Look forward to Gulf War Syndrome II

[wulfie]

Originally posted by Erlkonig
wulfie, man, you on drugs?  You spent 3 posts responding to Fishu's one-liner.  Plenty of other people on this BBS get away with sarcasm without being Chernobyl babies or Stalin worshippers or Mini Cooper drivers or whatever wackiness you're attacking Fishu with now.

Ummm. Define 'drugs' please. If you are talking about hashish, opium, mariahjiahwannah, coke, *illegal* speed, etc. then the answer would be, ummmmmm..."No".

And so what if I used three posts? It's not like a went and impugned the collective morality of the U.S.A. based on the decision to use nuclear weapons to end WW2 in the Pacific theater for example. And I didn't gloss over or ignore the fact that (at least) 2 million Japanese civilians dying from poison gas, artillery fire, bullets, etc. is *undoubtedly* *worse* than a couple hundred thousand dying before they knew what hit them. It's horrible that any innocents every have to die, but dead is dead and the fewer that die the better in every case is what I believe.

It's the classic debate of life and death issues between people that have had to make life and death decisions and people that will never have to make those decisions. Given your background I'm sure you know what I mean.

Anyways back to the point - you're a veteran and you are worried about GWS II because you empathize with guys who do what you used to do. I was worried about GWS I. I'm not overly worried about GWS II. Rest easy, at least until the next crisis comes up (and don't read any sarcasm into that statement there is none there).



Mike/wulfie

[Tuomio]

Originally posted by capt. apathy

where do you get that? what makes you think you need to be able to see it for it to be dangerous?     I've found the PEL for DU, (as a toxic metal not inclusive of radiation, these are the permisable levels NOT SAFE levels). the PEL for DU is .05mg/m3 or 1/20,000th of a gram per cubic meter of air (the same as lead). to a limit of 40 hours per week. (or about 1/80,000th of a gram if you are going to breath it 'round the clock'.

[/B]



PEL stands for work safety limits per 8-hours right?  So under these limits a person can do his regular work shift every whoopee day and he should live and prosper. Now how far away is that limit from something that can really, with a common sense taught as a no-no amount?

DU insoluble limit is 0,25 mg/m3 and lead is 0,05mg/m3. So this means that lead is more dangerous? Im not sure but dont they still commonly use lead in petroleum in third world countries?

Is soldiers PEL limits exeeded in Iraq?

Next is from

http://www.puaf.umd.edu/faculty/papers/fetter/sags-du.pdf

"Table 3 gives the maximum amount of uranium in the kidney following
the inhalation or ingestion of one gram of uranium aerosol. A uranium concentration
of 1 ppm in the kidney would result after inhaling 5 to 6 milligrams of
soluble uranium aerosol or 300 to 1400 milligrams of insoluble aerosol. For
comparison, the Health Physics Society estimates that the thresholds for transient
and permanent renal damage are 8 and 40 milligrams of inhaled soluble
uranium aerosol.  Also note that a uranium concentration of 1 ppm in the
kidney would result after ingestion of 60 milligrams of soluble aerosol or 1400
milligrams of insoluble aerosol."

"Toxic effects at levels of exposure to uranium lower than those required to
cause kidney damage have not been reported. However, there has been much
less study of low-dose effects of uranium than for lead. In the case of lead, significant biochemical and neurological effects have been found at blood levels
five to ten times smaller than those which cause kidney damage. Thus, we
cannot rule out the possibility that significantly lower uranium doses might
have adverse, but as yet unrecognized, health effects."

How much lead dust are soldiers exposed to, or even regular people living in the cities in -80:s? All these sensation news about DU are DIRECTLY (falsely) linked for radiation. They talk about toxicity and all, but what they wont tell that it isnt linked to radioactivity, but is completely different property of being heavy metal. If they would make up these stories about lead poisoning, people would laugh at them. But same story with DU and whoa we have a new religion.

Which one is more harmful to you, inhaling lead dust from destroyed tank or DU dust?

[Tuomio]

Originally posted by Horn
Some resources:

http://www.thefourreasons.org/duresources.htm

h

Finelly something that is reliable, i mean page that links to sites like "http://www.alkhilafah.info/massacres/iraq/" must be The Truth.

I used to think that content with less text and more pictures are for kids, but whadda ya know! (disclaimer, porn excluded)

[Erlkonig]

Originally posted by wulfie
It's the classic debate of life and death issues between people that have had to make life and death decisions and people that will never have to make those decisions. Given your background I'm sure you know what I mean.

Anyways back to the point - you're a veteran and you are worried about GWS II because you empathize with guys who do what you used to do. I was worried about GWS I. I'm not overly worried about GWS II. Rest easy, at least until the next crisis comes up (and don't read any sarcasm into that statement there is none there).



