume and to wear protective masks. (US Central Command log: "11 ACR Fire in Doha: Updates from Centcom Forward" July 12th 1991: Entry 10) But this warning was never passed on; indeed soldiers involved in the clean up operation wore no respirators or protective clothing whilst using shovels and brooms to clean the contaminated compound. The US army still does not know, or will not admit, what dangers are posed by residual DU contamination to soldiers who deploy to Doha base today.

http://www.firethistime.org/du.htm

For me, a non scientist, it's a question of to whom do you give the benefit of the doubt - the same gang of Military Industrial Complex war profiteers that promoted chemical warfare on the people of Vietnam and on US GIs through the use of Agent Orange (while at the same time issuing bland assurances that Agent Orange was not harmful to humans), or the likes of the Durakovics, Bertells and other well respected scientist and medical doctors who put their careers and reputations on the line to raise the alarm when they see that history appears to be repeating itself.