1
   

Troops poisoned by our own munitions

 
 
au1929
 
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2004 04:41 pm
Poisoned?
Shocking report reveals local troops
may be victims of america's high-tech weapons

By JUAN GONZALEZ
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Four soldiers from a New York Army National Guard company serving in Iraq are contaminated with radiation likely caused by dust from depleted uranium shells fired by U.S. troops, a Daily News investigation has found. They are among several members of the same company, the 442nd Military Police, who say they have been battling persistent physical ailments that began last summer in the Iraqi town of Samawah."I got sick instantly in June," said Staff Sgt. Ray Ramos, a Brooklyn housing cop. "My health kept going downhill with daily headaches, constant numbness in my hands and rashes on my stomach." A nuclear medicine expert who examined and tested nine soldiers from the company says that four "almost certainly" inhaled radioactive dust from exploded American shells manufactured with depleted uranium.Laboratory tests conducted at the request of The News revealed traces of two manmade forms of uranium in urine samples from four of the soldiers.If so, the men - Sgt. Hector Vega, Sgt. Ray Ramos, Sgt. Agustin Matos and Cpl. Anthony Yonnone - are the first confirmed cases of inhaled depleted uranium exposure from the current Iraq conflict.The 442nd, made up for the most part of New York cops, firefighters and correction officers, is based in Orangeburg, Rockland County. Dispatched to Iraq last Easter, the unit's members have been providing guard duty for convoys, running jails and training Iraqi police. The entire company is due to return home later this month."These are amazing results, especially since these soldiers were military police not exposed to the heat of battle," said Dr. Asaf Duracovic, who examined the G.I.s and performed the testing that was funded by The News."Other American soldiers who were in combat must have more depleted uranium exposure," said Duracovic, a colonel in the Army Reserves who served in the 1991 Persian Gulf War.While working at a military hospital in Delaware, he was one of the first doctors to discover unusual radiation levels in Gulf War veterans. He has since become a leading critic of the use of depleted uranium in warfare.Depleted uranium, a waste product of the uranium enrichment process, has been used by the U.S. and British military for more than 15 years in some artillery shells and as armor plating for tanks. It is twice as heavy as lead.Because of its density, "It is the superior heavy metal for armor to protect tanks and to penetrate armor," Pentagon spokesman Michael Kilpatrick said.The Army and Air Force fired at least 127 tons of depleted uranium shells in Iraq last year, Kilpatrick said. No figures have yet been released for how much the Marines fired.Kilpatrick said about 1,000 G.I.s back from the war have been tested by the Pentagon for depleted uranium and only three have come up positive - all as a result of shrapnel from DU shells.But the test results for the New York guardsmen - four of nine positives for DU - suggest the potential for more extensive radiation exposure among coalition troops and Iraqi civilians.Several Army studies in recent years have concluded that the low-level radiation emitted when shells containing DU explode poses no significant dangers. But some independent scientists and a few of the ­Army's own reports indicate otherwise.As a result, depleted uranium weapons have sparked increasing controversy around the world. In January 2003, the ­European Parliament called for a moratorium on their use after reports of an unusual number of leukemia deaths among Italian soldiers who served in Kosovo, where DU weapons were used.I keep getting weaker. What is happening to me?The Army says that only soldiers wounded by depleted uranium shrapnel or who are inside tanks during an explosion face measurable radiation exposure.But as far back as 1979, Leonard Dietz, a physicist at the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory upstate, discovered that DU-contaminated dust could travel for long distances.Dietz, who pioneered the technology to isolate uranium isotopes, accidentally discovered that air filters with which he was experimenting had collected radioactive dust from a National Lead Industries Plant that was producing DU 26 miles away. His discovery led to a shutdown of the plant."The contamination was so heavy that they had to remove the topsoil from 52 properties around the plant," Dietz said.All