Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Willravel · 12-04-2004, 11:04 PM

I remember back in health class when it was explained that radioactive materials can be toxic to my health. I also remember that uranium can be radioactive. In order to get suitable material for bombs and nuclear reactors for electricity generation, it is necessary to enrich uranium in U-235. Each ton of nuclear fuel obtained in the enrichment process generates at least 7 tons of uranium that is depleted in U-235. This is known as depleted uranium, or DU. The depleted uranium is a waste product because uranium metal doesn't have desirable properties for commercial use. The military developed DU as a high density projectile in munitions (uranium is 1.7 times denser than lead and 19 times denser than water). Once this high density projectile is fired at high velocity, is itn's easily stopped. Not only is DU heavier than lead, but it is much harder, giving it the ability to pierce armor that would splatter lead (it burns upon impact, instead of splattering). The Persian Gulf Was was the first confirmed use of DU munitions by the U.S. military. It was estimated that 320 to 350 tons of DU were used in the 1991 conflict. It was later acknoweledged that DU munitions were also used in Kosovo and Bosina.

That being said, we do everything we can to remove toxic materials like lead, mercury, and chromium from food, water, and building materials. As each of these, like DU, is relativly harmles in very small amounts, they become more dangerous as the body is exposed to them (for their carcinogenic nature). Just as lead or mercury poisoning can kill with enough exposure, radiation can also kill. Why would we use dangerously radioactive materials in an area that can (and sometimes does) contain civilians homes?

As mentioned above, when DU penetrators pierce through metal or other hard objects, they burn. A typical 30 mm round fired by aircraft contains more than a half pound of uranium, which goes up in smoke when it burns. The smoke is a very fine aerosol of uranium oxides that are easily inhaled. If an aircraft strafes a target with hundreds of rounds (which only takes a few seconds of holding the trigger), there could be hundreds of pounds of DU going up in smoke, The particles are so small that they would not be noticed. They may remain suspended in the air for a long time and may travel on the wind for many miles. The levels of DU dust in destroyed vehicles could be quite high and easily resuspended in the air by unknowing individuals looking for souvenirs. Vehicles passing DU destroyed targets would also kick up the dust as they pass. This seems to be the scenario that prevailed in southern Iraq in 1991. There is no way of knowing just how much DU aerosol our soldiers were exposed to in that conflict.

Biochemists have known since the early 1960s that uranium binds very well to DNA. They used it often to prepare DNA for viewing in an electron microscope, because DNA by itself doesn't show up well. Only recently have scientists discovered that uranium will cause mutations and breakage in the DNA. Mutations and breakage of DNA can lead to cancer. Mutations and breakage of DNA in a developing fetus can lead to birth defects. Mutations and breakage of DNA in sperm and egg cells can lead to an unviable fetus that will spontaneously abort, or may survive to be born with severe deformities. Studies with lab animals have shown that this will happen to animals. Scientists study such toxicity effects in animals to better understand what might happen in humans.

So here we have a geneotoxic substance in munitions that becomes dust upon impact in a battle zone. This dust can easily be inhaled. This dust is not only inhaled by 'the enemy', but also by the lungs of the U.S. soldiers that fired it. Why are DU munitions not classified as chemical weapons of mass destruction? The toxic properties and use easily fit the description. AND NOW DU ammunition is avaliable on the public market.

Am I crazy, or is this comething that needs to be addressed? I'm going to ask my friends and family that came back from service in Iraq to get tested for exposure, just in case.

12-04-2004, 11:04 PM	#1 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Cancer causing weapons used? I remember back in health class when it was explained that radioactive materials can be toxic to my health. I also remember that uranium can be radioactive. In order to get suitable material for bombs and nuclear reactors for electricity generation, it is necessary to enrich uranium in U-235. Each ton of nuclear fuel obtained in the enrichment process generates at least 7 tons of uranium that is depleted in U-235. This is known as depleted uranium, or DU. The depleted uranium is a waste product because uranium metal doesn't have desirable properties for commercial use. The military developed DU as a high density projectile in munitions (uranium is 1.7 times denser than lead and 19 times denser than water). Once this high density projectile is fired at high velocity, is itn's easily stopped. Not only is DU heavier than lead, but it is much harder, giving it the ability to pierce armor that would splatter lead (it burns upon impact, instead of splattering). The Persian Gulf Was was the first confirmed use of DU munitions by the U.S. military. It was estimated that 320 to 350 tons of DU were used in the 1991 conflict. It was later acknoweledged that DU munitions were also used in Kosovo and Bosina. That being said, we do everything we can to remove toxic materials like lead, mercury, and chromium from food, water, and building materials. As each of these, like DU, is relativly harmles in very small amounts, they become more dangerous as the body is exposed to them (for their carcinogenic nature). Just as lead or mercury poisoning can kill with enough exposure, radiation can also kill. Why would we use dangerously radioactive materials in an area that can (and sometimes does) contain civilians homes? As mentioned above, when DU penetrators pierce through metal or other hard objects, they burn. A typical 30 mm round fired by aircraft contains more than a half pound of uranium, which goes up in smoke when it burns. The smoke is a very fine aerosol of uranium oxides that are easily inhaled. If an aircraft strafes a target with hundreds of rounds (which only takes a few seconds of holding the trigger), there could be hundreds of pounds of DU going up in smoke, The particles are so small that they would not be noticed. They may remain suspended in the air for a long time and may travel on the wind for many miles. The levels of DU dust in destroyed vehicles could be quite high and easily resuspended in the air by unknowing individuals looking for souvenirs. Vehicles passing DU destroyed targets would also kick up the dust as they pass. This seems to be the scenario that prevailed in southern Iraq in 1991. There is no way of knowing just how much DU aerosol our soldiers were exposed to in that conflict. Biochemists have known since the early 1960s that uranium binds very well to DNA. They used it often to prepare DNA for viewing in an electron microscope, because DNA by itself doesn't show up well. Only recently have scientists discovered that uranium will cause mutations and breakage in the DNA. Mutations and breakage of DNA can lead to cancer. Mutations and breakage of DNA in a developing fetus can lead to birth defects. Mutations and breakage of DNA in sperm and egg cells can lead to an unviable fetus that will spontaneously abort, or may survive to be born with severe deformities. Studies with lab animals have shown that this will happen to animals. Scientists study such toxicity effects in animals to better understand what might happen in humans. So here we have a geneotoxic substance in munitions that becomes dust upon impact in a battle zone. This dust can easily be inhaled. This dust is not only inhaled by 'the enemy', but also by the lungs of the U.S. soldiers that fired it. Why are DU munitions not classified as chemical weapons of mass destruction? The toxic properties and use easily fit the description. AND NOW DU ammunition is avaliable on the public market. Am I crazy, or is this comething that needs to be addressed? I'm going to ask my friends and family that came back from service in Iraq to get tested for exposure, just in case.