[ RadSafe ] Depleted Uranium Found In Urine 20 Years Later

Blaine Howard blainehoward at yahoo.com
Mon Oct 29 22:20:32 CDT 2007


The statement in the article that "This is true even
when the U concentration is at the low end of the
normal range." indicated that this is a very sensitive
method of measurement and that measurements include
persons who have uranium content in their bodies which
is less than the average person.  This is obviously
not harmful.  Average people are not suffering from
uranium poisoning.


--- Roger Helbig <rhelbig at california.com> wrote:

> I rather wonder if the test proves that DU is there
> or that uranium is there -- I have asked Dr Parrish
> what steps he has taken to preclude natural uranium
> being reported as being DU.  The "aerosol" comment
> makes it sound like Parrish was not particularly
> unbiased when he began this testing.  He also works
> closely with Dr Axel Gerdes who has worked closely
> with Asaf Durakovic, and Durakovic's objectivity is
> seriously in question and Gerdes has assisted in
> some of the pronouncements by Durakovic such as the
> widespread contamination by DU of wells in
> Afghanistan.  Does anyone on the list know if Dr
> Parrish did adequately test to ensure that he is
> reporting only DU and not naturally occuring
> uranium?  Did he test a number of people who had
> never been exposed to DU using the exact same
> methodology and did make this part of the report?
> Roger Helbig
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Steven Dapra" <sjd at swcp.com>
> To: "Maury Siskel" <maurysis at peoplepc.com>;
> "radsafe" <radsafe at radlab.nl>
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 5:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Depleted Uranium Found In
> Urine 20 Years Later
> Oct. 25
>          All this story does is show that DU can be
> detected after it's 
> been in the body for twenty years.  So what?  The
> test proves it's there, 
> not that the DU is harmful.
> Steven Dapra
> sjd at swcp.com

More information about the RadSafe mailing list