• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Depleted uranium

WildCat said:
I predict that the result of those studies will be inconclusive, and there will be a call for more studies.


I would imagine that the studies are concluded, given that the article is dated Jan, 2001.

I would further imagine that the studies were not conclusive, given the power of WOO.
 
aerocontrols said:
There's a nice graphic here that may come close enough to answering your questions to make you happy. Or better yet, to answer the question you probably really want to have answered.

There is something wrong with that graphic. It implies that all the daughters from U238 decay have the same activity. They don't.

Activity/g is just downright confusing. A gram of what?

However it was meant to be presented, it's not correct in any case.
 
aerocontrols said:
There's a nice graphic here that may come close enough to answering your questions to make you happy. Or better yet, to answer the question you probably really want to have answered.

Thanks, aero, but I was really hoping I'd have the instuctor I originally asked the question of. He seems to have skipped town, however.
 
aerocontrols said:
I would imagine that the studies are concluded, given that the article is dated Jan, 2001.

I would further imagine that the studies were not conclusive, given the power of WOO.
D'oh! Just because I didn't notice the date, does it mean I'm ineligible for the $1 million prize? :p
 
There really seem to be no winning at the CTV forum. I have debunked their links, I've shown the key "expert" to be dishonest. I've shown scientific facts that show why DU isn't a significant environmental threat. Yet, they still persist that I am just giving a mere opinion based on the dogma that I prefer.

These people re-affirm the disdain I have for bleevers.

What's bad is, I don't like Bush or Cheney at all. But I feel like I'm defending them when I am defending the scientific position on DU. Ick.
 
Depleted Uranium dust is wonderfull stuff. Hands up all those who would like a few kilos of it spread around thier house? Maybe we could sell it as flower potting mix? Any takers?
 
The Fool said:
Depleted Uranium dust is wonderfull stuff. Hands up all those who would like a few kilos of it spread around thier house? Maybe we could sell it as flower potting mix? Any takers?

Strawman.
 
The Fool said:
Depleted Uranium dust is wonderfull stuff. Hands up all those who would like a few kilos of it spread around thier house? Maybe we could sell it as flower potting mix? Any takers?

Tell you what fool. For every kilo of lead dust you spread around your house, I'll spread a kilo of 238. See who lives better, longer.

Neither is good for you in large quantites. Lead just happens to be much worse.
 
Recent article on the topic.....make of it what you will.
I do wonder myself how many people would like a dose of it to see if it effects them. Anyway....

WSWS : News & Analysis : Middle East : Iraq
Soaring birth deformities and child cancer rates in Iraq

By James Cogan
10 May 2005


Iraqi doctors are making renewed efforts to bring to the world’s attention the growth in birth deformities and cancer rates among the country’s children. The medical crisis is being directly blamed on the widespread use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions by the US and British forces in southern Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War, and the even greater use of DU during the 2003 invasion.

The rate of birth defects, after increasing ten-fold from 11 per 100,000 births in 1989 to 116 per 100,000 in 2001, is soaring further. Dr Nawar Ali, a medical researcher into birth deformities at Baghdad University, told the UN’s Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN) last month: “There have been 650 cases [birth deformities] in total since August 2003 reported in government hospitals. That is a 20 percent increase from the previous regime. Private hospitals were not included in the study, so the number could be higher.”

His colleague, Dr Ibrahim al-Jabouri, reported: “In my experiments we have found some cases where the mother and father were suffering from pollution from weapons used in the south and we believe that it is affecting newborn babies in the country.”

The director of the Central Teaching Hospital in Baghdad, Wathiq Ibrahim, said: “We have asked for help from the government to make a more profound study on such cases as it is affecting thousands of families.”

The rise in birth defects is matched by a continuing increase in the incidence of childhood cancers.

Six years ago, the College of Medicine at Basra University carried out a study into the rate of cancer among children under the age of 15 in southern Iraq from 1976 to 1999. It revealed a horrific change between 1990 and 1999. In the province of Basra, the incidence of cancer of all types rose by 242 percent, while the rate of leukaemia among children rose 100 percent. Children living in the area were falling ill with cancer at the rate of 10.1 per 100,000. In districts where the use of DU had been the most concentrated, the rate rose to 13.2 per 100,000.

The results were cited at the time in campaigns to end the UN-imposed and US-enforced sanctions against Iraq, which were held responsible for the death of as many as 500,000 Iraqi children from malnutrition and inadequate medical treatment.

