Merged Depleted uranium

[RandFan]

pointless baiting ignored

Yeah, and you ignored everything else too. Actually you just refuse to respond because you can't.

 

[AWPrime]

How does U238 disrupt the proteins that repair
nucleotides?

When a cell is first damaged a repair process is set in motion. The stages of repair follow a definite time-course and end with cell division. However, if the cell is further damaged within about 10 hours of the first, full repair may become impossible. In particular the genetic code may be copied incorrectly. Incorrect copying can result in cancers, foetal abnormalities and premature aging.

Also I would like to show these articles:
http://www.usm.maine.edu/toxicology/test/research/uranium.php
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3912/is_200202/ai_n9077795

how much of those decay products are formed in a 100 year span?

Their formation starts after fabrication.

How much radiation is actually experienced by the body?

Too many factors to make an exact assesment.

Also see this Contamination article.
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/dgvd.html

Yes, one alpha particle hits one atom. Sometimes less. Do you think it bounces around like a pinball?

No it rams straight through like a tankshell, because it has the energy to do so:

DU is a very powerful alpha particle emitter, with each particle carrying a force of about 4.2 MeV (million electron volts). It requires only 6 to 10 eV (electron volts) to break the DNA or other large molecules in the body
http://www.iicph.org/docs/DU_Human_Rights_Tribunal.htm

 

[RandFan]

1. Would inhaling DU dust increase, decrease or make no difference to my radiation dosage.?
2. Is increasing my radiation dosage desirable?
3. Is it irrational to not want to increase my radiation dosage?

Asked and answered. Now, would you answer MY questions?

 

[Grammatron]

Hows your stamina holding up Bruce?
want to have a bash at my 3 questions?

1. Would inhaling DU dust increase, decrease or make no difference to my radiation dosage.?
2. Is increasing my radiation dosage desirable?
3. Is it irrational to not want to increase my radiation dosage?

The WHO report I posted earlier should answer those three questions if you read it.

 

[Bruce]

want to have a bash at my 3 questions?

What Ziggaraut said. Gram's reference answers those questions and so does mine, but I suppose if you haven't read them by now, you never will.

 

[AWPrime]

At any rate, yes, on a molar basis, Uranium may be worse because it cascades. But let's try to get some more numbers. An adult body has about 14 mg of K40. That's the molar equivalent of about 80 mg of U238. Throw in a fudge factor of 10 if you want to account for U238 having active decay products, and you're looking at 8 mg still being inconsequential. Throw in a factor of 100, and a mg still looks irrelevant - several mg still shouldn't be a worry. But of course, we're being generous here, because U238 isn't going to stay in your body forever, but K40 will always be present.

But would the K40 be more mobile and spread any damage?

Now, how much U238 do you think troops (or surrounding civilians) are realistically going to inhale.

I will need to look into that, but I would reason for now that the locals would have a larger long term dose and the troops would get one or several large dose.

Call me crazy, but if I'm looking at the consequences of inhaling U238, I'm going to be a LOT more concerned about heavy metal toxicity than radiation risk.

I won't call you crazy. Thier both risks and one has to liberty to give one more attention.
Even I, use gloves and/or wash my hands when handeling heavy metals.


I will look for some hard numbers, will post them later.

ps. Thanks for keeping this seriously.

 

[gnome]

To me it seems obvious that the issue that clouds this is the use of DU by the American military.

As a Hypothetical if US road repair gangs started using DU tips on thier jackpicks which left detectible radioactive dust and fragments behind when they did a road repair what do you think would happen if the public found out about it? My suggestion would be that there would be an outrage followed by the immediate withdrawal of DU from work gangs and a comprehensive survey and cleanup of previous worksites.

Because it is the military using it then the issue of DU gets associated with the Issue of what the US military is doing...

My personal opinion is that any addition to the radiation load my body absorbes is undesirable. Anyone who wants to increase my radiation exposure will be politely told no thank you, choosing certain activities will increase my exposure but I will make that decision myself. I don't want someone spreading DU dust where I live and telling me not to be concerned....so niether am I happy with someone spreading du dust where other people live either.

Now at least you're responding with an argument instead of an accusation.

I think a big question is, is it cumulative...? if you take an environment that is minimally radioactive... and sprinkle around something that is also minimally radioactive... has that environment gotten worse? Question number 2 for me is, are the alternatives to DU especially better?

