[ RadSafe ] On-Line Posting to Senator Rosa Franklin, Washington State Senate

[The Wilsons]

So Roger, with this vast wealth of information that has been developed 
over several generations of people, you are prepared to explain in 
layman's terms exactly why any one of those exposed absolutely will not 
and can not be harmed by their particular exposure to depleted uranium?

Roger Helbig wrote:
> You also may comment to Senator Franklin from http://apps.leg.wa.gov/memberemail/MailForm.aspx?Chamber=S&District=29
>
> Thanks to Al Conklin who advised me that the Bill had not passed .. I then went to the Washington Legislature Bill site and found that it had not apparently even been voted on by the full Senate or the full House of Representatives and had only been voted out of the Committees.
>
> Senator Franklin, 
>
> I have read the testimony presented at the hearing for the bill you sponsored and the official legislative report.  Both presented a great of misinformation about depleted uranium
>
> The Senate Legislative Report said in part
>
> "The conclusive testing must look at blood results, tissue testing, and must be able to detect microscopic particles. Depleted uranium becomes microscopic. Troops breath it in and it settles in the lungs. In Mississippi, returning Persian Gulf male veterans are 1.7 times more likely to father
> children with birth defects. Female Persian Gulf veterans are 2.4 times more likely to give
> birth to a child with birth defects. This is only the beginning. England and Germany are
> conducting the proper tests. The United States needs to do the same for their veterans."
>
> The following sentence is extensively rebutted below:
>
> "In Mississippi, returning Persian Gulf male veterans are 1.7 times more likely to father
> children with birth defects"  - this is not true .. read the following from 
>
> http://www.ntanet.net/traprock.html
>
> Traprock Peace Center, Leuren Moret and Doug Rokke Mislead Public on Depleted Uranium 
> by Robert Holloway 
>
> Leuren Moret - An Expert on Depleted Uranium?
> There is a great deal of false information on the Internet about depleted uranium. One such retailer of false information is Leuren Moret. Let's take a close look at an instance where Ms. Moret has had ample opportunity to correct false information, at my request, and has failed to do so. 
>
> Ms. Moret recently published (August 9, 2005) an article in the Battle Creek Enquirer on depleted uranium. The article was republished online at the following URL: 
>
> http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0809-33.htm 
>
> In the article Ms. Moret makes the following claim and I quote exactly: 
>
> "In some studies of soldiers who had normal babies before the war, 67 percent of the post-war babies are born with severe birth defects - missing brains, eyes, organs, legs and arms, and blood diseases." 
>
> I have asked Ms. Moret by email to supply the source for her claim but she has not responded. The above claim is similar to other claims that she has made for several years. But reflect on this claim for a minute. If it is true, it is the sort of claim that would have been picked up long ago by the major news organizations and it would have caused a national scancal. The figure of 67 percent is far above the background rate of major birth defects of less than 5 percent. Did Ms. Moret make this claim up out of thin air? I think not. The background of this claim is that in the mid 90s, there was at least one newspaper account of anecdotal claims of excess birth defects in children born to a unit of the Mississippi National Guard. 
>
>
> However, this situation was thoroughly investigated in a scientific study by the Centers for Disease Control. A scientific paper on this study was published in a research journal. An abstract of that study can be found on the website of the CDC. Here is a quote from the CDC website: 
>
>   
>>>>>>>>>>> In 1994, CDC collaborated with the Mississippi Department of Health and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to investigate reports of adverse birth outcomes among members of two Mississippi National Guard Units that served in the Gulf War. This investigation found no increase above expected rates in the total number of birth defects or in the frequency of premature births and low birth-weight babies. The frequency of other health problems, such as respiratory infections, gastroenteritis, and skin diseases among children born to these veterans also did not appear to be elevated. 
>>>>>>>>>>>                       
>
> Publication 
>
> Penman A, Tarver RS, Currier MM. No evidence of increase in birth defects and health problems among children born to Persian Gulf War veterans in Mississippi. Military Medicine 1996;161:1–6.<<<<<<<<< 
>
> I informed Ms. Moret more than a year ago that she was using old and outdated information in regard to her claim about birth defects. She did not respond but continues to use the same misinformation. The fact that she does not respond on this problem calls into question her desire to present truthful information in regard to depleted uranium. If Ms. Moret wishes to respond to my comments, I will place here comments here. How about it Leuren? 
>
> Upon further checking on the Internet, I found what may be the source of Leuren Moret's 67 percent figure. Here is a quote from The Nation, of March 7, 1994: 
>
>   