The study noted: “Most doctors and scientists agree that even mild radiation is dangerous and increases the risk of cancer. The health risk becomes much greater once the [DU] projectile has been fired. After they have been fired, the broken shells release uranium particles. The airborne particles enter the body easily. The uranium then deposits itself in bones, organs and cells. Children are especially vulnerable because their cells divide rapidly as they grow. In pregnant women, absorbed uranium can cross the placenta into the bloodstream of the foetus.

“In addition to its radioactive dangers, uranium is chemically toxic, like lead, and can damage the kidneys and lungs. Perhaps, the fatal epidemic of swollen abdomens among Iraqi children is caused by kidney failure resulting from uranium poisoning. Whatever the effect of the DU shells, it is made worse by malnutrition and poor health conditions....

“Iraq holds the United States and Britain legally and morally responsible for the grave health and environmental impact of the use of DU ...” (A version of the report is available at: http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/du_iraq.htm).

Terrible as these results were, the last six years have witnessed a further rise in the number of children under 15 falling ill with cancer in Iraq. The rate has now reached 22.4 per 100,000—more than five times the 1990 rate of 3.98 per 100,000.

Dr Janan Hassan of the Basra Maternity and Childrens Hospital told IRIN in November 2004 that as many as 56 percent of all cancer patients in Iraq were now children under 5, compared with just 13 percent 15 years earlier. “Also,” he said, “it is notable that the number of babies born with defects is rising astonishingly. In 1990, there were seven cases of babies born with multiple congenital anomalies. This has gone up to as high as 224 cases in the past three years.”

The statistics point to the long-term consequences of depleted uranium contamination. Munitions containing an estimated 300 tonnes of DU were unleashed by coalition forces in southern Iraq in 1991. A decade after the war, DU shell holes are still 1,000 times more radioactive than the normal level of background radiation. The surrounding areas are still 100 times more radioactive. Experts surmise that fine uranium dust has been spread by the wind, contaminating swathes of the surrounding region, including Basra, which is some 200 kilometres away from sites where large numbers of DU shells were fired.

A 1997 study into the cancer rate among Iraqi soldiers who fought in the Basra area during the 1991 Gulf War found a statistically significant increase in the rate at which they were stricken with lymphomas, leukaemia, and lung, brain, gastrointestinal, bone and liver cancers, as compared to personnel who had not fought in the south. One in four of the American personnel who fought in first Iraq war—more than 150,000 people—are also suffering a range of medical disorders collectively described as “Gulf War Syndrome”. While the US military denies there is any relationship, exposure to depleted uranium is one of the factors blamed by veterans and medical researchers.

Somewhere between 1,000 and 3,000 tonnes of DU was expended during the three-week war in 2003. Unlike 1991, however, where most of the fighting took place outside major population centres, the 2003 invasion witnessed the wholesale bombardment of targets inside densely-populated cities with DU shells. Christian Science Monitor journalist Scott Peterson registered radiation on a simple Geiger counter at levels some 1,900 times the normal background rate in parts of Baghdad in May 2003. The city has a population of six million.

Given that it was two to four years after the 1991 war before cancer and birth defect rates began to rise dramatically, the fear among medical specialists is that Iraq will face an epidemic of cancers by the end of the decade, under conditions where the medical system, devastated by years of sanctions and war, is unable to cope with the existing crisis.

Dr Amar, the deputy head of the Al-Sadr Teaching Hospital in Basra, one of the main hospitals treating Iraqi cancer patients, told the Sydney Morning Herald on April 29: “We don’t have drugs to treat tumours. I have a patient with tumours who is unconscious and I don’t have drugs or a bed in which to treat him. I have two women with advanced ovarian cancer but I can give them only minimum doses of only some of the drugs they need.

“Two or three days ago we had to cancel all surgery because we had no gauze and no anaesthetics. Our wards are like stables for horses, not humans. We can’t properly isolate patients or manage their diets. We don’t have proper laboratory facilities....

“If you are sick don’t come to this hospital for treatment. It is collapsing around us. We’re going down in a heap.”
 
Rob Lister said:
Tell you what fool. For every kilo of lead dust you spread around your house, I'll spread a kilo of 238. See who lives better, longer.

Neither is good for you in large quantites. Lead just happens to be much worse.
cool...so because lead is a lot worse DU is not a problem?

I take it you are passing on having the DU spread around your house? but as you say, a kilo is a lot...How about a gram? Aerosolised....agreed?
 
