[ RadSafe ] half of burning uranium becomes gas vapor

[James Salsman]

This review of over 74 studies on the subject is not evanescent at all:

"In aggregate the human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased
risk of birth defects in offspring of persons exposed to DU."
-- Hindin, R. et al. (2005) "Teratogenicity of depleted uranium
aerosols: A review
from an epidemiological perspective," Environmental Health, vol. 4, pp. 17:
  http://www.ehjournal.net/content/4/1/17

This has been discussed at length before, but Colonel Daxon tries to imply that
it is incorrect:

> I disagree with your connecting Dr. Kang's results as an endorsement of your
> position that DU is a causal factor.  There are no data that support your inference.
>
> I would like to see the references for "... people to propose using urine
> testing to measure uranium exposure, instead of measuring chromosome damage
> from uranyl poisoning, which is a much more accurate method of measuring
> exposure to uranium trioxide gas."  If anyone on the list has information to
> corroborate or to disprove the statement, I would appreciate it.  I believe
> it to be incorrect.

Schröder H, Heimers A, Frentzel-Beyme R, Schott A, Hoffman W (2003)
"Chromosome Aberration Analysis in Peripheral Lymphocytes of Gulf War and
Balkans War Veterans" Radiation Protection Dosimetry 103: 211-219:
  http://www.cerrie.org/committee_papers/INFO_9-H.pdf

"It is concluded that ... urine assay could be useful, provided that
measurements
are made soon after a known acute intake.... The urinary excretion rate falls
substantially after exposure, particularly during the first few
days.... However,
if urine analysis is carried out on a routine basis not related to the
pattern of
intake, then the errors in the assessment of intake can be considerable."
-- Ansoborlo E (1998). "Exposure implications for uranium aerosols formed at a
new laser enrichment facility: application of the ICRP respiratory tract and
systemic model" Radiation Protection Dosimetry 79: 23-27:
  http://www.bovik.org/du/Ansoborlo98.pdf

Colonel Daxon's lies continue:

> Once again you are discussing the vapor issue, the uranium trioxide and
> DoD testing which has already been laid to rest multiple times.

Fact:  Neither the DoD, nor any of its contractors, have ever measured the
gas vapor products of uranium combustion. They have only measured the
aerosol particulates, which settle from the air much faster. This includes
those who have been responsible for the safety of those using pyrophoric
uranium munitions, including Dr. Johnson, Colonels Daxon and Cherry, all
of whom read RADSAFE, and Drs. Mishima, Parkhurst, etc., and all of the
regulators at the NRC.  It has required me, an amateur, to bring the fact
that there even are gaseous combustion products of uranium to all of them
in the first place.

I challenge anyone to produce any document showing that any U.S. military
organization or contractor ever considered any gaseous combustion
product of uranium prior to 2005.

What level of professional competence should we demand from those
entrusted with the safety of soldiers and their children?

Sincerely,
James Salsman

On 1/15/07, Maury Siskel <maurysis at peoplepc.com> wrote:
>
>  If anyone remains interested in your (Salsman's) claims, one must grind
> through 7 pages of the pdf  reference in order to approach the Kang
> tentative report on page 10. A couple pages of discussion of this whole
> topic illustrates how evanescent the topic is. In my opinion, you (Salsman)
> are not promoting clarification of these issues. Moreover, perusal of the
> Dec 2006 meeting report of the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War
> Veterans Illnesses might convince one how tentative are solutions due in
> part to the breadth and vague nature of these interests. That report can be
> seen at:
> http://www1.va.gov/rac-gwvi/docs/AnnualReport_Dec2006.pdf
>  It really is unfortunate that so many problems remain beyond definitive
> scientific settlement, notwithstanding sincere desires.  Sigh ....
>  Maury&Dog  (maurysis at peoplepc.com)
>  =======================
>  James Salsman wrote:
> Colonel Eric Daxon wrote that the U.S. Veterans' Administration  "found that
> Gulf War veterans REPORTED more birth defects than non-Gulf War Veterans.
> When they actually did the study and examined the medical records, the birth
> defect rates were equal to the normal .... '
>  -------------------snipped------------
>