Very good links on "Depleted Uranium" here.

[chknltl]

These folks were recommended to me by a fellow DUer, (thanks "4Mo...."), www.nuclearpolicy.org I sent them a request in regards to the hazards of depleted uranium oxide particles. (These are the particles which are formed when depleted uranium munitions are fired both from the impact and from the vapor trail left behind as the munition is fired). I promised in an earlier thread to report back my findings. Here is the link they sent back, it does little to assuage my concerns:
http://www.nuclearpolicy.org/Documents/DU_report_final_7_6.pdf
Breathing uranium oxide particles IS bad news friends, it can be the gift that keeps on giving and giving again!
After you are done with that click on: www.beyondtreason.com
I am not trying to sell Mr. Rokkes' and Ms. Morets' dvd here, I just happen to feel that they and the distinguished doctors over at Nuclear Policy are saying some VERY alarming things. Our government has thrown up the "mother of all smoke screens" on this topic, I believe that this link and this DVD cut right through that! IMO this is a topic which should be relevant to one and all.
thank you

[G2099]

1. Depleted Uranium is a subject that will never be on CCM

ccm = corporate controlled media

[chknltl]

3. I am optimistic / pessimistic

Does that make me a "flip-flopper"? Sorry
Folks are hearing more and more about this stuff, (I for one will not let this topic go), Questions are being asked, when enough pressure is brought about by those questions the "CCM" will be forced to spread the governments own smoke screen. Hence my pessimism, my optimism comes from the knowledge that there are a great many "truths" running rampant here on the internet. When enough people click onto one of these "truths" it snowballs off the internet and becomes "The Downing Street Memo/Minutes" for instance. 2 months ago folks were saying that the DSM could never have reached its current status. I believe that this topic is of equal stature, it may be awhile before enough folks "click" into it though. Meanwhile there will be more cancers and more mutated babies and more young people being maimed.... The very bottom line here is that some day, some how this stuff must be cleaned up or neutralized. For everyones sake the sooner the better.

[Quixote1818]

2. Thanks, my Dad is a Chemist and has taken a strong interest in this

nt

[chknltl]

4. You are welcome, please let me know what his thoughts are...

... on this topic. Bookmark this little thread, I actually check my inbox on occasion.

[unhappycamper]

5. Three more excellent articles

I posted a thread in Ed & Other Articles yesterday that had three excellent articles on DU:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x137601

The articles were about DU from a scientific perspective, from a military perspective & from a personal perspective. If you want to find out more, all three are a good read.

[chknltl]

6. Why thank you.

An article in that very Lonestar Iconoclast by Leuren Moret and another by Doug Rokke is what got me started on this topic. I will read these as well as those posts in your thread. You seem to have gotten a few more responses than I have been getting. Every now and again a fellow DUer will share a link with me. My nuclear policy.org link was given to me by a fellow DUer and it is one I recommend highly. They agree with what we are saying and they have far better credentials than we do thats for sure. Be sure to check them out, they want to help. (E-mail them with any questions, they seem pretty approachable). Leuren Moret seems to be approachable too, I suspect that she is very busy with the release of the DVD which started a few days ago. I keep hoping to see her here in the Democratic Underground. (She said she might). btw unhappycamper, thank you very much, I have been feeling quite on my own with this topic over the last couple of months. It is good to know that there are others here in the big DU keeping this topic on the radar screens!
:toast:

[unhappycamper]

7. Like you, I am very concerned about DU. It scares the hell out of me.

DU is the Agent Orange of our times. We are creating a generation of DNA-damaged vets; our seed corn, so to speak. The passage in the Moret interview question that got me most was:

Anyone who goes now cannot avoid being contaminated. Anyone. Anyone. Anyone. Everyone who goes to the Middle East and Afghanistan will be contaminated.

We need to educate the masses. Email those articles to folks you know with kids & folks you know that have family members over there. Talk, educate, and don't let up. This is an issue that deserves our passion. Watch the forums & collect threads that have articles about DU & make a post of 10~12 articles. The preponderance of evidence shows this is a health issue for our children that will kill them & their progeny.

Nominated for geatest page.

on edit: to add Nominated. What the hell was I thinking when I forgot to nominate?

[Massacure]

41. DU doesn't contaminate the entire Middle East

just because the military used in a several tank battles with the Iraqis. There is DU where there were battles, but it doesn't spread that easily with how dense and heavy it is.

[chknltl]

43. Massacure

this is a VERY COMMON misconception. You are right that DU is heavy, and much of the spent munition is left behind. If only "that was that" First off we use DU munitions in a great many other weapon systems, the A-1 Tank-Buster' gatling gun spits out far more of this stuff then the tanks did. (Those "R2D2" anti-aircraft systems our navy has equipped many of our ships use it to). Read some of the links posted here by our fellow DUers and then ask yourself this: "Would I pick up a spent DU munition as a souvenir and pass it along to a loved one?" Even the harshest critics of this topic would say no to this, as should you. (REALLY)
That is just the "heavy" item. The salient points to this thread are in regards to "uranium oxide". This is a byproduct formed when a depleted uranium munition is used. Can't see it, can't smell it. Is it as bad as a lot of folks are saying? Well I think so, hence this thread.

[unhappycamper]

8. I also offer one more suggestion.

Today is going to be another heavy traffic day with the London, Andy, Plame, G8 & SCOTUS stories. Keep an eye on this thread & kick it from time to time to keep it on page one of GD.