I do wonder myself how many people would like a dose of it to see if it effects them. Anyway....

Pay me $100K and I'll eat an ounce of it.

I take it you are passing on having the DU spread around your house? but as you say, a kilo is a lot...How about a gram? Aerosolised....agreed?

How about we plant 16 oz. pile of DU in the corner of my living room. We'll plant the same amount of cow crap in your living room too.

Heck, we can even aerosolise it.

No one is saying DU is nice to have as a house accessory, but it doesn't really pose an environmental threat either.
 
The Fool said:
cool...so because lead is a lot worse DU is not a problem?

I take it you are passing on having the DU spread around your house? but as you say, a kilo is a lot...How about a gram? Aerosolised....agreed?

You're demonstrating your own strawman. DU is being discussed because it is used instead of lead for high-v anti-tank rounds. DU is more effecient and less hazardous (to non-targets).

Edit to add: I have (well, my wife has) a couple of decroative plates hanging on the wall that are glazed with uranium. It makes the prettest blue. Edit to edit: Wife informs Rob (that would be me) that the blue is cobalt and the yellow is uranium. She shrugged her shoulders when I suggest we actually eat off of them, just to please Fool. She doesn't suffer me much lately but that didn't seem to bother her.

But sure. You ingest a gram of lead and I'll see you with two grams of 238
 
Grammatron said:
Strawman.
strawman.


....your turn.

are you passing on the uranium dust? I thought it was only Iraqis that were being sooks for complaining about it.....If its not a hazzard why don't we use it for domestic products? Sounds like handy stuff.
 
The Fool said:
strawman.


....your turn.

are you passing on the uranium dust? I thought it was only Iraqis that were being sooks for complaining about it.....If its not a hazzard why don't we use it for domestic products? Sounds like handy stuff.

Yes, strawman. Have you already been inhaling or otherwise ingesting lead dust? It seems so.

By the way, I wouldn't want any high-v projectiles bouncing around my corner of the world. I'd much prefer they bounce around in another corner. Either way, I'd like them to be both effective, and as non-hazardous as is cost effective. DU meets that goal.
 
People here who are comparing DU to lead (or could do so with tungsten) are really missing the point.

DU is used (for example) to destroy tanks.

The tank goes up in flames. The tank, its fuel and ammunition, being made of nasty stuff, disperses into the air. Hundreds of pounds of really nasty stuff.

Now. How much more dangerous are the fumes because they contain a tiny bit of DU, or a tiny bit of lead?


A further note for the 'aerosolized' crowd: Only hard metal armor is sufficient to cause a pyrophoric reaction, aerosolizing some of the sabot. Buildings, the ground, etc., don't.

I volunteer for the uranium dust experiment. No need to expose yourselves to lead to prove anything to me. (Edit: It occurs to me that I have roomates and I can't volunteer on their behalf. Sorry, you'll have to wait.)
 
Rob Lister said:
Yes, strawman. Have you already been inhaling or otherwise ingesting lead dust? It seems so.

Naughty rob, give yourself an uppercut.


By the way, I wouldn't want any high-v projectiles bouncing around my corner of the world. I'd much prefer they bounce around in another corner. Either way, I'd like them to be both effective, and as non-hazardous as is cost effective. DU meets that goal.

Not a problem....you "not in my backyard" people are always fun. Chuck this stuff around new york and suddenly it may become a different issue.
 
The Fool said:
strawman.


....your turn.

are you passing on the uranium dust? I thought it was only Iraqis that were being sooks for complaining about it.....If its not a hazzard why don't we use it for domestic products? Sounds like handy stuff.

Well if WHO study is not enough for you, please, tell me what is.
 
They never should have called it depleted uranium. They should have called it RHR.
 
Really Heavy Rocks


Fool, did you know you get about as much radiation exposure from the uranium inside the cinder-block walls of your fall-out shelter as you do from an ounce of depleted uranium?

Yes, there is uranium in ordinary dirt and rocks.

No, I'm not going to dig up a link for you.

Why does anyone bother trying to talk to you?

Why am I talking to you?

I need to go read Mycroft's wisdom thread again. :(
 
Grammatron said:
Well if WHO study is not enough for you, please, tell me what is.
Let's see...according to the WHO,

Applications of depleted uranium

...radiation shields in medical radiation therapy machines...
Radiation shields? RADIATION SHIELDS!!!???? OMG!?

:D
 

Back
Top Bottom