0
cumplidor

More on Depleted Uranium

Recommended Posts

Quote

Just discovered, DU bonds to DNA!

http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20060307010324data_trunc_sys.shtml

So all you have to do is come in contact with it and it becomes part of you- bonus!

Sooo many ways to make money off industrial wastes...



Um...no. Your "Science-a-go-go" website is overstating.

The researchers' hypotheses were that:

* The metabolism of Uranium (U(VI)) by biologically-relevant reducing agents (ascorbate, glutathione (GSH), and cysteine) produces DNA damage in vitro.

* Uranium produces DNA damage and mutations in cells distinct from those produced by radon.

* Uranium produces cell damage by inducing inflammation and oxidative stress


Admittedly, there's not a link to the full research, just an overview on the university page itself, but the information doesn't match the claim.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Yeah right. Go into battle nowadays and talk to me in 20 yrs. If you are alive and your kids are fucked up[:/]



I didn't say it was the equivalent of powdered sugar, dude... I merely stated that the information on the website OF THE RESEARCHERS doesn't support his claim.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Admittedly, there's not a link to the full research, just an overview on the university page itself, but the information doesn't match the claim.



Well, I certainly am not knowledgable enough to know if the hypos and conclusions they reach are credible or not. BUT, I do believe that Uranium or DU are both incredibly toxic to us, and have herad of way too many troops having serious health complications upon coming home, their wives experiencing it first hand during sex, when his semen burns her insides. There are some reports that occasionally come out of Iraq about newborn babies having incredible deformities and defects or not surviving. (Not to mention the Native Americans here in the US of which the study was focused on I believe)

Now a person who refuses to believe this is possible would state that it doesn't make the news so it cant be true or show me the research... But we all know that the current administration exhibits a certain level of control about what is released to the public via the approved propaganda outlets. Anything that would be a threat to national security certainly isn't going to make the news...

And to discover that DU weapons are incredibly toxic to land and human for millions upon millions of years would be a little bit of a threat to national security methinks. That would sound an awful lot like the current administration would be guilty of the same charges we have levelled against Saddam.

But I would imagine the spin machines of Washington will kick into high gear and make sure that interests are protected, not unlike the pharma companies covering their asses regarding the anti-depressive medicines for kids and adults. Undertested and overmedicated... but that is a new topic...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

No doubt - uranium, whether depleted or not, is toxic material.



Can you offer me an explaination as to why would develop and deploy these weapons, knowing they are this toxic, thus exposing our troops and troops of our allies to this toxin?

Is it because those in our administration in charge of use of these weapons certainly don't have to worry about their immediate family or friends? And since the general people don't 'seem' to mind...

Do you disagree that the current administration would be guilty of the same charges against Saddam right now, if you agree that our DU weapons are poisioning thier lands for millions of years?

Sorry about the VRWC thing, I get sidetracked and forget myself sometimes... (I had to look up VRWC :D)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

BUT, I do believe that Uranium or DU are both incredibly toxic to us, and have herad of way too many troops having serious health complications upon coming home, their wives experiencing it first hand during sex, when his semen burns her insides.



The problem with the claim that uranium is going along for the ride during sex is pretty simple - if every ejaculation contains some, it's being removed from the man's body. How much can he possible have inside?

And should we really believe these soldiers are holding it all in during their deployments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

BUT, I do believe that Uranium or DU are both incredibly toxic to us, and have herad of way too many troops having serious health complications upon coming home, their wives experiencing it first hand during sex, when his semen burns her insides.



The problem with the claim that uranium is going along for the ride during sex is pretty simple - if every ejaculation contains some, it's being removed from the man's body. How much can he possible have inside?

And should we really believe these soldiers are holding it all in during their deployments?



Hmm.... do you think.....?
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The problem with the claim that uranium is going along for the ride during sex is pretty simple - if every ejaculation contains some, it's being removed from the man's body. How much can he possible have inside?

And should we really believe these soldiers are holding it all in during their deployments?

Hmm.... do you think.....?