If folks who read this thread think it is worthy of the greatest page, two more nominations will put it on the greatest pages for 24 hours.

:kick:

[chknltl]

17. roger/willco and

knock me over with a feather, this is the most interest ever generated from any of my posts on this topic. It needs it and more. thanks :patriot:

[unhappycamper]

19. Yes, it does need much more attention. The US has already turned

the Middle East into a DNA wasteland.

BTW, I PMed you with a few ideas.

[chknltl]

59. unhappycamper... still here?

I tried to PM some of my thoughts over to you. There were some serious server problems here in the Democratic Underground over the weekend when I sent those. I watched some of my stuff to you disappear! You offered to help. I could put that help to good use.
Even a little moral support would be nice. Have you noticed the "DU-Links" thread has NOT faded away? Every time I go back to check on it there are more postings both pro and con. I wish to start a new thread soon. Your contributions could be VERY useful to this new thread. Do you feel that I am taking this in a good direction or not? Do you have any suggestions? You're thoughts here are important to me.

[landdaddy]

9. Kick and recomended.. . . . .eom

:kick:

[Tinoire]

10. Recommended n/t

[JohnyCanuck]

11. Also checkout the work of the Uranium Medical Resarch Centre

at www.umrc.net

UMRC was founded by Dr. Asaf Durakovic a former US Army Colonel in the reserves and the former head of nuclear medicine at the Veterans Affairs medical facility in Wilmington Delaware (also a professor of nuclear medicine and radiology at Georgetown University). He lost his job with Veterans Affairs after he found DU contamination in some of his GW1 patients and refused to be silenced on the dangers posed to troops and civilians alike by the widespread use of DU munitions.

More about Dr. Durakovic here:
http://www.nuclear-free.com/english/durakovic.htm

[chknltl]

18. Another great link reccomended highly

Dr. Durakovic is one of my heros. Thank you for adding his story to this thread. :toast:

[Richard Steele]

12. KICK for 80 thousand generations of birth defects.

[Massacure]

42. 80,000? Where do you get that number?

[chknltl]

44. Massacure here check this link out please

http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_16946.shtml
It will provide a good start for you in order to understand what I and others are talking about here. :toast:

[Massacure]

45. I know the health effects of DU are really nasty.

I just get frustrated when people scream 'NUCLEAR' when the entire issue is more complex than what they paint it to be. Of course the Pentagon is lying their ass off when they downplay the effect of DU munitions, but I do not want to allow others to take down the whole legitimate nuclear establishment because of a few reckless people in the Pentagon.

[Richard Steele]

47. I am not "screaming nuclear", and 80 thousand generations is LOW....

Too many folks hear the word 'uranium',
and assume the danger is from RADIATION.

DU is short for "DEPLETED Uranium";
and it is called 'DEPLETED' because it is NOT radioactive.

Only one in several million Uranium atoms is "radioactive"
and used for Nuclear weapons...
So the 'REFINEMENT' process produces MANY TONS of leftvoer
"DU" for every nuclear weapon it produces.

What "DU" really is:
It is one of the most terribly POISONOUS compounds known to modern Science.
And it NEVER BREAKS DOWN.

It NEVER GOES AWAY.

NEVER.

It does occasionally combine to form other molecules;
and those molecules are just as terribly POISONOUS.

NOTHING combines with a DU molecule and renders it INERT.

NOTHING

In nature, URANIUM is a very rare element,
and occurs in small ISOLATED deposits
DEEP in the Earth's crust
which present few risks to surface organisms.

It is actually so rare and isolated,
that
our mere 75 years of "Mining and Refining"
HAVE PLACED MORE URANIUM
INTO THE EARTH'S BIOSPHERE
THAN OCCURRED NATURALLY IN THE LAST FIVE BILLION!

We used BRIEFLY it in IRAQ 14 years ago,
And their "birth defect" rate has gone up 1200%!

Our troops from "Gulf War 1" were there for less than a year,
And over a THIRD of them are now "Permanently Disabled"!

So you ask where I got my "80 Thousand Generations" number?
Well, I pulled it out of my ass.

Because not even COCKROACHES are gonna be around that long.

[DistressedAmerican]

13. Thanks So Much For Posting These. This Is A VERY Important Issue!

Like scattering radioactive landmines all over the damn place. Indecsriminate and harming our own troops.

Nominated!

[chknltl]

22. Thanks "D.A."...

those "radioactive landmines" have an even worse insidious trick: Uranium Oxide particles are very mobile in that they can enter the groundwater where they may be drank at some point or they can float on the winds to be deposited ANYWHERE on the planet. With a 4.5 billion year half-life they have plenty of time to get around to their deadly errands! Multiply that by the hundreds and hundreds of tons of DU munitions which have been used over the last decade, (not only in Iraq but Kosovo, Bosnia and Afghanistan as well), and the sheer enormity of this crime is way beyond alarming. Thank you again for nominating this thread.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

14. Unbelievable what we are doing to the world.

It's just a matter of time before they rise up
against us.

