Cancer rise in Fallujah

[FireGarden]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...on-fallujah-worse-than-hiroshima-2034065.html

The study, entitled "Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009", is by Dr Busby, Malak Hamdan and Entesar Ariabi, and concludes that anecdotal evidence of a sharp rise in cancer and congenital birth defects is correct. Infant mortality was found to be 80 per 1,000 births compared to 19 in Egypt, 17 in Jordan and 9.7 in Kuwait. The report says that the types of cancer are "similar to that in the Hiroshima survivors who were exposed to ionising radiation from the bomb and uranium in the fallout".

Researchers found a 38-fold increase in leukaemia, a ten-fold increase in female breast cancer and significant increases in lymphoma and brain tumours in adults. At Hiroshima survivors showed a 17-fold increase in leukaemia, but in Fallujah Dr Busby says what is striking is not only the greater prevalence of cancer but the speed with which it was affecting people.

Of particular significance was the finding that the sex ratio between newborn boys and girls had changed. In a normal population this is 1,050 boys born to 1,000 girls, but for those born from 2005 there was an 18 per cent drop in male births, so the ratio was 850 males to 1,000 females. The sex-ratio is an indicator of genetic damage that affects boys more than girls. A similar change in the sex-ratio was discovered after Hiroshima.

That last is, apparently, because girls have two X chromosomes, while boys have only one and a Y. But I've not been able to find a reference to a change in sex ratio at Hiroshima which doesn't mention Fallujah, ie: a reference which isn't a recent story.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

FireGarden,

the thing with DU is that its effects arent fully understood, and why havent we seen similar results in places like Bosnia, Kosovo or Croatia where A-10 Thunderbolt IIs really had free reign against JNA tanks?

 

[JihadJane]

Dirty bombs.

 

[plumjam]

....why havent we seen similar results in places like Bosnia, Kosovo or Croatia where A-10 Thunderbolt IIs really had free reign against JNA tanks?

A complete guess, but less rainfall?
In Iraq I can easily imagine depleted uranium hanging around in the dusty atmosphere - thus being breathed in more -, while in the Balkans I would imagine it would get washed away much quicker into the watercourses and move off to the sea.
(This is disregarding the matter of size of conflict. I could be wrong, but I would have thought much more DU was used in the 2 Iraq conflicts.)

 

[JihadJane]

A complete guess, but less rainfall?
In Iraq I can easily imagine depleted uranium hanging around in the dusty atmosphere - thus being breathed in more -, while in the Balkans I would imagine it would get washed away much quicker into the watercourses and move off to the sea.
(This is disregarding the matter of size of conflict. I could be wrong, but I would have thought much more DU was used in the 2 Iraq conflicts.)

Yes, massively more DU has been dumped on Iraq than the Balkans. (Estimates: Balkans 12.7: tons, Gulf War 1: 320 tons, Gulf war 2: 2,000 tons).

In Gulf War 2, DU was used far more used in urban areas than in the Balkans or Gulf War 1.

 

[theprestige]

Iraq is a big place, actually. And Fallujah is only a small part of it.

Depleted uranium is used by militaries that can afford it as a high-end anti-armor weapon. Its use requires extremely high velocity, which immediately rules out most delivery methods.

Typically, it is employed as ammunition in guns with high muzzle velocities. Notably, the main gun of the M1A1 Abrams main battle tank, the GAU-8 "Avenger" gun mounted on the A-10 attack plane, and the autocannon mounted on the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle.

We should expect to see lots of DU in Fallujah if we have seen any of these three vehicles involved in heavy action in Fallujah.

The Apache attack helicopter's M230 chain gun does not use DU; it uses explosive ammunition instead. Squad-level and vehicle-mounted machine guns do not use DU.

In fact, DU is a highly specialized ammunition, associated with a very short list of weapons.

Anybody wishing to convince me of DU-related side effects in Fallujah will first have to convince me that substantial numbers of DU-loaded weapons were fired in Fallujah.

 

[JihadJane]

Iraq is a big place, actually. And Fallujah is only a small part of it.

