Fwd: [ RadSafe ] Explanation for Gulf War illness?

Steven Dapra sjd at swcp.com
Sat May 31 20:19:43 CDT 2008

May 31

         You, James, have been preaching to us about uranium's radiological 
teratogenicity.  You have not proven that it is a rad teratogen.  Its 
chemical effects are not germane to its use in DU weapons.

         Yes I did prove you wrong seven out of nine times.  See RADSAFE of 
March 5, 2006.  My posting begins, "I will have to take back what I said a 
day or two ago, and intervene in this dispute about DU. (Caution: this is a 
long message; about 2000 words.)."  (I'm not going to hold your hand, nor 
am I going to do your homework for you, James.  Look for yourself.)

Steven Dapra

At 11:22 PM 5/29/08 -0700, you wrote:
>Thank you for your admission that you accept the teratogenicity of
>uranium proven:
> >> ... You admit the teratogenicity.
> >
> > SD:
> >
> >  Chemical teratogenicity, NOT radiological teratogenicity....
>If I said it was a radiological toxin, it was only in the same
>statement as saying its chemical toxicity was a million times more
>hazardous in vitro, per Miller, A.C. (2002).
> >  I proved you wrong seven times out of nine in March, 2006.
>No, you did not.  To which message(s) do you refer?
>James Salsman

More information about the RadSafe mailing list