• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cancer rise in Fallujah

Travis said:
Actually, I think we should just cut to the chase.


Suppose that there is indisputable evidence that the US used depleted uranium in Fallujah and that this caused the spikes in defects and cancers. What then? What should the US have done differently? What should be done now?
Click to expand...

Anyone?

Come on all that arguing about whether the stuff is there and no one wants to talk about what it means if it is proven to be there?
 
Travis said:
Anyone?

Come on all that arguing about whether the stuff is there and no one wants to talk about what it means if it is proven to be there?
Click to expand...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6290319&postcount=447

Travis said:
Suppose that there is indisputable evidence that the US used depleted uranium in Fallujah and that this caused the spikes in defects and cancers. What then? What should the US have done differently? What should be done now?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not saying DU did cause the spike, but I am curious as to what did, if the evidence against DU being the cause is as strong as has been suggested.

As for for what should be done - well, a massive epidemiological study into the phenomenon that identifies the cause would be a good start, followed up by a comprehensive overhaul of the way we go to war in order to prevent this sort of thing from ever happening again, and if that means not using, or even banning, the use of certain weapons - or at least rewriting the rules on how and where such weapons can be deployed in battle - then that would be a vast improvement. Especially if you think it is a good idea to use military force to go around "liberating" people, it's not a real good look if you poison them in the process.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
At the height of the conflict, Iraq had no sanitation or infrastructure. Trash was tossed into the street and occasionally set on fire. I mean, with shootings and bombings and generally insanity you couldn't pay folks to go and pick up the garbage and if they did what the hell were they supposed to do with it? The first COB I was at we had to burn it all our self. Including human waste because the infrastructure was not there. Not every home, especially in slummy areas, had toilets and folks just went where they could and those that did, the raw sewage ran through the streets in open ditches. Everyone smokes all day long.

And now folks are blaming cancer rates with DU?

Let's clear the air. I have no doubt in my mind that the US Military used DU at Fallujah. Why? Because we used DU all the time! Specifically, the Brads and Abrams have DU ammunition. I have handled it. I have loaded it and I have fired it. Hell, I've even been around it burning. So has every armor and mech-inf US Soldier! Not to mention that A-10s also use a hell of a lot of it.

Putting aside questions of "Iraqi hospitals are in a sad state to say the least, how can they track cancer rates?" and "Who provided the baseline for normal cancer rates considering the sanitation and general health issues that have faced modern Iraqis?"... You know, stuff like science and **** that skeptical folks dig, let's ask ourselves "'If exposure to DU lead to a rise in cancer then shouldn't we be seeing our vets coming home riddled with freaking cancer? Wouldn't there be an explosion at the VA for cancer treatments?"

Come on ya'll, this is easy stuff here.
 
foxholeatheist said:
At the height of the conflict, Iraq had no sanitation or infrastructure. Trash was tossed into the street and occasionally set on fire. I mean, with shootings and bombings and generally insanity you couldn't pay folks to go and pick up the garbage and if they did what the hell were they supposed to do with it? The first COB I was at we had to burn it all our self. Including human waste because the infrastructure was not there. Not every home, especially in slummy areas, had toilets and folks just went where they could and those that did, the raw sewage ran through the streets in open ditches. Everyone smokes all day long.

And now folks are blaming cancer rates with DU?
Click to expand...

A. Poor sanitation does not lead to birth defects and spikes in cancer rates.

B. Smoking rates are routinely taken into consideration when calculating cancer rates in populations, you can be sure that the authors of the Fallujah survey factored that into their study.

C. Not all folks are blaming DU, some of us want to see a comprehensive, large-scale epidemiological study into issue that can actually identify the cause so that, whether it be DU or something else altogether, it can be remedied and the appropriate steps taken to prevent it from ever happening again.
 
foxholeatheist said:
And now folks are blaming cancer rates with DU?
Click to expand...

Actually, no. Some people are obssessed with exonerating DU, even though no firm claims have been made that it is DU. Even the article in the OP refused to commit itself to what the cause is. I don't see how DU can be removed from the suspect list at this stage. And that's why I've argued on this page.

Let's clear the air. I have no doubt in my mind that the US Military used DU at Fallujah. Why? Because we used DU all the time! Specifically, the Brads and Abrams have DU ammunition. I have handled it. I have loaded it and I have fired it. Hell, I've even been around it burning. So has every armor and mech-inf US Soldier! Not to mention that A-10s also use a hell of a lot of it.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm glad you've come along to say that. Because we've had 'experts' asking us "where were the tanks? Where were the tanks? DU is only used against armour". There are some links up above which seem to dispute that. But I'm glad you've come along and, as a skeptic is supposed to, called out those people who made factual errors. Not by name, perhaps. But I'm sure they know who they are.

Putting aside questions of "Iraqi hospitals are in a sad state to say the least, how can they track cancer rates?" and "Who provided the baseline for normal cancer rates considering the sanitation and general health issues that have faced modern Iraqis?"...
Click to expand...

They don't know the normal baseline rates for Fallujah. The study estimated them by comparing them to Egypt.

Along with cancer and birth defects, they found a change in the sex ratio for children born a year or more after after 2004. This implies that something happened in 2004. Whether the contamination is from DU and/or some industrial plant or some other source -- no-one knows. The study, though it spent some time discussing the effects of DU (and I've agreed with criticism of that) did not actually reach a conclusion regarding cause (which is why I think they should not have bothered discussing DU)

You know, stuff like science and **** that skeptical folks dig, let's ask ourselves "'If exposure to DU lead to a rise in cancer then shouldn't we be seeing our vets coming home riddled with freaking cancer? Wouldn't there be an explosion at the VA for cancer treatments?"

Come on ya'll, this is easy stuff here.
Click to expand...

See earlier posts in the thread for other cases of Uranium being linked to cancer and birth defects. It's the chemical properties of the Uranium which are blamed. The thread has included stories regarding US/British soldiers from the first Gulf war. And about Italian soldiers who served in Kosovo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom