Print

Print


>> A friend has sent me a large amount of material on Depleted Uranium
>> (DU), but I am really not competent to judge the issues involved. Can
>> some members of this list help out.
>>
>> Carrol Cox


  Roughly one month ago I wrote about this issue in relation to
  a NOVA public TV program in the US on dirty bombs, comparing
  the effects of this radiological weapon, with powerline and other
  issues, and how DU-issues may be relevant when troops and .IQ
  citizens are eating sand during those most wicked desert storms.
  An early post on Public Awareness of Radiation can be found at:
  http://archives.openflows.org/electronetwork-l/msg00519.html

  Likewise, in a more recent newsletter on electromagnetism, this
  issue has a reference to an article about this same issue, at:
  http://archives.openflows.org/electronetwork-l/msg00531.html

Depleted uranium casts shadow over peace in Iraq
<http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993627>

         "Given its low radioactivity and our current understanding of
radiobiology, DU cannot trigger such health effects, the British and
American governments maintain.

         "But what if they are wrong? Though DU is 40 per cent less
radioactive
than natural uranium, Miller believes that its radiological and toxic
effects might combine in subtle, unforeseen ways, making it more
carcinogenic than thought. It's a controversial theory, but one for
which Miller has increasing evidence." .. "Miller points to another
reason to be concerned about DU: the so-called "bystander effect".
There is a growing consensus among scientists that radiation damages
more than just the cells it directly hits."

bc      http://www.electronetwork.org/