humans have at least tiny amounts of natural uranium in their bodies because it is found in water and in the food supply, Dietz said. But natural uranium is quickly and harmlessly excreted by the body.Uranium oxide dust, which lodges in the lungs once inhaled and is not very soluble, can emit radiation to the body for years. "Anybody, civilian or soldier, who breathes these particles has a permanent dose, and it's not going to decrease very much over time," said Dietz, who retired in 1983 after 33 years as nuclear physicist. "In the long run ... veterans exposed to ceramic uranium oxide have a major problem."Critics of DU have noted that the Army's view of its dangers has changed over time.Before the 1991 Persian Gulf War, a 1990 Army report noted that depleted uranium is "linked to cancer when exposures are internal, [and] chemical toxicity causing kidney damage."It was during the Gulf War that U.S. A-10 Warthog "tank buster" planes and Abrams tanks first used DU artillery on a mass scale. The Pentagon says it fired about 320 tons of DU in that war and that smaller amounts were also used in the Serbian province of Kosovo. In the Gulf War, Army brass did not warn soldiers about any risks from exploding DU shells. An unknown number of G.I.s were exposed by shrapnel, inhalation or handling battlefield debris.Some veterans groups blame DU contamination as a factor in Gulf War syndrome, the term for a host of ailments that afflicted thousands of vets from that war.Under pressure from veterans groups, the Pentagon commissioned several new studies. One of those, published in 2000, concluded that DU, as a heavy metal, "could pose a chemical hazard" but that Gulf War veterans "did not experience intakes high enough to affect their health."Pentagon spokesman Michael Kilpatrick said Army followup studies of 70 DU-contaminated Gulf War veterans have not shown serious health effects."For any heavy metal, there is no such thing as safe," Kilpatrick said. "There is an issue of chemical toxicity, and for DU it is raised as radiological toxicity as well."But he said "the overwhelming conclusion" from studies of those who work with uranium "show it has not produced any increase in cancers."Several European studies, however, have linked DU to chromosome damage and birth defects in mice. Many scientists say we still don't know enough about the long-range effects of low-level radiation on the body to say any amount is safe.Britain's national science academy, the Royal Society, has called for identifying where DU was used and is urging a cleanup of all contaminated areas."A large number of American soldiers [in Iraq] may have had significant exposure to uranium oxide dust," said Dr. Thomas Fasey, a pathologist at Mount Sinai Medical Center and an expert on depleted uranium. "And the health impact is worrisome for the future."As for the soldiers of the 442nd, they're sick, frustrated and confused. They say when they arrived in Iraq no one warned them about depleted uranium and no one gave them dust masks.Experts behind News probeAs part of the investigation by the Daily News, Dr. Asaf Duracovic, a nuclear medicine expert who has conducted extensive research on depleted uranium, examined the nine soldiers from the 442nd Military Police in late December and collected urine specimens from each.Another member of his team, Prof. Axel Gerdes, a geologist at Goethe University in Frankfurt who specializes in analyzing uranium isotopes, performed repeated tests on the samples over a week-long ­period. He used a state-of-the art procedure called multiple collector inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry.Only about 100 laboratories worldwide have the same capability to identify and measure various uranium isotopes in minute quantities, Gerdes said. Gerdes concluded that four of the men had depleted uranium in their bodies. Depleted uranium, which does not occur in nature, is created as a waste product of uranium enrichment when some of the highly radioactive isotopes in natural uranium, U-235 and U-234, are extracted.Several of the men, according to Duracovic, also had minute traces of another uranium isotope, U-236, that is produced only in a nuclear reaction process."These men were almost certainly exposed to radioactive weapons on the battlefield," Duracovic said.He and Gerdes plan to issue a scientific paper on their study of the soldiers at the annual meeting of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine in Finland this year.When DU shells explode, they permanently contaminate their target and the area immediately around it with low-level radioactivity.