[txindy]

15. Highly recommended.

:kick:

[JohnyCanuck]

16. time for a kick n/t

[Turn CO Blue]

20. Bookmarking. n/t

[dxstone]

21. Kicked and NOMINATED!

The saddest and most horrendous issue out there; we are seeding the future with poison...
I have a really sad effective flash on my site about this, by a woman who goes by the handle hyakamooks; just click on
http://presidentevilonline.com/vc/picshow04.html
Frightening facts and horrifying pics of the legacy of this ongoing insanity...
This is the one issue that makes me think it's just too late, and we are all truly fucked, well and proper...
But as long as we yet live, there's still hope...
I hope.
d

(Edited to fix link)

[unhappycamper]

23. kick for the evening crowd n/t

:kick:

[bonzotex]

24. reposted and expanded from earlier thread

(my apologies to anyone that read my post to the earlier thread on DU, this is the expanded version, because it need to be said again)

This is an important topic, but I've got some dogs barking in my head on some of these claims.

Researching this a little I see lots of really scary stories, but very little peer-reviewed science to back it up. That seems to be changing and that’s a good thing!

DU armor and weapons are incredibly important and useful in the US military. It won’t surprise anyone that the DoD does not want people freaking out about DU. If there are true causative links between DU and DU oxides and health problems and death, then there is liability and money involved, and nobody in the US Govt is going to fall over themselves to publicize this. I applaud the people that are really doing research on this and getting the truth out.

So far, the most deadly proven effects of DU weapons are on the targets they are fired at. There are also a lot of Abrams tank crews alive today because DU layers in their composite armor stop anti-tank rockets and shaped charges from penetrating. It’s probable that aerosol DU particles and DU oxides are not good for you. The science is still inconclusive on just how dangerous it is. Of no doubt, is how dangerous plain old bombs and bullets are. The best way to cut weaponized DU contamination is to prevent the future wars that invite their use and end the one we are bogged down in now.

I'm inclined to be worried about DU effects beyond the battlefield, but frankly many of these articles just repeat the same non-scientifically researched claims and add questionable anecdotal "evidence". Leuren Moret (the interview subject in the Iconoclast article) sounds legit and knowledgeable but she rattles off some really crackpot ideas too. (possible tomahawk cruise missile debris in the Pentagon after 9/11 as one particularly unproven speculation) She is a favorite speaker for activist groups and interviews, but hasn't written any peer reviewed scientific papers (that I can find) on this subject.

The bad thing is, there is some real science that back up a ban on DU weaponry, but it gets overwhelmed and muddied by sensationalist doomsday scenarios. These sites seem like it has some good researchers and some real backing:

www.umrc.net
as previously linked by johnnnycanuck and
www.nuclearpolicy.org as mentioned by chknltle, but I can’t get any of their .pdf links to open up to read.

I’m doing some more searches and reading on this myself, but I’d sure like to hear from a DUer who has really looked at the science here. I’ll continue to look and post if I find relevant things.

Couple of links: if you really want to look at the other side's thoughts.

This article in Reason Online sums up the Right Wing libertarian view of the "myth of DU" This is a good example of the other end of the spectrum where you dismiss something without any scientific backup but merely because it doesn’t fit your worldview, thus it must be false.

http://www.reason.com/rb/rb032603.shtml

The author, Ronald Bailey, is a non-scientist and an apologist for the Oil companies and denier of global warming. So if this is the kind of guy that attacks DU warnings, I'm inclined to believe the alarmists.

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id...

If you wouldn't take a hack like Ronald Bailey seriously, you should at least be skeptical about Leuren Moret and some of the others clanging the alarm bell over DU contamination. I think she has more chance of being close to the truth, but there's not much here to back up what she claims. When I read about burning semen and PTSD symptoms being attributed to DU oxides my BS flag goes up.

As far as Dubya being retarded because Barbara was irradiated, well.....it's funny, but there's simpler and non-"nucular" explanations for why he's a dope and an asshole. There is also a whole lot of research on radiation in the atmosphere that suggests some of the scarier claims in these articles should be taken skeptically.

In fact, the reason Gulf War Syndrome and other mysterious ailments of War vets haven’t been pinned to any one cause is that there are a variety of ailments, most of which can have a variety of explanations. It doesn’t mean people aren’t suffering and even dying, but it doesn’t help anyone to disregard science and leap to convenient conclusions.

It may turn out that DU and DU oxides are a deadly threat and responsible for sickness, birth defects, death, and much more. Certainly, we humans are finding lots of creative ways to poison ourselves and our planet.

I just want to ask my friends here at Dem Underground to take a hard look at anything they read and remember that spectacular claims require spectacular evidence. Do whatever you can to help stop the current war. That will definitely save lives.

[dxstone]

28. But what is 'crackpot', anyway?

"Leuren Moret (the interview subject in the Iconoclast article) sounds legit and knowledgeable but she rattles off some really crackpot ideas too. (possible tomahawk cruise missile debris in the Pentagon after 9/11 as one particularly unproven speculation)"

I respectfully submit that this is hardly a crackpot idea; a TRULY crackpot idea is the one about how a large commercial airliner hit the Pentagon but left no debris, while somehow punching a series of round holes deep into the concentric interior walls.
And forget all those people nearby who said they heard what sounded like a missile go by... crackpots, most likely...
Yet this incredibly cracked pot of an airplane that disintegrates, with all its fuel, upon impact, is seen as the legitimate explanation.
And we the people, robbed of the actual confiscated film of the event, can do little but speculate...

