[ RadSafe ] uranium smoke is a teratogen

[Steven Dapra]

May 22

         More comments from Steven Dapra.  This round is "SD-2 comments."

Steven Dapra


At 01:26 AM 5/21/08 -0700, Ben Fore wrote:
Steven,

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your message:

(SD-2 comments:  Salsman/Fore began by dragging in the red herring about 
lead.  Mike Brennan has very ably addressed this.)

 >> How do you explain the Kuwaitis? 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16700386
 >
 > 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:
 >   http://www.emro.who.int/publications/emhj/1104/article20.htm
 >   http://www.emro.who.int/publications/emhj/1104/PDF/20.pdf
 >
 > "Profile of major congenital malformations in neonates in Al-Jahra 
region of Kuwait."
 >   [by] Madi SA, Al-Naggar RL, Al-Awadi SA, Bastaki LA
 >   Department of Pediatrics, Al-Jahra Hospital, Kuwait.
 >
 > [Abstract:] 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)

Steven, you are confusing "major" congenital abnormalities (which require
hospitalization) as reported in the Kuwaiti paper with "significant" (defects
which in most U.S. states must be reported to the parents) which number
far more. The U.S. Navy's Birth and Infant Health Registry, and Dr. Han Kang
of the Veterans Administration divide birth defects in to two categories:
"moderate to severe," which is the same as "significant to major," as the
terms are used above, and "minor," which covers all other detectable
birth defects.

SD-2 comments:

         I am not confusing anything, thank you very much.  I am also not 
going to get into some futile hair-splitting argument about "major" versus 
"significant."  You, James are so confused you can't tell whether you're 
lecturing us about depleted uranium or about lead.>>>>>

[edit some material from Salsman/Fore about birth defect nomenclature]

 >> 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)."
 >   [by] Al-Herz, W.
 >
 > Allergy & Clinical Immunology Unit, Pediatrics Department, Al-Sabah
 > Hospital, Kuwait city, Kuwait.
 >
 > ... Ninety-eight percent of the patients presented in childhood....

That figure is about 80% than the average in OECD countries.

SD-2 comments:

         Once again, this shows your scientific incompetence.  Aren't most 
or all of the OECD countries known as First World countries?  If they are, 
you are comparing them with Kuwait, which is virtually a Third World 
country.  And I mean Kuwait --- the entire country --- not Kuwait City, 
which is probably fairly well advanced.>>>>>

 > The prevalence of these disorders in children was 11.98 in 100,000
 > children with an incidence of 10.06 in 100,000 children....

That's 20-45% more than in OECD countries.

SD-2 comments:  Same as above.>>>>>

 > What is this supposed to prove?

They used not to have anywhere near that many immunodeficiency,
and they are getting so much in kids.

SD-2 comments:

         What is this supposed to mean?  First you talk about DU, then 
lead, now it's immunodeficiency.  Make up your mind, James/Ben.>>>>>

 >> 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 ranges.
 >
 >      Are you suggesting that Iraqis go around eating soil? -- eating dirt?

No, but where do you think they get their drinking water from?

SD-2 comments:

         My guess is "they" get it from wells.  They don't wring it out of 
dirt.>>>>

(edit part about incorrect URL)

 >> 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....

I was referring to the point sources from uranium munitions fires.

SD-2 comments:

         You are?  I thought you were talking about lead and about 
immunodeficiency.>>>>>

 >> 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 --
 >>   [oops, wrong URL again]
 >> -- 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....

I would far rather be a nut than be accused of supporting terrorists!

SD-2 comments:

         If you, James/Ben, are suggesting that I support terrorists, or 
that anyone on RADSAFE supports terrorists, you are committing a gross 
slander.>>>>>

(edit a small amount of material that is not germane.)

-----  END  -----