I see why they had to make rules against verbal attacks on folks... sheesh

with repsonses like that its no wonder the country is in the shape it is in- no doubt some people watched way too many cartoons on Sat mornings...

must have made them think they were funny or something...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Show some research that connects the two (as I've seen a myriad of possible reasons for the syndrome) instead of an appeal to emotion by tying it to DU with no evidence, and you may be taken more seriously.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Can you offer me an explaination as to why would develop and
> deploy these weapons, knowing they are this toxic, thus exposing
> our troops and troops of our allies to this toxin?

Cause it's war. Why do we use weapons with high explosives in them, explosive that can (and have) killed many, many american soldiers? Because they are even better at killing the enemy.

Weapons are neutral morally, as DU is. As a wing weight it's a good material. As fertile reactor cladding it's great stuff. As a weapon it's good because it's dense, bad because it's toxic. But the error is deciding to use it in a certain instance, not in developing it in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

BUT, I do believe that Uranium or DU are both incredibly toxic to us, and have herad of way too many troops having serious health complications upon coming home, their wives experiencing it first hand during sex, when his semen burns her insides.



The problem with the claim that uranium is going along for the ride during sex is pretty simple - if every ejaculation contains some, it's being removed from the man's body. How much can he possible have inside?

And should we really believe these soldiers are holding it all in during their deployments?



So the cure is more sex?;)
Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clean to the bone!

I like to start my day off with a little Ray of Soulshine™!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Show some research that connects the two



Wow, interesting article. Wonder if it will get taken seriously?


Excerpts:
"various test-tube and animal studies have suggested that depleted uranium may increase the risk of cancer, according to a review of the scientific literature published in May 2008 by the US National Research Council. The review cites a wide range of studies, including one from 2007 by John Wise and colleagues at the University of Southern Maine in Portland which showed that depleted uranium dust induced mutations in the chromosomes of human lung cells (Chemical Research in Toxicology , vol 20, p 815). "

"Now two researchers [...] claim that uranium atoms in the body could act as "radiation antennas". They argue that uranium atoms could be capturing photons of background gamma radiation and then re-emitting their energy as fast-moving electrons that act on the surrounding tissue in the same way as beta radiation. This "phantom radiation" could be over 1000 times more damaging than the alpha particles released by depleted uranium's slow nuclear decay, according to their preliminary calculations.

Their theory invokes a well-known process called the photoelectric effect. This is the main mechanism by which gamma photons with energies of about 100 kiloelectronvolts (keV) or less are blocked by matter: the photon transfers its energy to an electron in the atom's electron cloud, which is ejected into the surroundings."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Playing devil's advocate...

Quote

Some researchers and campaigners are convinced that depleted uranium left in the environment by spent munitions causes cancer, birth defects and other ill effects in people exposed to it. Governments and the military disagree, and point out that there is no conclusive epidemiological evidence for this. And while they acknowledge that the material is weakly radioactive, they say this effect is too small to explain the genetic damage at the levels seen in war veterans and civilians. Studies back this up: in 2005, Albert Marshall of Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico showed that even the most heavily exposed soldiers during the Gulf war of 1990-91 had only around a 1 per cent greater risk of developing lung cancer compared with those who hadn't been exposed.



On a political note; You realize the Bush administration didn't develop many of the DU weapons in our inventory, right? The most prominent uses have been around for 20+ years.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've understood the main danger from spent DU munitions to be from the 'dust' produced from the disintegration of the munition shortly after impact. Further to that, the danger would therefore be temporary, until the 'dust' spread throughout the nearby atmosphere. Still, there's food for thought...

Essentially, if you were of the dubious inclination to have your photo taken on top of a destroyed T-55 clutching an AK like a dickhead, the DU issue was still something to consider.

On a 'health check' in around 2004 an 'issue' was noticed. The Doctor asked if I might have been exposed to DU.......:S

Who knows? I reckon I have, like hundreds of thousands of others, to an unknown extent. I'd like to know exactly what this extent might be!


'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0