I'm just not sure why you'd refer to that as a 'crackpot' idea...
Cuz if you're so keen on science, well, hell, you don't need a microscope or a degree from MIT... all you have to do is look at the pictures on that one...
d

[chknltl]

29. Ouch...

I actually read an interveiw with Doug Rokke where he was saying much of the same thing you just did. This sent my "bullshit" alarms off until I looked at a link he provided on that topic. WOWSERSx2!! I wish I still had that link, he claims it is common knowledge that this was a cruise missile instead. What do I think? I think I am going to stick to just one earth shattering revelation at a time. My tiny little brain can not handle much more than that. Hell, I am still soul searching this one! (BTW: that "silent scream" link you provided earlier was deeply disturbing, highly reccomended, and filed with my most precious links on this topic. I WILL scream for those babies! thank you)

[dxstone]

32. Here's a link to a short very informative flash: Pentagon Strike

Pentagon Strike
http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/

...if you should feel up to it...

Yes, hyakamooks little films are profoundly moving; I'm really proud to be featuring them on my site...
So sad though... so immensely and needlessly tragic...
d

Woe to the war-whores upon their war-horses
Woe to the Dark King and all his dark forces
Amassed in their fortresses, arming for battle
And woe to the fools who stand mooing like cattle...

Woe to the woman, and woe to her child
Woe from the wolves in the wilderness wild
Woe to the artist, the lover, the kind
Woe to the one who won't sign on the line

Woe to the world, woe that blows on the winds
To torture mankind, so refined in our sins
Woe to the waves on the darkening shores
Woe to the world!... 'til the end of all wars

--D X Stone (just now)

[chknltl]

38. this time I will save the link. thanks

Ok after watching that and adding this to my fave file I agree that there is more than something fishy going on here. If the depleted uranium topic was not something I feel as strong about as I do I would spend more time on this for curiosity's sake if nothing else!
The link I looked at a couple of months back, (provided by Dr. Rokke), was less dramatic but said much of the same stuff. One thing added though was a photo of a jet engine, just before it was carted off. It was (acdg to the authors of the link), more consistent in size and shape with an F-16 fighter engine OR a cruise missile engine. Thank you for another profound link.

[bonzotex]

36. this is a thread about DU but I'll bite...

Moret's evidence of a tomahawk warhead consists of a "friend" who happened to have a geiger counter who recorded elevated radiation readings somewhere at some time after the 9/11 Pentagon strike. For one thing not all Tomahawks or other cruise missiles use DU casings. For another, it's tremendous leap to assume radiation level must have been increased because of a "plume" from the Pentagon. It's possible. It's also possible it was from something else in the building. It's also possible it was something else entirely. It's also possible it's just a story. Moret has some other odd anecdotal evidence in that Iconoclast article that just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. She may have good solid scientific evidence but you can't tell from that article.

I do agree that the investigations of the 9/11 attacks were a joke and there is a lot of unanswered questions. I believe our government has plenty to cover up and has and is.

Be careful what you choose to believe, however. I'll look more at the Pentagon attack and keep an open mind, but to my eyes the Pentagon damage looked entirely consistent with it being hit by an airliner.
I won't argue the conspiracy theories here. I don't have a BS from MIT but I was a military pilot, flew B52s among other types and I've also seen the damage from both big plane crashes and big explosive weapons. I don't buy the missile in the Pentagon stories.

[chknltl]

39. That makes me go "hmmm" as well but....

....it was a similar statement made by Doug Rokke which as I said earlier set off my "B.S." alarms but he had a good link to back up his statement. You gotta admit DX-Stone (sorry if misspelled) has another compelling link on that as well. Your earlier point that Ms. Moret sometimes makes unsubstantiated statements, (my words), with this as an example, needs addressing. (It is on topic after-all). Let us assume for the moment that this particular statement is utter nonsense, something absolutely fabricated out of thin air, now what? Do we dismiss all of the rest of what she is saying? (If A. Einstein made a statement about flying pigs would E=MC-square be added to the trash heap?). For me, I agree with you: an open mind IS needed. If she was standing in front of me I would want to delve further into her statement about the missile/pentagon. (What prompted her to ask her friend with the geiger counter to put it to use?... would be my first question).
So what to do? I look at those baby photos, I look at the case by case studies given to me in link form by my fellow DUers, I look at as many angles as my simple little mind will allow and I come to these conclusions: Something extraordinarily horrific is going on here and depleted uranium and its subsequent uranium oxide particles are smack in the center of this. Leuren Moret and Doug Rokke are putting forth a heroic effort to get this out to public attention. Our own government and those who support our government are doing their best to counter this. I can not NOT scream for those babies. I support our troops. I support our vets. I support America. (or rather that noble experiment called Democracy as it was intended here prior to the hijacking by bushco). Whose side should I be on? I sense that you agree with me bonzotex, I am too concerned about this topic for a simple "wait and see" as others are. bushco would prefer everyone to "wait and see", my own fave leadership, Sen. Jim McDermott, (Dem WA.) is trying to pass a bill calling for further investigation on this. GREAT, I suppose that is what he must do, it still falls back to "wait and see". I have seen way too much in my own researches now. I do not want to "wait and see". Ms. Moret and Mr. Rokke are going in a good direction, they have my support. Until our Democratic leadership or someone better comes along and picks up this ball I will continue to show them my full support.

[bonzotex]

49. i'm with you...

I'm not a wait and see guy either. The best way to stop possible DU contamination is to kick out the warheads that are running our govt and end the Iraq conflict.

You don't have to convince me DU is a bad thing. I'm just not convinced it rises to the level of what Ms Moret claims. In here signature article, "Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War"

http://www.nuclearpolicy.org/NewsArticle.cfm?NewsID=1800

"The use of depleted uranium weaponry by the United States, defying all international treaties, will slowly annihilate all species on earth including the human species, and yet this country continues to do so with full knowledge of its destructive potential"

Having read many of these links and resources now, that level of hyperbole is simply not justified and doesn't further the argument.