Comment.
The effects of DU shells does not come as a surprise since it has been known for some time. I wonder at it's continued use despite the known dangers.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 3,540 • Replies: 75
No top replies

 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2004 05:12 pm
The far right, however, has gone out of its way to deny that DU poses any threat whatsoever. I'm sure they will show up to tell you that you are stupid, and a traitor, as well as other epithets.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2004 05:23 pm
Hobitbob

Those shells predate this administration and so does the decision to use them. I would like an investigation into who made the decision to use them, and the justification if there can possibly be one.

I wonder if the gulf war syndrome is somehow related to the use of these shells.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2004 05:29 pm
That has been a strong suspicion for some time.
0 Replies
 
wenchilina
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Apr, 2004 07:10 pm
Flagrant disregard for UN resolutions yet again. It's quite incredulous to see a group denying the very real fact uranium oxides are as poisonous as ARSENIC oxides. Bunker busters up to 4000 lb (meaning at least 2 tonnes of depleted uranium per bomb) have been dropped in large quantities in Iraq and Afghanistan. So when American soldiers are firing rounds containing these, they are breathing in amounts as well. Gulf War Syndrome II.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2004 08:30 am
wenchilina wrote:
Flagrant disregard for UN resolutions yet again. It's quite incredulous to see a group denying the very real fact uranium oxides are as poisonous as ARSENIC oxides. Bunker busters up to 4000 lb (meaning at least 2 tonnes of depleted uranium per bomb) have been dropped in large quantities in Iraq and Afghanistan. So when American soldiers are firing rounds containing these, they are breathing in amounts as well. Gulf War Syndrome II.


I could be wrong here, but I believe that when they refer to a 4000lb bomb, it doesn't actually weigh 4000lbs. That means the explosive power is equivalent to 4000lbs of TNT.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2004 08:34 am
wenchilina wrote:
Flagrant disregard for UN resolutions yet again. It's quite incredulous to see a group denying the very real fact uranium oxides are as poisonous as ARSENIC oxides. Bunker busters up to 4000 lb (meaning at least 2 tonnes of depleted uranium per bomb) have been dropped in large quantities in Iraq and Afghanistan. So when American soldiers are firing rounds containing these, they are breathing in amounts as well. Gulf War Syndrome II.



???????????????????????????

lol How exactly does a soldier "fire" a 4000lb bomb?
0 Replies
 
wenchilina
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2004 08:52 am
I didn't state a soldier " fired a 4000 lb bomb "
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2004 09:00 am
"Bunker busters up to 4000 lb (meaning at least 2 tonnes of depleted uranium per bomb) have been dropped in large quantities in Iraq and Afghanistan. So when American soldiers are firing rounds containing these..."


What "these" were you referring to here then?
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2004 09:18 am
I imagine they have larger guns these days fishin'

;-)
0 Replies
 
wenchilina
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2004 09:25 am
It was in reference to burning DU providing ample amounts of particles of oxides and lowlevel radioactivity to munch on.

Sorry about not making that clear initially.
0 Replies
 
BoGoWo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2004 09:32 am
brings up another possible motive for 'war mongering'; a new (admittedly ineffective - what's new?) way of getting rid of nuclear waste from power plants around the country. Shocked

find a 'target' and fire it at them!

that'll teach them to mess with.......................
oops, sorry about the 'colateral dammage'.
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Apr, 2004 10:11 pm
Quote:
Health concerns

Environmental groups have raised concerns about the use of this material; arguing that not only is it dangerously radioactive, but it is also as toxic as lead. Such issues are of concern to those fired upon by DU weapons, to those protected by DU armour-plating; and to civilians and troops operating in a theatre where DU is used. The health effects of depleted uranium have been postulated to be one of the possible causes of Gulf war syndrome. This possibility has been widely denied by a number of government officials, most of whom deny that DU is dangerously radioactive.

Studies of scientific bodies have resulted in mixed conclusions. Studies showing detrimental health affects have claimed the following:

Toxic material from shot DU ammunition does disperse into the air much more easily and widely than expected (since uranium is one of the heaviest metals there are, this came rather unexpectedly). Also DU disperses into the water, as mentioned in the UNEP study [5]:

"The most important concern is the potential for future groundwater contamination by corroding penetrators (ammunition tips made out of DU). The penetrators recovered by the UNEP team had decreased in mass by 10-15% due to corrosion. This rapid corrosion speed underlines the importance of monitoring the water quality at the DU sites on an annual basis."

While DU studies from the military sector mostly were conducted under the assumption about external exposure to DU materials, newer studies took inhalation of particles from the remains of used ammunition into consideration. These studies indicate that the battlefield use of DU ammunition may have grave consequences, especially if used near population centers.