I hate war and would avoid it wherever possible. But the decision to go to war and the decision to as to which kind of ammunition to use are distinct.

 

[thaiboxerken]

1. Would inhaling DU dust increase, decrease or make no difference to my radiation dosage.?

It would increase based on how much you inhaled. You'd have to inhale a very high amount of it before it posed a threat. The carbon monoxide you inhale from the traffic is more dangerous. DU dust present in places where DU has been used as ammunition poses no threat because there isn't a significant amount of it.

2. Is increasing my radiation dosage desirable?

Nope, but the sun causes more radiation damage to you than DU ever will.

3. Is it irrational to not want to increase my radiation dosage?

It's irrational to tihnk that DU will increase your radiation dosage based on it's use today. It could play a significant part if you ground it up and snorted it like cocaine though.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Now at least you're responding with an argument instead of an accusation.

I think a big question is, is it cumulative...? if you take an environment that is minimally radioactive... and sprinkle around something that is also minimally radioactive... has that environment gotten worse? Question number 2 for me is, are the alternatives to DU especially better?

I hate war and would avoid it wherever possible. But the decision to go to war and the decision to as to which kind of ammunition to use are distinct.

Just to clarify your point for those that need it:

To be a bit more accurate, the earth is a radioative planet. DU is less radioactive than much of the surrounding environment. Spreading around DU would probably decrease the radiation exposure, as it is a good shield and it emits less radiation than the environment.

I

 

[The Fool]

Now at least you're responding with an argument instead of an accusation.

can you tell me what my accusation was and where I said it?

 

[The Fool]

Spreading around DU would probably decrease the radiation exposure,

I

sure you don't want to reconsider that? Should we now consider dusting New york with 500 tons of DU to lessen the radiation risk?
this is getting bizzare

 

[The Fool]

Yeah, and you ignored everything else too. Actually you just refuse to respond because you can't.

pointless baiting continuing to be ignored.

 

[thaiboxerken]

sure you don't want to reconsider that?

No.

Should we now consider dusting New york with 500 tons of DU to lessen the radiation risk?
this is getting bizzare

I didn't realize that New York was at a significant risk from radiation. Besides, all of that dust would make it unpleasantly dusty.

 

[gnome]

can you tell me what my accusation was and where I said it?

Apologies... Serves me right for not looking back. That complaint was more directed at Demon. You did not make an accusation in this thread that I can see.

 

[The Fool]

No.

so we should expect to find decreased radiation levels inside an surrounding DU penetrated viehicles?

Ken, this is getting a bit silly, You opened this thred with a genaeral tirade calling anyone who is not happy with DU being spread about as being believers and woos and alligning any counter arguments with the loonie extreme. You now appear to be the one providing the loonie extreme arguments for your "side". your suggestion that spreading DU around an area will lessen radiation exposure is just plain silly....how about you let it go and return to the mainstream discussion.

 

[thaiboxerken]

so we should expect to find decreased radiation levels inside an surrounding DU penetrated viehicles?

As compared to what? Spreading banana paste would raise the radiation levels more.

Ken, this is getting a bit silly, You opened this thred with a genaeral tirade calling anyone who is not happy with DU being spread about as being believers and woos and alligning any counter arguments with the loonie extreme.

Yes, but that's because the ban-DU people have no science to support their position.

You now appear to be the one providing the loonie extreme arguments for your "side". your suggestion that spreading DU around an area will lessen radiation exposure is just plain silly....how about you let it go and return to the mainstream discussion.

It depends on where the DU is being spread. It's harmless as a radioactive component.

 

[RandFan]

pointless baiting continuing to be ignored.

And sticking your fingers in your ears and humming loudly also I see.

Now, how about those questions?

 

[RandFan]

sure you don't want to reconsider that? Should we now consider dusting New york with 500 tons of DU to lessen the radiation risk?
this is getting bizzare

This is argument? You don't feel even a little bit of shame? Your argument is specious.

 

[RandFan]

I know that you are going to ignore this but I think it is worth a shot. Fool, do you have a logical argument to support your belief? Anything besides specious arguments?

 

[The Fool]

This is argument? You don't feel even a little bit of shame? Your argument is specious.

What is your response to the proposition that adding even large amounts of DU to the environment will lower the radiation dose of anyone living there? I was asking for Ken to confirm that this is what he means by using an example....I find the proposition absurd, what do you think?