Lets stop this damn war then work on getting DU out of our arsenal.

[bonzotex]

25. more links

Here's the DoD summary from 1998 Take it for what it's worth

http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/

selected quote: "A small fraction of the uranium taken into the body deposits in the skeleton, leading to suggestions that uranium's radioactivity could increase the risk of bone cancer above natural background levels. The low levels of radiation DU emits and the results of scientific studies indicate DU does not cause bone cancer. In fact, scientists have never observed bone cancer in populations exposed to any form of uranium, including enriched uranium, which is much more radioactive than DU.<56> As to other possible health effects, the ATSDR concluded it would not expect any radiological health hazard from exposure to inhaled or ingested natural or depleted uranium because their radioactivity is low.<57>"

This is a big and heavily footnoted report. You can keep on the tinfoil hat and dismiss it as coverup stuff, but the DoD scientists that put out this stuff are not all souless Repubican robots pushing an evil agenda. Still, I'm plowing through this and would love to hear comments on this report from a Dem Underground Science geek.

And a short one from Jane's Defense Weekly. Janes may be a military industrial complex rag, but they tend to be very frank and objective.

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

selected quote: "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 <snip>....Lead bullets are probably more dangerous than uranium bullets.

A cute phrase since bullets for rifles and machine guns don't use DU, their point is valid. Lots of weapons spread toxic materials. DU is just one and maybe not the worst.

Don't just read what you want to belive if you claim to live in the reality based community.

[chknltl]

26. Thank you bonzotex alarming news IS hard to swallow.

I share your concerns, please note my handle "chicken little", this stems from that very exact concern on my part. Both Dr. Rokke and Ms. Moret are saying some VERY alarming things. Up until I got the e-mail back from the Nuclear Policy folks I have been reluctant to post some of these things which were the most alarming. Why?... Who am I, a fiftyish hippy type with a 4 yr. college degree in anthropology from back in the early '80s. On what grounds should I be trying to defend the words of doctors and physicists against other doctors and physicists? Hell without spell check I would not be able to spell physicist much less defend one. Should I be the one even repeating any of these alarming things? If I believe them to be true then what could I do? I have held back a bit, deliberately, so as not to scare folks away. Over the last 2 months I have been squirreling away more and more links to this topic. Less than a week ago I got that nuclear policy link from a fellow DUer. As I have done with most of these links I went there, examined who these people were and then looked at some of the stuff that they had to say. These folks looked VERY legit to me so I sent them an e-mail. I requested info on the hazards of uranium oxide from depleted uranium munitions. I mentioned that I had been sourcing Leuren Moret and Doug Rokke in discussions here in the Democratic Underground. I informed them that the info I had was VERY ALARMING and would they be so kind as to set the record straight. Their response was quick, with this: "We are very aware of uranium oxide from depleted uranium munitions and we are VERY ALARMED as well. They gave me that link and permission to source them any time I felt the need. I could not get that file open either, until my step kid, (very computer savvy, I am not), downloaded some kind of "PDF" file reader. I wish she were standing with me right now, she showed me how I could transfer that reader to folks here if needs-be. I will try to do so in the post following this. Please find a way to open it, go there and read what the nuclear policy folks are saying. They do not use any alarmist words, they DO give both sides of the story and I did not find anywhere where they disagreed with Leuren Moret or Doug Rokke. What really needs to happen is for the award winning physicists with the PhDs to start posting here or perhaps Leuren Moret and Doug Rokke could do so. I HAVE mentioned this to Ms. Moret in an e-mail. She has responded now to 3 of my e-mails,(I have sent her 4). In the last one she said that she might just do that. This certainly would make matters easier for all of us. Do I like being a "tinfoilhat" with double layers? Hell no. I do not want to be a "chicken little" either, Do I believe that Leuren Moret is the real deal? Yes I do. What about Doug Rokke? I believe his science to be sound, the military obviously thought so and his credentials certainly are in order. A web search on these 2 names will show how they both have been highly influential within some pretty respectful boards of inquiries on the matter of Depleted Uranium munitions. Here are a couple of boards of inquiry where Ms Moret has been asked to contribute: The World Uranium Weapons Confrence at Hamburg Germany:
http://traprockpeace.org/depleted_uranium_hamburg03.html
and: Here are the notes from a judge who also participated at an International Tribunal against gw bush. (It is a fascinating read)
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Afghanistan-Criminal-Tribunal10mar04.htm
I can not believe either of these groups would have asked Ms. Moret to contribute anything if she were less than legitimate.
I will post this and then attempt to get that "PDF" reader for you in the next post.

[chknltl]

27. Adobe Acrobat Reader is needed to read that file....

I was just informed of this by my step-kid. She says there are simple ways to get free versions of this. She had me type in and search for Adobe Acrobat Reader Downloads. Look for the free trial offers. (Best I can do for you, sorry, I DO hope that works, I really wish to hear your thoughts on this particular link).

[bonzotex]

35. I have Adobe..I'll get them open

The Nuclear Policy Center seems to have some of the best scientific info and impressive supporters. I've been looking through their other stuff too. Real gold mine of good info. Thanks!

[JohnyCanuck]

31. It appears that the latest research by scientists investigating

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.

