Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

America ! Protector of Human Rights. ; - (

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345
Author
DukeC View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
  Quote DukeC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: America ! Protector of Human Rights. ; - (
    Posted: 09-May-2006 at 11:15
Originally posted by TeldeInduz

There's still some discussion of DU left on it. DukeC is just trolling. It's been a good discussion so far other than that, so if we ignore him, it should carry on.

good discussion how? as cattus has repeatedly pointed out your arguments have no solid scientific basis. We get it that "IN YOUR OPINION" DU is harmful. How many more ways do you plan on saying it. This isn't discussion it's instruction.

Back to Top
TeldeInduz View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 07-Mar-2006
Location: Paraguay
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 857
  Quote TeldeInduz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-May-2006 at 12:37

 

Cattus and those interested,

I've read some reports of DU not being found in soil samples etc as you posted. But that is only for certain areas as I said. Here is one report in Kosovo, where DU has been found in the soil. There are mixed reports on this.


Depleted uranium particles in selected Kosovo samples.

Danesi PR, Markowicz A, Chinea-Cano E, Burkart W, Salbu B, Donohue D, Ruedenauer F, Hedberg M, Vogt S, Zahradnik P, Ciurapinski A.

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), PCI, Seibersdorf Laboratories, IAEA, Wagramer Strasse 5, P.O. Box 100, A-1400 Vienna, Austria. Danesi@iaea.org

Selected soil samples, collected in Kosovo locations where DU ammunition was expended during the 1999 Balkan conflict, have been investigated by secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS), X-ray fluorescence imaging using a micro-beam (micro-XRF) and scanning electron microscopy equipped with an energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence detector (SEM-EDXRF), with the objective to test the suitability of these techniques to identify the presence of small DU particles and measure their size distribution and the 235U/238U isotopic ratio (SIMS). Although the results do not permit any legitimate extrapolation to all the sites hit by the DU rounds used during the conflict, they indicated that there can be "spots ' where hundreds of thousands of particles may be present in a few milligrams of DU contaminated soil. The particle size distribution showed that most of the DU particles were <5 microm in diameter and more than 50% of the particles had a diameter <1.5 microm. Knowledge on DU particles is needed as a basis for the assessment of the potential environmental and health impacts of military use of DU, since it provides information on possible re-suspension and inhalation.

J Environ Radioact. 2003;64(2-3):143-54.

http://www.pdhealth.mil/downloads/DU_particles.pdf 

Article referred to


Isotopic composition and origin of uranium and plutonium in selected soil samples collected in Kosovo.

Danesi PR, Bleise A, Burkart W, Cabianca T, Campbell MJ, Makarewicz M, Moreno J, Tuniz C, Hotchkis M.

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Seibersdorf Laboratories, Wagramer Strasse 5, PO Box 100, A-1400 Vienna, Austria. P.R.Danesi@iaea.org

Soil samples collected from locations in Kosovo where depleted uranium (DU) ammunition was expended during the 1999 Balkan conflict were analysed for uranium and plutonium isotopes content (234U, 235U, 236U, 238U, 238Pu, (239 + 240)Pu). The analyses were conducted using gamma spectrometry (235U, 238U), alpha spectrometry (238Pu, (239 + 240)Pu), inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) (234U, 235U, 236U, 238U) and accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) (236U)). The results indicated that whenever the U concentration exceeded the normal environmental values (approximately 2 to 3 mg/kg) the increase was due to DU contamination. 236U was also present in the released DU at a constant ratio of 236U (mg/kg)/238U (mg/kg) = 2.6 x 10(-5), indicating that the DU used in the ammunition was from a batch that had been irradiated and then reprocessed. The plutonium concentration in the soil (undisturbed) was about 1 Bq/kg and, on the basis of the measured 238Pu/(239 + 240)Pu, could be entirely attributed to the fallout of the nuclear weapon tests of the 1960s (no appreciable contribution from DU).

J Environ Radioact. 2003;64(2-3):121-31. Related Articles, < =1.2> < =1.2> opUpMenu2_Set(Menu12500799);">Links
 


 


Edited by TeldeInduz
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................
Back to Top
cattus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1803
  Quote cattus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-May-2006 at 22:02
Originally posted by TeldeInduz

I think the epidemiological evidence is good that DU causes an increase in these malformations and the scientists just confirm it with their studies.


If malformations are confirmed than why does the Miller study say..

Limited data exist however, regarding the long-term health effects of internalized DU and HMTAs in humans.


The study only claimed to have data that DU can "activate gene expression through several signal transduction pathways that may be involved in the toxicity and tumorigenicity". The same is thought for Tungsten alloys.

Your review did not find that relevant or significant enough to add to its assessment. It overlooked it and cited an earlier work that Miller was involved on. Who knows,a lack of data or maybe because it was a controlled study on recombinant liver cells.


Originally posted by TeldeInduz

The Araneta study is very good evidence in fact. It is not anecdotal as you point out later - it is a scientific study, and it's results are significant concerning the deformities found in the pre and post war offspring. Also the Araneta study looked at US military servicemen, not Iraqis, so sanctions did not affect them - it was something in the environment that was caused these babies to deform - if it were sanctions alone you would not have found the offspring of US servicemen with the same problem.


I only mentioned the sanctions as an additonal hardship for the those people which are the subject here of many birth defects. Like them, the vets were exposed to many very bad things.. known and unknown.

I did not say that the Araneta study was anecdotal. It is only statistical information and itself is not related to depleted uranium.


Originally posted by TeldeInduz

This is wrong. The review I quoted did not rely on any anecdotal evidence. All the results quoted in the table were scientific results - nothing was anecdotal. Just because they rely on epidemiological evidence, does not mean that is anecdotal or unscientific, the results shown in the table are as scientific as any result you quoted in your soil sample Kuwait article - ask any scientist.


Again, I did not say the review relied on anecdotal evidence but seemed so itself. I probably should not criticize it considering it was only to asses the "weight of evidence". I guess im hungry for some difinitive answers. However,if the review tried to give one based on that method, then im sure their curricula vitae would come into question.

What I dont understand is why you defend the review so strongly, it does not give the result you want. After looking over other reviews and research, they finally concluded that DU's harm was "plausible".. i.e., they dont know. They certainly did not provide proof otherwise. Now compare that to what you will find on political sites.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.090 seconds.