[ RadSafe ] Re: uranium smoke is a teratogen

[Steven Dapra]

May 7

         (Writen in reply to James Salsman.  My comments are 
interspersed.  Steven Dapra)


At 07:52 PM 5/5/08 -0700, Ben Fore wrote:

  Steven Dapra wrote:
 > You claimed, James, to have presented "peer-reviewed publications
 > which show that uranium combustion products are teratogens." None of the
 > publications you invoked are about U combustion products....

There are plenty of papers, e.g., U.S. Army work by M. Parkhurst, which
say that uranium smoke dissolves into uranyl ions. Do you need me to cite
those for you, too?

REPLY:

         We are not talking about whether or not uranium smoke "dissolves" 
into uranyl ions.  We are talking about whether or not uranium combustion 
products are teratogens.  None of the material you have cited here so far 
does anything to prove that U smoke is teratogenic.  SD

 >... all of them that I have read are full of qualifiers....

So we have several papers, including three peer-reviewed literature 
reviews, stating that uranyl is a teratogen, but they are "full" of 
unspecified qualifiers.
And how many papers say that uranyl isn't teratogenic or isn't a 
reproductive toxicant? Zero.

REPLY:

         The Arfsten (2001) paper primarily discusses uranyl acetate's 
affect on the reproductive behavior of various types of rats.  It says 
virtually nothing about teratogenicity.

         The Hindin (2005) paper uses the word "uranyl" only three times in 
its text, and says nothing about it being teratogenic.

         I can't comment on the Domingo (2001) paper because I have not 
read it.

         Arfsten and Hindin are full of qualifiers, and if you had ever 
taken the time to read them you would have found that they are.

         As far as papers that say uranyl isn't teratogenic, I already 
*told* you that it is very difficult to prove a negative.  Hence, your 
question is worthless.  SD

 >...You cite two papers published in medical journals in Basra,  Iraq. 
.... Have you personally read either of these papers, and  if so, have you 
read any of the >literature cited in them?

Yes, I have read both of them. You can find them both on the web by, e.g., 
googling their titles.

REPLY:

         Perhaps I will do so at a later time.  If they are as useful as 
the material you have cited so far, . . . well, you can figure that out for 
yourself.  SD

[edit Salsman's reply to Jim Muckerheide]

James Salsman, as Ben Fore