AW: [ RadSafe ] United Nations: "potential harmful effects" of DU to bestudied, adjendized

[Franz Schönhofer]

Dave and RADSAFErs,

I fully understand your and other RADSAFErs discomfort and your anger about
what happens in the field of nuclear energy or DU. But I have written it
over and over again and now once again:

Nuclear power, radioactivity, DU, medical use of ionizing radiation etc.
etc. is  n o t  a matter of science, but a matter of politics. How many
scientists ever would object some decision - if it is politically opportune
this decision will be pulled through. A good question would of course be,
why the unscientific anti-everythings have so much influence on politics.
Any answer? 

As for the DU issue I have a very heretical point of view - it would have
been better if all participants would have avoided those conflicts where DU
was used - not only because of avoiding negligible DU exposure but also
death and destruction, which would have been much more important. This would
really have been ALARA. Not to wage war would have been "as low as
reasonably achievable". 

Best regards,

Franz

Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
MinRat i.R.
Habicherg. 31/7
A-1160 Wien/Vienna
AUSTRIA


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] Im Auftrag
von Dave Blaine
Gesendet: Freitag, 30. November 2007 14:35
An: radsafe at radlab.nl
Betreff: [ RadSafe ] United Nations: "potential harmful effects" of DU to
bestudied, adjendized

By a vote of 122-6 (35 abstaining) the United Nations decided last
month to request reports on, and include on their agenda, "effects of
the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted
uranium." Against the resolution were the Czech Republic, France,
Israel, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States.  I
presume that this is a new development and not something that happens
every year.

http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N07/574/73/PDF/N0757473.pdf?OpenEleme
nt

Although I can't be certain, it seems as though this was brought about
in part by the testimony of Keith Baverstock, retired after 12 years
from the W.H.O.  He apparently served there under Mike Repacholi, who
produced reports in 2001 which Baverstock now says are skewed against
correctly reporting the health threat, specifically genotoxicity. A
BBC transcript with the details is here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/reports/international/uranium_20061101.sht
ml

Baverstock's testimony to the Belgian government (21 refs.) is here:

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/docs/15.pdf

Would someone please have look at all this to see if it makes any
sense from a toxicological perspective?

On a related note, who knows the vapor pressure, surface tension,
latent heat of vaporization, and the Van der Waals equation's
molecular attraction (a) and volume (b) for the uranium di- and
tri-oxides?  Or if you know any or all of those aren't published,
please let me know asap.

Dave Blaine
-- 
representing only myself; personal opinions only
_______________________________________________
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/