Mike/wulfie

I think you mistake me for someone else - I am not a veteran.

[Horn]

Originally posted by Tuomio
Finelly something that is reliable, i mean page that links to sites like "http://www.alkhilafah.info/massacres/iraq/" must be The Truth.

I used to think that content with less text and more pictures are for kids, but whadda ya know! (disclaimer, porn excluded)

I see. So you would dispute this one?

http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/pdf/dumyths.pdf

I don't think I mentioned "truth" anywhere.



h

[Tuomio]

Originally posted by Horn
I see. So you would dispute this one?

http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/pdf/dumyths.pdf

I don't think I mentioned "truth" anywhere.



h

Many antiwar people see the antiwar "nonbiased.iraq.info" as an absolute truth. Being "nonprofitable" (usually pure lie) doesent mean nonbiased.

That article that you now linked starts with a words

"One overlooked but significant consequence of the Bush administration's plans to invade
Iraq is the renewed debate about weapons containing depleted uranium (DU). "

Ok so now i have my shields on, i scroll this and look for tables or data about what happens when person finds himself around an tank thats been destroyed by such round. Nada..

There isnt ANY info about the doses that man must ingest and the types of heavy metals to get yourself a problem. Sure, 900 000kg of DU is a big chunk, but where it currently exists in Afghanistan deserts? 30% of it perhaps 16,2 meters underground? How is it dispersed and in what forms, aerosol type is the worst and intact shell underground is no biggie. What happens to the DU aerosol when it finally soon after lands? What are the scenarios of people getting this stuff inside their bodies for long times?

All these questions and no answers from that lousy FAQ..Im no scientist, but if somebody wants to claim something like this:

"Despite the obvious limitations with the Iraqi studies, anti-DU activists and Iraqi doctors
have misleadingly pointed to the Iraqi studies and claims as proof that the effects of the
use of DU are equivalent to effects of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor accident.  The
comparison to the Chernobyl accident, which has had quantifiable, widespread and
serious health and environmental effects, is inaccurate and inappropriate.  Nonetheless,
among others, anti-DU activist Leuren Moret has claimed, "The use of depleted uranium
by the Department of Defense has created a slow Chernobyl in the Middle East." Iraqi
doctor Huda Ammash has even claimed the release of DU in Iraq is equivalent to 100
Chernobyl accidents. "

Its all about radiation again isnt it?
This guy better have very very good and simple statistics backing up on him.  People getting sick from this "obvious" cause should be no big deal for scientists to identify and study. Basically most of that FAQ is filled with how the army is stupid, Maverics could all the job blah blah (quick scroll). If he thinks hes good army advisor he should maybe fill an application for such job.

Oh and this "4.9.  Israel is using DU against the Palestinian people"

Were talking about serious non-biased data here folks!

" The adjective "depleted" by no means diminishes the
chemical and radioactive properties of DU, but it can affect how people perceive DU's
risks. "

Duck and cover, it might be the nuclear bullets!

[jamusta]

I dont get it... Why would DU rounds affect the US military? Those rounds were not used against us. The only exposure would be loading the DU rounds. I am sure that a few troopers climbed on destroyed vehicles but let us remember that a large amount of vets affected were the folks in the rear.....

[capt. apathy]

PEL stands for work safety limits per 8-hours right? So under these limits a person can do his regular work shift every whoopee day and he should live and prosper. Now how far away is that limit from something that can really, with a common sense taught as a no-no amount?

actually most experts believe most of our PEL's (this is a general statement, not specific to any one chemical) are above a safe level.  in the process to determine the LEGAL PEL's scientists submit data then the industry argues what these limits would do to their profitability, loby heavily and put pressure on lawmakers, the PEL falls somewhere in between a safe level and a profitable level.  (imagine if true PEL's for cigarette smoke where published and not prevented by money)

also these PEL's change often (usually more restrictive) as scientists collect more data and it becomes harder for a dollar to win out over the amount of info stacked against it, they bargain again and the PEL becomes more restrictive.

if you doubt this do a check on the PEL's for lead.  I have the data but don't really feel like digging through the books to pull up the levels. if you look it up you will find that the levels have become signifigantly more restrictive as the years go by with the industry basicly being drug kicking and screaming the whole way.

or as another example this summer I attended a certification upgrade for HAZ-MAT instructor at the hanford site (real nasty place).  while talking to the rad-tech there he told me the PEL for radiation is now 500 mrem per anum.  my last nuke job was in '90 the pel then was nominaly 500mrem per quarter (you could easily be cleared for 1500 with nothing more than a signiture on a form), because they run calander quarters and the work stradled the quarter date I was allowed to take 2,700 mrem of radiation in less than 45 days.  all perfectly legal.

did radiation become more dangerous in the last 13 years?  

even if the levels for DU where below the PEL's (and afaik nobody bothered to check) that doesn't mean the levels where safe or that these guys don't have real health problems related to DU.  don't be suprised to see a whole new batch of sick soldiers and deformed babies

[capt. apathy]

I dont get it... Why would DU rounds affect the US military?

source

The new contract is for a test batch of 30-millimetre ammunition of the type used by American A-10 "tank buster" aircraft, which fired some 75 tonnes of DU during the recent Iraq conflict.