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Susie Spear, a health writer for the Clarion-Ledger in Jackson, Mississippi, reported that among her local unit of the National Guard severe birth defects had affected thirteen of fifteen babies conceived by veterans or their spouses since the end of the war. Since then, a Veterans Administration survey of 251 parents statewide has revealed that 67 percent of their children conceived since the war are afflicted with illnesses rated severe or have birth defects including missing eyes and ears, blood infections, respiratory problems and fused fingers.<<<<<<<<<<< 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>                           
>
> I should note here that a survey can hardly be described as a study, as Moret claims. And I believe that there is substantial doubt as to the accuracy of the 67 percent figure. It seems that if the survey were really conducted, there is no written record of it now, other than the Internet references quoted by the activists. It is also interesting that Leuren Moret does not give references for this information in her own Internet publications. Seems to me Leuren, that your 67 percent figure is just another urban legend. 
>
> The story goes on. Here is something that Michael C. Sullivan reported on the Internet in 2003 on this curious 67 percent figure. 
>
>   
>>>>>> One of the more startling statistics still worming through the internet and the British press is the claim that a study of Gulf War veterans showed the 67% had children with severe illnesses, missing eyes, blood infections, respiratory problems and fused fingers. [SH] 
>>>>>>             
>
> The same figure showed up in the 1999 BBC story by Kirby: In one unit, 67% of children born to US Gulf veterans had severe illnesses or birth defects." [BBC1] Internet searches revealed that this stat, with a bit more detail, shows up on many peace and environmental activist sites. In a study of 251 Gulf War veterans families in Mississippi, 67 percent of their children were born without eyes, ears or a brain, had fused fingers, blood in infections, respiratory problems or thyroid and other organ malformations. [LM] I wrote to the author and was informed that her source was an article by Laura Flanders in The Nation from 1994. I quote: 
>
> "And now the effects of Gulf war Syndrome are carrying over to a new generation. Last December, Susie Spear, a health writer for the Clarion-Ledger in Jackson, Mississippi, reported that among her local unit of the National Guard severe birth defects had affected thirteen of fifteen babies conceived by veterans or their spouses since the end of the war. Since then, a Veterans Administration survey of 251 parents statewide has revealed that 67 percent of their children conceived since the war afflicted with illnesses rated severe or have birth defects including missing eyes and ears, blood infections, respiratory problems and fused fingers." [LF] 
>
> I believe this is the common source of the 67 percent figure. It has now made its way into a book [MD]. I wrote Flanders and asked for the title of the VA survey and where it was published. She replied: 
>
> "The '94 article refers to a survey which was part of a study not completed and published by the VA until 1996. My source is the Jackson Ledger reporter, somebody Spear, whom I quote in the piece; she'd been writing about the surveys starting a few months before and appeared on FAIR's radio show to talk about it (a detail that got cut in editing.) Statistics being what they are, the '96 report produced a quite different result from the early research. I haven't read it in its entireity (by this time I was not so closely on the case) but it's title is something like VA Finds NO LINK....to birth defects. [Private e-mail, 4/14/2003] 
>
> I went to my campus library and in 30 minutes, with some help from a kind person at the Government Documents Desk, found a 1997 article in Gulf War Review [GWR] entitled Birth Defects Risk Not Increased. I asked Flanders if this was the study. She wrote back: That's the one! [Private e-mail, 4/15/2003] The study itself was published in the New England Journal of Medicine [NEJM]: In conclusion, this report provided substantial evidence that the children of Gulf War veterans do not have an increased risk of birth defects. 
>
> What can we conclude? Hearsay is valid news. This is why we should not try people in the press. It is also why we should not do science in the media either, and yet there is no "science court" to defer to. One just has to dig. I do not fault Flanders so much for reporting what she was hearing. But that so many others would repeat this story without checking up on the source is shear laziness.<<<<<<<<< 
>
> ---- Michael C. Sullivan 
>
> You owe it to your constituents to have solid science, not myth, behind your legislation.  I am heartened to see that contrary to the trumpeting in the anti-DU crusader internetworks, that it has not yet passed and been sent on the Governor for signature.  It's heart is in the right place, but it the entire premise of the speakers is that depleted uranium is a horror that it is not.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Roger W Helbig
> 1021 Lassen St
> Richmond, CA 94805-1016
>
> I would like a response because I have been monitoring the anti-DU crusader networks along with having connections with well qualified experts in radiation safety.  I would prefer an e-mail contact on your staff .. mine is rhelbig at california.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
>
>