Small amounts of radiation may even be more harmful to the body than bigger doses may be [2,3,4]. Damaged cells resulting from lower doses of radiation seem to be less efficiently repaired by the body. This seems to be a possible source of cancer. This may lead to controversy in the future if the facts become more clear (proven by more studies) and more commonly known, since this may be important to people living in the vicinity of nuclear power plants as well.

These facts together may indicate that DU ammunition is actually quite a health problem and endangers the civilian population if left on the battlefield. However, other studies have shown that DU ammunition has no measurable detrimental health effects, either in the short or long term. Critics of these studies point to the fact that they come primarily from the US and UK -- both supporters of DU. However, the Geneva-based International Atomic Energy Agency also reports, "based on credible scientific evidence, there is no proven link between DU exposure and increases in human cancers or other significant health or environmental impacts" [1]. The US military watchdog group Federation of American Scientists has come to similar conclusions.

Wikipedia

I tend to believe scientific studies before I believe activists. The hysteria over DU is generally non-scientific and usually seems to take the following form:

1. Joe is sick.
2. Joe was previously exposed to Depleted Uranium.
3. Therefore, Depleted Uranium is the reason Joe is sick.

There's no science in a statement like that - it's pure emotion. It ignores any number of alternate reasons for Joe's illness. But when a person has made up his mind to believe something, it's often difficult to convince them otherwise even with massive numbers of scientific studies.

Speaking of studies, there are several links to studies on that Wikipedia page. You can also go to the Federation of American Scientists website and search for "depleted uranium" and find more studies.
0 Replies
 
wenchilina
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Apr, 2004 06:45 am
Quote:
On matters concerning international peace and security, the Subcommission:

Affirmed that weapons of mass destruction and, in particular, nuclear weapons should have no role to play in international relations and thus should be eliminated;

Further reaffirmed its support for a total ban on the production, marketing and use of such weapons; urged States that had not yet done so to sign and ratify the Convention on Conventional Weapons and Protocols thereto;

Urged all States to be guided in their national policies by the need to curb production and spread of weapons of mass destruction or with indiscriminate effect, in particular nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, fuel-air bombs, napalm, cluster bombs, biological weaponry and weaponry containing depleted uranium;

Requested the Secretary-General to collect information from governments and other relevant sources on the use of such weapons and on their consequential and cumulative effects, and to submit a report on the matter to the Subcommission at its forty-ninth session.


Source : UN, HR/CN/755
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Apr, 2004 10:50 am
Regardless of how these soldiers got sick, I hope the military takes good care of them. As to whether depleted uranium rounds are dangerous: I hope so. They are munitions, after all.

War should not be safe. If it were, we'd lose the deterent value thereof. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Apr, 2004 10:57 am
It is not unreasonable to state the the point of weapons and weapons systems is to make the battlefield dangerous for the other guy--not for one's own troops.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Apr, 2004 11:09 am
Scrat

You do realize that the use of these shells may contaminate the soil and water supply for years to come. That is never the intention of war. Were there no other alternative the use of these shells may be imperative and justified however, does not seem to be so.
Consider would one drop munitions on their own troops to kill the enemy? Of course not. Than why use munitions that could possibly have the same outcome.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Apr, 2004 12:36 pm
Setanta wrote:
It is not unreasonable to state the the point of weapons and weapons systems is to make the battlefield dangerous for the other guy--not for one's own troops.

That is a perfectly valid, perfectly reasonable point. However, no munitions are safe for our troops. A US soldier can be wounded by a US bullet. I do see the difference that DU rounds are not intended to cause illness in either side, but my comment was half-tongue in cheek and the other half intended in the broadest sense. We could certainly argue over how much risk our troops ought to incur from our weaponry, in which case I suspect data could show our men to be at greater risk from other types of munitions than they are from inhalation risk from exploded DU rounds.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Apr, 2004 12:54 pm
DU is no more dangerous to the soil and water than an equal amount of lead.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Apr, 2004 01:11 pm
In my opinion, Scrat, you don't make your case--it is a weak argument at best.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Troops poisoned by our own munitions
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 03:18:01