[bonzotex]

34. thanks...good stuff there

I agree that the weapons makers and users are not always the best source of information about the side effects of their toys.

[nolabels]

30. Thanks for links

This will be much more important in the years to come :kick:

Just a little speck of Depleted Uranium can eventually kill you and yet the US military launched tons and tons of stuff around in explosives in the last two invasions

[bonzotex]

33. the last links I provided...

...don't support that a tiny speck of DU will harm you much less kill you. Assuming of course it was't fired at you from a cannon.

Other links in this thread imply that DU might just kill us all and that every person in the Iraq/Afghanistan war zone is effectively a walking dead person because of DU. I suspect the truth is somewhere more in the middle.

I'm still looking at it, it an important issue

[JohnyCanuck]

37. bonzotex, were you aware that the DU ammo might contain plutonium

and other nuclear by-products?

First printed in the SUNDAY TIMES (UK) on 21st January 2001

URANIUM SHELLS HELD 'COCKTAIL OF NUCLEAR WASTE'’
by Jonathon Carr-Brown

SHELLS fired in the Gulf war and Kosovo were made out of material contaminated by a potentially lethal cocktail of nuclear waste, according to a book published this week. The claim, supported by American army and government documents, suggests that the military in Kosovo and Iraq used depleted uranium (DU) shells containing traces of elements that indicate the probable presence of plutonium and other highly toxic nuclear by-products.

<snip>

Until now, the Pentagon has maintained that DU shells are safe because they contain only mildly radioactive uranium. But the authors claim the shells were made with uranium contaminated with more toxic elements.

<snip>

The authors’ claims are based on papers that have led them to three nuclear plants in Paducah, Kentucky; Portsmouth, Ohio; and Oak Ridge, Tennessee - the main makers of DU.

Last January Bill Richardson, the energy secretary, accepted after decades of denials that thousands of workers at Paducah "had been exposed to radiation and chemicals that produced cancer and early death".

Most of the victims display symptoms similar to Gulf war veterans -
particularly chronic fatigue and joint pain. The authors claim the workers had been handling uranium contaminated with plutonium, which was then used to make DU.

Documents from August 1999 show that workers at Paducah had been inhaling plutonium as part of a "...flawed government experiment to recycle used nuclear reactor fuel." The first sign was employees with a string of cancers in the 1980s.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0121-02.htm

AGENCE FRANCE PRESS - WASHINGTON
23rd January 2001

Plutonium and a highly radioactive isotope, U-236, found in US depleted uranium (DU) munitions has been traced to the use of contaminated equipment at US government plants where the heavy metal was produced during the Cold War, the Pentagon said Tuesday. Pentagon spokesmen said that the amounts found in US stocks of depleted uranium were minute and the risk to health or to the environment was insignificant.

"We have seen nothing in our studies that this would have more than an insignificant impact either on personal health or the environment," said Rear Admiral Craig Quigley, a Pentagon spokesman. "It is just incredibly small quantities here that we’re talking about both in the armor and in the munitions themselves," he said. But the disclosure that DU munitions contain even trace amounts of highly toxic plutonium as well as U-236 has outraged Germany, whose defense minister protested the Pentagon’s failure to keep its' allies informed.

NATO has been struggling for weeks to allay fears in some European countries that a rash of reported cancer cases among veterans of Balkans peace keeping missions were linked to exposure to depleted uranium ordnance fired by US forces during conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo. Quigley said a NATO committee set up to look into the depleted uranium issue has been informed in recent days about the plutonium found in US DU stocks.

<snip>

The investigation found that all three plants during the 1950s through the 1970s were contaminated by operations involving recycled uranium that contained plutonium, neptunium and technetium-99, defense officials said. Depleted uranium produced with the contaminated equipment itself became contaminated with plutonium and the other transuranic elements, they said.

http://www.firethistime.org/plutoniumcontamination.htm (page down to see the AFP report under the Sunday Times story)

If it's true that the DU ammo is contaminated with plutonium then perhaps it's quite possible that just a speck would be enough to harm you.

There is no doubt, according to a new report leaked to the "New Scientist" magazine, that radiation emitted by plutonium and other radionuclides may cause much more damage to human cells than was previously believed.

The report, due to be released in the next several months, was produced by the Committee Examining Radiation Risks from Internal Emitters (CERRIE). The committee was composed of 12 specialists from the British government's National Radiological Protection Board, the nuclear industry, universities and environmental groups.

All CERRIE members reportedly agreed that, "the margin of uncertainty over the risks of plutonium inside the body could extend over at least an order of magnitude."

The CERRIE report raises the profile of recent scientific discoveries about the less obvious effects of low-level radiation. For example, descendants of cells that appear to be unharmed by radiation may, in fact, suffer delayed damage. This is referred to as "genomic instability," and it carries major implications for how the biological impacts of so-called "low-level" radiation exposures are calculated. (Note that research into genomic instability has also been previously reported in "New Scientist" and other journals, and copies are available at the Tri-Valley CAREs office.)

http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/Plutonium-Danger-Greater1aug04.htm

[chknltl]

40. I too have made similar statements...

... I am of the opinion at this point that even one tiny speck of uranium oxide, once lodged in the lungs, CAN cause serious damage over time. Remember this tiny insignificant speck maintains it's radioactivity for 4.5 billion years. That tiny but constant burst of radiation IS cumulative. That is where the damage comes from. Does it mean that EVERYONE who breathes the air over in the combat zones is gonna get exposed and suffer? I will say that their odds of exposure are greatly increased over ours and once exposed their odds of damage of some kind are greatly increased as well. I would love to see those "odds" put out in print. Data of that sort could cause a cascading effect causing an overwhelming majority of bushco supporters to start screaming for his impeachment.