Depleted uranium is used by militaries that can afford it as a high-end anti-armor weapon. Its use requires extremely high velocity, which immediately rules out most delivery methods.

Typically, it is employed as ammunition in guns with high muzzle velocities. Notably, the main gun of the M1A1 Abrams main battle tank, the GAU-8 "Avenger" gun mounted on the A-10 attack plane, and the autocannon mounted on the M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle.

We should expect to see lots of DU in Fallujah if we have seen any of these three vehicles involved in heavy action in Fallujah.

The Apache attack helicopter's M230 chain gun does not use DU; it uses explosive ammunition instead. Squad-level and vehicle-mounted machine guns do not use DU.

In fact, DU is a highly specialized ammunition, associated with a very short list of weapons.

Anybody wishing to convince me of DU-related side effects in Fallujah will first have to convince me that substantial numbers of DU-loaded weapons were fired in Fallujah.

I'm sure the US military will be keen to let you know how much DU they dumped on Fallujah. Just ask them.

Maybe those who heroically killed civilians in Fallujah to free Iraq from WMDs are using WMDs even more toxic that DU.

 

[JihadJane]

Anybody wishing to convince me of DU-related side effects in Fallujah will first have to convince me that substantial numbers of DU-loaded weapons were fired in Fallujah.

Why would you call the effects of DU poisoning on the human body "side-effects"?

 

[fuelair]

Why would you call the effects of DU poisoning on the human body "side-effects"?

Because unless you can show that DPU is not being used because of it's high ability to damage/stop heavy armor but because of possible poisoning effects later, the poisoning (if that is indeed the cause) is a side effect. For all things medical/weapons etc. side effects are those things occuring that are not the primary reason for use of a material (medicine, bullets, explosives, etc.).

Note: if you, or someone else, can establish that DPU's primary purpose is poisoning areas for both civilians and for the US troops that may have to go in and fight there (as they did), then you are free to call that the primary/intended effect and the immediate destruction of heavy armor vehicles and their crews the side effect.

 

[Travis]

I'm sure the US military will be keen to let you know how much DU they dumped on Fallujah. Just ask them.

Maybe those who heroically killed civilians in Fallujah to free Iraq from WMDs are using WMDs even more toxic that DU.

Operations in Fallujah had nothing to do with WMD's and you know that. And your insinuation that the US military was deliberately killing civilians with biological/chemical weapons is vile.

 

[JihadJane]

Because unless you can show that DPU is not being used because of it's high ability to damage/stop heavy armor but because of possible poisoning effects later, the poisoning (if that is indeed the cause) is a side effect. For all things medical/weapons etc. side effects are those things occuring that are not the primary reason for use of a material (medicine, bullets, explosives, etc.).

Wouldn't this usually be euphemistically called "collateral damage" rather than a "side effect, which, as you apparently recognize, is a term more commonly associated with therapeutic interventions rather than killing devices.

Note: if you, or someone else, can establish that DPU's primary purpose is poisoning areas for both civilians and for the US troops that may have to go in and fight there (as they did), then you are free to call that the primary/intended effect and the immediate destruction of heavy armor vehicles and their crews the side effect.

A scorched earth policy cannot be ruled out. Troops are expendable. Their mutant children can be ignored.

The toxic effects of DU are well-known to US military planners.




Is cancer a side effect of radiation?

 

[WildCat]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...on-fallujah-worse-than-hiroshima-2034065.html



That last is, apparently, because girls have two X chromosomes, while boys have only one and a Y. But I've not been able to find a reference to a change in sex ratio at Hiroshima which doesn't mention Fallujah, ie: a reference which isn't a recent story.

And what is the evidence that any of this was caused by DU or any other munition?

 

[WildCat]

Is cancer a side effect of radiation?

You think DU is radioactive enough to cause cancer?

 

[ddt]

You think DU is radioactive enough to cause cancer?