75 ton, that is just from the a-10 alone.
now add all the other weapons that used DU and throw in a couple sand storms.

[Charon]

At lest we aren't talking about those inhumane cluster bombs and napalm strikes or those evil neutron bombs that kill  people and leave buildings standing, unlike "conventional" tac nukes that kill more people, level buildings and irridate the landscape  

BTW, how much more effective is DU than tungsten etc.?

Charon

[Fishu]

Originally posted by jamusta
I dont get it... Why would DU rounds affect the US military? Those rounds were not used against us. The only exposure would be loading the DU rounds. I am sure that a few troopers climbed on destroyed vehicles but let us remember that a large amount of vets affected were the folks in the rear.....

A little theory..

US was pretty much all the time advancing rapidly (keyword: rapidly), so we could assume the leading forces were the ones who were least exposed to hazards of used DU rounds, since they were after all advancing most of the time ahead of the wastelands and when they created such a DU wasteland, they passed it quicly.
However these folks in the rear were all the time camping around these wastelands the advancing ones had created.

If assumed the DU rounds becomes harmful after been used, in form of a small particles, it would be even worse for the folks in the rear than for the advancing ones - since the particles hasn't yet had the time to spread around during the presence of advancing forces, but has had some time to spread around by the time rear elements arrives.
So the rear elements would been all the time bathing in a DU filled dust. (depending on the areas of course)
This would be only further magnified by the large open areas of the desert, where the wind blows rather freely and doesn't have much obstruction in the way, like in europe, where are plentiful amounts of trees, bushes, grass...
Desert conditions would also make it easier to inhale DU particles.

Then on to some other theories...
The origin for these harmful DU particles could be also be in the chemical reactions at the time it strikes some certain surface.
Maybe it isn't the armour + DU, maybe it could be just as well sand + DU or something else like that?
Fairly certainly most of the DU rounds were missed and instead hit one the biggest targets on earth - the ground itself.

[Raubvogel]

Depleted uranium rounds actually "self sharpen" as they penetrate armor, increasing the penetration; as opposed to tungsten and other metals which mushroom upon impact.

Standard Army training concerning depleted uranium warns soldiers to stay at least 50 meters from a vehicle suspected to have been hit with DU munitions. We receive yearly training on precautions to take and signs to identify DU munitions. Army doctrine calls for wearing gloves and donning protective mask if you must work in the area of a DU hit vehicle.  

DU is heavy, I seriously doubt that the dust would be blown very far at all.

Personally, I'd rather fight a war knowing that we had weapons to put just about anything out of commission and increase my chances for survival than be equipped with something that is "safer" but might not kill the bad guys as well. Just my 2 cents.

[Gadfly]

When we reach the point at which the environment is the primary concern of War, then we will truly be a doomed species.

[Horn]

"Despite the obvious limitations with the Iraqi studies, anti-DU activists and Iraqi doctors
have misleadingly pointed to the Iraqi studies and claims as proof that the effects of the
use of DU are equivalent to effects of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor accident. The
comparison to the Chernobyl accident, which has had quantifiable, widespread and
serious health and environmental effects, is inaccurate and inappropriate. Nonetheless,
among others, anti-DU activist Leuren Moret has claimed, "The use of depleted uranium
by the Department of Defense has created a slow Chernobyl in the Middle East." Iraqi
doctor Huda Ammash has even claimed the release of DU in Iraq is equivalent to 100
Chernobyl accidents. "

Its all about radiation again isnt it?
This guy better have very very good and simple statistics backing up on him. People getting sick from this "obvious" cause should be no big deal for scientists to identify and study. Basically most of that FAQ is filled with how the army is stupid, Maverics could all the job blah blah (quick scroll). If he thinks hes good army advisor he should maybe fill an application for such job.

Read it again Tuomio. It's not about radiation at all. And scroll to the 35th and last page for your statistics.


h

[wulfie]

Originally posted by Erlkonig
I think you mistake me for someone else - I am not a veteran.

I did mistake you for someone else who is a veteran. But if the cause of your post is honest concern for the guys serving in the military, then my sentiments are unchanged.

Mike/wulfie