[ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen

Dan W McCarn hotgreenchile at gmail.com
Sun May 18 22:47:13 CDT 2008

Dan W. McCarn, Geologist; 3118 Pebble Lake Drive; Sugar Land, TX 77479; USA;

HotGreenChile at gmail.com           UConcentrate at gmail.com

<<"The shipment is safe, Hyslop said, because the concentration of uranium
in the sand is so low  about 10 parts per trillion. That concentration
about 0.00000000001 percent  is about five to 10 times higher than the
concentration of uranium found in concrete or wall board, he said.">>

Oops – Either Chad Hyslop of American Ecology is wrong or the quote is
wrong!  That’s 5 orders of magnitude less uranium than typical concrete, not
5 to 10 times more...  Assuming that concrete has only 1 ppm U (and it's
likely a little more than that).

That's down around detection threshold for most techniques... And very clean

Dan ii

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf
Of Steven Dapra
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 8:07 PM
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen

May 18

         I have done some research on James Salsman/BenFore's (JS/BF) 
latest posting here about birth defects in Iraq.  He wrote in reply to a 
message from Dan McCarn.  It's classic JS/BF --- relying on the popular 
press, relying on abstracts, everything so twisted around it makes little 
or no sense, and relying on un-refereed literature.  Comments from Steven 
Dapra (SD) are interspersed throughout, in an attempt to set the record 

James Salsman/Ben Fore wrote:

Dan, thank you again for, as usual, a really good message.

I agree that foliate deficiency had an affect on birth defects in Iraq, but 
not among the U.S. or Kuwaiti people in the same area, just as anthrax 
vaccine increased the birth defects among U.S. troops, but not enough to 
explain the increase.

On a related note, Eric Olsen has written a series of four articles on the 
same sand from Kuwait's Camp Doha DU munitions dump fire which Dr. Salbu 
has been studying, which is now with the American Ecology disposal company 
in Idaho:

SD's comments:

Olsen's articles are about some Kuwaiti sand that was contaminated with a 
minute amount of DU, and was shipped to the United States for disposal in 
Idaho.  American Ecology is the company handling the disposal.  A Chad 
Hyslop of American Ecology is project manager for American 
Ecology.  According to the second of Olsen's articles (April 15, 2008), 
"The shipment is safe, Hyslop said, because the concentration of uranium in 
the sand is so low  about 10 parts per trillion. That concentration  about 
0.00000000001 percent  is about five to 10 times higher than the 
concentration of uranium found in concrete or wall board, he said."

         This was a routine news article published in the popular 
press.  It did not take even a superficially scientific approach to the 

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Dan W McCarn <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>
 > a close friend (my sister-in-law) who has lived in southern Iraq since 
1978 has
 >repeatedly confirmed issues about CONTINUOUS malnutrition because of
 > Saddam Hussein's behavior toward the Shia majority, especially since the
 > First Gulf War, but also prior to that in the Iran-Iraq War....
 > After this last war, when she was finally able to call (using a GI's cell
 > phone) and she confirmed these factors. I tend to believe her far more
 > "reports" from the media.

How do you explain the Kuwaitis? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16700386

SD's comments:

         This paper was published in the Eastern Mediterranean Health 
Journal, which is published by the Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office of 
the WHO.  The links for html and PDF versions are:



This is the Abstract posted at the ncbi link James gave above.

Profile of major congenital malformations in neonates in Al-Jahra region of 
Madi SA, Al-Naggar RL, Al-Awadi SA, Bastaki LA

Department of Pediatrics, Al-Jahra Hospital, Kuwait.