[nolabels]

46. Kind of just something I heard that made sense really.

Thanks for the challenge on it, guess it time for some reserch from my own boisterous ass. There seems to be a lot of conflictig information on the subject but it is a proven fact can have died of the stuff. To what degree and what effective time level is not so clear.

Radioactive source horror stories
http://www.nuclear.com/materials_licensees/index-source_horrors.html

Here is kind of a interesting article on tritium

Tritium Traffic: Deadly Dividends for Nuclear Industry
David H Martin

In February, 1934, the British journal, New Scientist, published an article by Tom Wilkie, "Old Age Can Kill the Bomb." It was an ingenious solution to the arms control nightmare of verification; controlling not only the number of weapons, but the strategic materials that fuel them -- mainly plutonium, enriched uranium and tritium. Wilkie focused on tritium, because it turns into non-radioactive helium at a rate of 5.5 per cent per year. A halt of tritium production would rapidly cripple all nuclear arsenals. Thus, attention was rivetted on Ontario Hydro's plan to produce about 57 kilograms of tritium by 2006. A one megaton thermonuclear warhead (equivalent to one million tons of TN") may contain as little as one gram of tritium.

Tritium (H3) (a form of hydrogen that emits beta radiation), is a major radioactive pollutant from Canada's CANDU nuclear power reactors. Unlike American reactor systems, the CANDU uses heavy water as a moderator and coolant. The moderator and the heavy water coolant slows down the neutron release from the uranium fuel in the reactor so that a chain reaction can take place. The active ingredient in heavy water is deuterium, another form of hydrogen. When the deuterium picks up a neutron, some of it is transformed into tritium. The concentration of tritium in the heavy water increases with the age of the reactor.

The CANDU reactor system produces 2400 times as much tritium as the American light water reactor. This is a gigantic problem for Ontario Hydro, the operators of Ontario's commercial nuclear power reactors, because tritium is extremely toxic. As little as one billionth of a gram can cause cancer if inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through the skin. One five-hundredth of a gram is fatal to an average person. Thus, since the early days of nuclear power in Ontario, critics have argued that tritium should be removed from the heavy water in the reactors to reduce the exposure of workers and surrounding communities. Ontario Hydro recently began to build a tritium removal facility when it became apparent that there was a very lucrative market for it. It sells for $15 million per kilogram-more than one thousand times the price of gold!

Tritium is used in several types of thermonuclear (fusion, or "hydrogen") bombs. First, there is the "boosted" fission weapon. In this type of weapon, tritium causes a secondary fusion reaction, which increases the efficiency of the fission explosion, resulting in a much greater blast, and reducing the "yield-to-weight" ratio of the bomb. This is an extremely serious development, since lighter warheads allow for much greater flexibility in delivery vehicles. Nuclear-capable cruise missiles would not be possible without tritium-boosted warheads. Second, there is the "hydrogen" bomb proper. Tritium is used to provide an initial fusion reaction to boost the yield of the secondary fission explosion, which ignites the second (and main) fusion explosion. The technique of using the first stage to set off the second, or third stage, is the real H-bomb secret. This is known as the "Teller-Ulam Trick," after its inventors, Edward Teller and Stanislav Ulam. The bomb uses only small amounts of tritium and other fissile material. The secondary fusion explosion "breeds" its own tritium from Lithium-6.
(snip)
http://www.peacemagazine.org/archive/v03n2p14.htm

[bonzotex]

50. thanks, good stuff...

There is a wealth of info out there. Lots of good sound reasons to get heavy metals and radioactive materials out of weapons and out of circulation.

No question about that. I just don't want to use questionable sources to make our argument. There's enough perfectly good sound science out there to make the case.

[JohnyCanuck]

48. kick n/t

[bonzotex]

51. thanks chknltl

Even though I'm obviously playing the skeptic here on some of these sources, I appreciate this thread and all the good discussion you've generated. Thanks also to the other DUers who passed on more sources.
Problems with Depleted Uranium use and other contamination are going to continue to be important and under-reported issues.

If we want to fight this battle we have to be well informed and have factual information. A few committed intelligent people can make a difference.

[chknltl]

52. Thank you to all who looked at this thread.

Thank you to each and every one of you and thanks you for all those links you provided me, they will be added to my files and researched as best as I can. This point comes through for me from this thread: ALL HERE ARE ALARMED, that encourages me. More real research IS needed. For me it will be hard to balance my outrage and tears with this notion. When I hear from: Doctors and Physicists, my fellow DUers, and even Nobel Peace Award winning Scientists that: the use of depleted uranium munitions is VERY BAD for all life on this planet, when I see the damage it has likely caused to adults, when I see those babies who never had a chance at a normal life, when I HEAR those babies who can not scream....

[ArkDem]

53. Look into why it's called 'depleted' uranium.

[chknltl]

54. Pg 4 of my above Nuclear Policy Link.....

describes what it is well enough but does not answer why it is called 'depleted'. There are many folks who have been told that the word 'depleted' equates to harmless. Was it given this name in order to instill these notions deliberately? (Tin foil hat answer sorry.)
As a fellow DUer with over 1000 posts I suspect that you have seen this topic more than a few times here in the Democratic Underground.
My real answer is that I do not know. It is my intention to post another thread on this topic, that question shall be answered then. I too want an honest response to those who say; "....but it is called 'depleted' for a reason!", thinking that is that, end of story.
Well that is NOT that and there is a hell of a lot more to this story!