I always wondered about that too. Depleted uranium is the waste product of enriching uranium. That means it has much less U-235, the fissionable isotope of Uranium. However, fissionable is not the same radioactive. In fact, both major isotopes of Uranium - U-238 (99.3% in nature) and U-235 (0.7% in nature) are radioactive. The first step in both decay cycles is emitting an alpha particle (= Helium nucleus) which is quite harmless:

Because of their relatively large mass, +2 electric charge and relatively low velocity, alpha particles are very likely to interact with other atoms and lose their energy, so their forward motion is effectively stopped within a few centimeters of air.

(wiki link). However, the isotopes produced are themselves also radioactive, so this is just a first step in a decay cycle which ends with a stable isotope, in both cases a lead isotope.

In fact, the third isotope U-234 which only accounts for only 0.005% of natural uranium is responsible for nearly half of the radioactivity (DOD link). That link also says that DU has 60% of the radioactivity of natural uranium. However, that purely measures the number of radioactive decays, and does not distinguish between sorts of radioactivity. Beta particles (electrons or positrons) can be dangerous, IIRC, and gamma rays of course are outright bad for your health.

To measure how much harmful radioactivity DU has (e.g., gamma rays) requires more knowledge of the decay cycles, the half lives of the isotopes involved etc.

The wiki page on DU notes there are studies that have concluded that DU causes genetic defects, but that the subject is controversial.

 

[fuelair]

Wouldn't this usually be euphemistically called "collateral damage" rather than a "side effect, which, as you apparently recognize, is a term more commonly associated with therapeutic interventions rather than killing devices.



A scorched earth policy cannot be ruled out. Troops are expendable. Their mutant children can be ignored.

The toxic effects of DU are well-known to US military planners.




Is cancer a side effect of radiation?

Depends on the radiation - of Atomic bombs, yes...of radiation treatment , not normally.

Collateral damage and side effects are just different terms for the same thing, but I will grant the former is more often used re:war/weapons. DPU is very inefficient to be used as "scorched earth" source unless you have a lot more than I know about. Plain salt or any number of defoliants are way better and cheaper for that.

 

[Beerina]

 

[Travis]

A scorched earth policy cannot be ruled out.

Sure it can. What would be the point strategically?

And DU would be about the worst material to use for a "scorched earth policy" that you could think of.

• It's expensive
• It's in limited supply
• It has much better uses
• It's only as toxic as lead which is cheap and plentiful

Troops are expendable.

Not with a volunteer military where the average "cannon fodder" grunt costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to train and equip. Also it would be callous and totally at odds with all historical practices of the US military.

Their mutant children can be ignored.

See above.

The toxic effects of DU are well-known to US military planners.

So are the effects of lead, which, as stated above, DU is equivalent to. Your point then?

Is cancer a side effect of radiation?

Could be. If there were any harmful radiation to talk about.

 

[ddt]

• It's only as toxic as lead which is cheap and plentiful

Is it? The wiki page on the Gulf War syndrome states about DU:

Because uranium is a heavy metal and chemical toxicant with nephrotoxic (kidney-damaging),[38] teratogenic (birth defect-causing),[39][40] immunotoxic,[41] and potentially carcinogenic[42] properties, uranium exposure is associated with a variety of illnesses.[43] The chemical toxicological hazard posed by uranium dwarfs its radiological hazard because it is only weakly radioactive, and depleted uranium even less so. DU has recently been recognized as a neurotoxin.[44] In 2005, depleted uranium was shown to be a neurotoxin in rats.[45] Epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in the offspring of persons exposed to DU.

I've never heard of lead being associated with birth defects.

 

[barium]

The first step in both decay cycles is emitting an alpha particle (= Helium nucleus) which is quite harmless:

True, alpha particles are stopped by the skin. But when decaying radioisotopes are inhaled or ingested they're very very nasty as seen in the case of Alexander Litvinenko.

 

[The Fool]

It truly saddens me...

I remember the last DU thread where we had crowds of apologists saying they would be happy to have their house filled with DU dust. DU was harmless etc etc etc. Probably get some of them to do a star act in this thread too....eat more DU!!! better for you than brocolli..


clowns....