We investigated major congenital abnormalities in babies born in Al Jahra 
Hospital, Kuwait from January 2000 to December 2001. Of 7739 live and still 
births born over this period, 97 babies had major congenital malformations 
(12.5/1000 births): 49 (50.6%) babies had multiple system malformations, 
while 48 (49.4%) had single system anomalies. Of the 49 babies with 
multiple malformations, 21 (42.8%) had recognized syndromes, most of which 
were autosomal recessive and 17 had chromosomal aberrations. Isolated 
systems anomalies included central nervous system (12 cases), 
cardiovascular system (9 cases), skeletal system (7 cases) and 
gastrointestinal system (6 cases). Of the parents, 68% were consanguineous. 
Genetic factors were implicated in 79% of cases. Genetic services need to 
be provided as an effective means for the prevention of these 
disorders.  [end Abstract]

SD's comments:

         The 97 babies constitute 1.25% of the studied births.  According 
to the Introduction to this paper, "Birth defects are a major clinical 
problem: 3% of all children born in any hospital, country or year will have 
a significant congenital abnormality and they represent 30% of all 
admissions in hospitals. The etiology of birth defects often remains 
unknown."  (citations omitted)

         First, the number of babies in this study with birth defects was 
less than the expected number of defects.  Second, the authors note that 
the cause of birth defects "often remains unknown."  That means, James/Ben, 
that often no one knows the reason for birth defects.  The authors of this 
study suggest that consanguineous marriages may be the cause of some of the 
birth defects.  If you had taken the time to read the study, you would have 
found this in the Conclusions: "The present study showed a high incidence 
of congenital malformations among our population and also a high rate of 
consanguinity which can lead to the recurrence risk of these 
conditions."  The authors note the high incidence of first cousin 
inter-marriages in Kuwait as a possible cause of the birth defects they 
found.  They recommend a program of education about the dangers of 
inter-marriages, and cite another study showing that a program of nutrition 
education led to a "dramatic decline" in the rate of anencephaly.

         To answer your question about 'how do we explain the Kuwaitis?,' I 
would suggest that you read the paper, instead of relying on the 
abstract.  (Suffice it to say that the authors did not suggest that 
Depleted-Uranium-Smoke caused any of the birth defects in their study.)>>>>>

See also http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18008151 -- immunodeficiencies 
were not nearly as prevalent in Kuwait in 1990, and were are not talking 
about anything transmissible (yet?)>>>>>

(Abstract posted at ncbi)

J. Clin. Immunol. 2008 Mar; 28(2):186-93.
Primary immunodeficiency disorders in kuwait: first report from kuwait 
national primary immunodeficiency registry (2004-2006).
Al-Herz, W.

Allergy & Clinical Immunology Unit, Pediatrics Department, Al-Sabah 
Hospital, Kuwait city, Kuwait.

Primary immunodeficiency disorders are heterogeneous group of illnesses 
that predispose patients to serious complications. Registries for these 
disorders have provided important epidemiological data and shown both 
racial and geographical variations. The clinical features of 76 patients 
with primary immunodeficiency disorders registered in Kuwait National 
Primary Immunodeficiency Registry from 2004 to 2006 were recorded. 
Ninety-eight percent of the patients presented in childhood. The prevalence 
of these disorders in children was 11.98 in 100,000 children with an 
incidence of 10.06 in 100,000 children. The distribution of these patients 
according to each primary immunodeficiency category is: combined T and B 
cell immunodeficiencies (21%), predominantly antibody immunodeficiency 
(30%), other well defined immunodeficiencies (30%), diseases of immune 
dysregulation (7%), congenital defects of phagocyte number, function or 
both (8%), and complement deficiencies (4%). The consanguinity rate within 
the registered patients was 77%. The patients had a wide range of clinical 
features affecting different body systems. Primary immunodeficiency 
disorders are prevalent in Kuwait and have a significant impact into the 
health system.

SD's comments:

         What is this supposed to prove?  The abstract merely describes the 
incidence rate of the disorders and says nothing about their causes.  (I 
looked at this paper on line, and it says nothing about 

 > Given the endowment of uranium naturally present in the soils of 
southern Iraq....