[ArkDem]

55. Ever heard of the term 'pseudo science'?

[chknltl]

56. As performed by Nobel Peace Award Nominees? NOPE

Name one with a doctorate in "pseudo science". Go back through this thread, look at the links given both pro and con, and let me know which of the good doctors qualify as a "pseudo scientist". You are my fellow DUer, not my enemy. You would not even be here with over 1000 posts and not be familiar with this concept: "An informed electorate is crucial to the democratic process" I seek to be informed. I seek to pass along this information. Being a skeptic is fine, required actually, when dealing with topics such as this.
If you feel that I am passing along a bunch of "tin-foil-hat" crap, then I welcome this opinion. I WANT to be one of those members of Democracy who is educated. I know that I have lost objectivity here, this is because of looking at BOTH sides of this debate. The damage done IS a fact that can not to be ignored. Until I see significant amounts of data from anyone who can show me that all these horrors were created by somethings other than depleted uranium and these same data do NOT spread the Repuke line on the topic my objectivity will remain lost.
I challenge you to find this data. It will aid me in forming my next thread on this topic. As a fellow DUer I believe I can count on your help here.

[Career Prole]

57. When they present you with the studies which found that

DU tended to contaminate only the areas where it was used in the Bosnian conflict and that aerosol contamination, while bad, wasn't occurring because the DU residue remained localized remind them that Iraq has something Bosnia didn't...big damned sandstorms.
And to complicate further Iraq also has its citizenry routinely sleeping on their rooftops (with or without dustmasks, I wonder?) due to widespread lack of electricity and storing water in open containers due to widespread water shortages.

[chknltl]

58. Thank you for that Career Prole...

... I was thinking that this thread was done with here, I am starting a new one on this topic soon. There were legit questions asked by my fellow DUers in this thread. The most important question for me here is "How can I, with no doctorate, sort through the works of those with doctorates and arrive at the truth." The fact that SOMETHING is causing all this damage and horror is not going away. The fact that bushco wants us to believe that depleted uranium is NOT the cause lends much credibility to those who say it IS the cause. Who is right? Is it somewhere in the middle? I suppose I could give up on this, throw away my "tin-foil-hat" as some believe I should, but then I come again and again to those babies. They did not ask for this, they came into this world by and large trusting their parents, trusting all adults for that matter. I am an adult. I can not betray that trust. I will do what I can to find the truth, if it is what I suspect it to be then I will wholly side with the alarmists. This goes beyond politics, beyond corporate greed. Someone more enlightened then I pointed out that the greatest measure of a man is in what he leaves for future generations. A world polluted with "what-the-f**k-ever" caused this to happen to those babies is NOT the legacy I am willing to leave behind. Sorry to rant on in a response to what you wrote here Career Prole. You add an important point about those sandstorms. The alarmists would have us believe that particles from those sandstorms may be highly hazardous to our health, even all the way over here in the good ol' USA. At this point I side with those alarmists. I feel that it is important to back this up with further and fully objective data. This is the kind of data I seek for the next thread I keep referring too as of late. Any help here, pro OR con would be much appreciated.

[JohnyCanuck]

60. Why is the precuationary principle frequently ignored?.

The following short article is not directly related to the topic of this thread, the dangers of Depleted Uranium munitions, however it does take a look at the "precautionary principle" and explains that it is often ignored for the sake of expediency and profits.

OpEd From the Capital Times, Madison Wisconsin:

Bruce Barrett: Using precautionary rule for health makes sense

By Dr. Bruce Barrett
July 11, 2005

<snip>

During these 50 to 70 years, when lead should have been banned from paint and gasoline, thousands of people suffered acute lead poisoning, and tens of millions of children were exposed to lead levels sufficient to permanently impair their intellectual functioning. This is worth stating twice. There was enough evidence for several countries to ban lead in paint in 1920s. The United States did not do so until 1976. During the interval, tens of millions of children - at least 1 in every 10 kids - were poisoned sufficiently to cause permanent harm.

Wider appreciation and use of the "precautionary principle" could help avert similar disasters. As Tim O'Riordan and James Cameron have aptly noted in "Interpreting the Precautionary Principle" (1994), the precautionary idea originated in 1930s German democratic socialist thought: "The German concept of Vorsorgeprinzip means much more than the rough English translation of foresight planning. It absorbs notions of risk prevention, cost effectiveness ..., ethical responsibilities toward maintaining the integrity of natural systems, and the fallibility of human understanding."

The Rio Declaration resulting from the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development described the precautionary principle as follows: "When there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation."

<snip>

Meanwhile, reckless disregard for potential consequences holds the day, with environmental catastrophe brewing in every quarter. From mercury and dioxin to global warming, political exigencies trump public health and common sense. If you've read this far, you are perhaps already among those who want more stringent regulation and better science. If so, please help us spread to word, both in your daily lives and work, and in communications to your elected representatives. For information and action outlets, try www.psrmadison.org or www.wiscenvirohealth.org.

http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/index.php?ntid=46467&ntpid=1

From the brief blurb about the author:

Dr. Bruce Barrett is a member of Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Wisconsin Environmental Health Network. He is an assistant professor in the department of family medicine at UW-Madison.