What fraction is soluble, and of that what fraction dissolves into uranyl 
at pH
range 1.0-9.0? I know that's a pretty wide range for uranium chemistry, so
if it's not a fair range, please say for lung, blood, and stomach pH 

SD's comments:

         Are you suggesting that Iraqis go around eating soil? -- eating 

 > the added DU is a very tiny fraction of the available U in soils. I
 > suggest that the annual addition of normal phosphate fertilizers
 > a significantly larger source for uranium than DU as well as natural 
 > from groundwater.... You may not be aware, but Syria and Iraq both host
 > uranium-bearing marine phosphorites (phosphate ore), so the
 > fertilizers are locally available. Iraq used these resources as a source
 > for their uranium weapons program.

How do you know that? Wouldn't we have heard about that as a justification
for the occupation when the suggestion of Nigerian yellowcake failed?>>>>>

SD's comments:

         James, how do you (and all of us) know you're not off your 
rocker?  No, we wouldn't necessarily have heard about U-bearing phosphate 
ore.  It was only an ore, and had not been processed.  The Nigerian 
yellowcake had been processed.  (Actually, it was trumped up, wasn't


In addition to the Iraqi's lack of folate, some of the anthrax vaccines had 
an increase in birth defects in clinical trials:
http://www.anthrax.mil/documents/1004AvipLeadersbrief.pdf  But that still 
leaves Kuwaitis unexplained (unless they bought a whole lot of bad anthrax 

SD's comments:

         This 14 page PDF article says nothing about birth defects or about 
clinical trials.  It appears to have been published by the Department of 
Defense, and it is a superficial treatment of anthrax vaccinations, and the 
services' requirement that certain soldiers receive said vaccinations.>>>>>

 > Uptake of uranium into crops is a function of the labile (as opposed to
 > refractory) uranium concentration in the upper soil zone which is
 > by 1) Annual source term (natural and anthropogenic); 2) Years of
 > 3) Soil conditions (density, moisture, etc.); 4) Leaching Coefficient; 5)
 > Soil concentration (from the first four factors); and 6) Transfer
 > coefficient to a plant. See McCarn, 2004, TECDOC-1396, pp. 301-304.

If you really want to answer this question, you need to say what fraction 
of effluent from point sources -- constrained within a much smaller area 
than all of Iraq -- entered human lung or stomachs. If that is too hard, 
how much flowed into potable water, and was what fraction of it?>>>>>

SD's comments:

         This uptake has been going on for thousands of years, and the 
Iraqis are obviously not dying like flies, nor do they appear to be 
suffering from a vast number of cases of birth defects.  In light of that, 
your question serves no constructive purpose.>>>>>

 > Given a back-of-the-envelope comparison, assuming 5 ppm of U in soils in
 > Iraq, the amount of natural uranium in 1 square meter (33.33 cm deep) is
 > about 3 grams per square meter of uranium. If aerosols from 10% of the 75
 > Tonnes...

More like 300,000 tons; you used only the Abrams tank sabot DU, and ignored 
the 30 mm, 25 mm, and 20 mm penetrator bullets --
-- some of which have more than 270 g of uranium core.  Something like 18% 
of that burned on impact, and most of the penetrators do fracture, melt, or 
otherwise lose a lot of their mass from their kinetic energy, so you have 
to assume an increased surface area for further erosion the next time the 
rains come and wash away part of the metal's oxide coat.>>>>>

         James, you're a nut.  This report is about Yugoslavia and has 
nothing to do with Iraq.  Furthermore, in the paragraph before the 
introduction, the author says, "The risk [from DU] for Yugoslavia [is such 
that] any increase in long-term cancer mortality will be so low that it 
will remain undetected."  The author reiterates this in his 
Conclusions.  The report has 30 footnotes, and the author cites NO refereed 

 > distributed over southern Iraq (1/3 of 437,072 Sq. Km)....

The firing of DU rounds in February, 1991, was constrained to this region: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:GWI_DU_map.gif >>>>>

Good luck,

James Salsman, writing as Ben Fore.>>>>>

         James, you're the one who needs some luck.

Steven Dapra

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:

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:

More information about the RadSafe mailing list