[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: more on DU
I really don't like to make a judgment on the basis of a book title, but
"Allergic to the Twentieth Century" puts my junk science antennae on full
alert. Having lived healthily through arsenic and coal-tar skin ointments,
DDT sprayed around the kitchen with a flit gun (remember those?), doing
butanol and benzene extractions with gallons of solvents outside a fume hood
with an open window the only ventilation, getting mouthfuls of all kinds of
stuff while pipetting, and you know what? I'm still here! and healthy! My
father, who was born in 1896 and survived much worse conditions in chemical
and biochemical laboratories, lived to be 83, and the few health problems he
had could readily be ascribed to bad diet and poor dental care. I could
give dozens of other examples.
I don't know about Gulf War Syndrome, but it seems to me that as a society
we are considerably overestimating the relative health effects of substances
we have labelled "toxic." For one thing, anything is "toxic" if it is
misused or if too much is ingested or inhaled: e.g. drinking salt water can
certainly do you in. I am reminded of a woman at a public hearing on oil
ports (in Washington State) who claimed she was violently allergic to
hydrocarbon fumes so that even a few MOLECULES affected her, but who
admitted that she had driven about 250 miles to get to the hearing.
Also, humans are, in fact, sturdier than most domestic animals. My daughter
raises horses, and has often commented that her horses are much more
delicate and sensitive to diet and to both soap and medications than she is.
We have bred domestic animals for certain characteristics and in so doing
have limited their genetic diversity and the stock."
Ruth F. Weiner, Ph. D.
7336 Lew Wallace NE
Albuquerque, NM
505-856-5011
fax 505-856-5564
ruth_weiner@msn.com
-----Original Message-----
From: denison.8@osu.edu <denison.8@osu.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Thursday, March 09, 2000 12:25 AM
Subject: Re: more on DU
>Ernesto Faillace wrote:
>>
>>Could it be that the increased cancer rates (if this is a true increase)
>>are due to the poor nutrition and poor medical care of a people in an
>>embargoed nation?
>>
>I think it's just as likely that the increase in the diagnosis of cancer is
>due to an increase in surveillance. Call me cynical (or uninformed), but
>the impression I have is that medical care for the masses in Iraq has never
>been good, so most of the common people may never have been screened
>before. Now, Saddam's government is looking for ways to condemn the West,
>and they suddenly start finding more cancer.
>
>Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of sanctions. I think they're a damn poor,
>heavy-handed tactic, especially against a country where, with or without
>sanctions, the ruling elite get whatever they want while 95% of the
>population lives in fear and scrapes to survive. I just don't trust
>so-called scientific/medical data coming from Bagdhad any more than I trust
>radiation hazard data from Caldicott and the Baldwins.
>
>As for the GWS connection, I'd suggest checking out "The Gulf War Within,"
>by Peter Radetsky, in the August, 1997 issue of Discover Magazine. It's
>adapted from his book, "Allergic to the Twentieth Century." Written for
>the somewhat-educated lay reader, and certainly not a venerable journal,
>but good info nonetheless. Seems there's a lot of data indicating that no
>single agent is responsible for the range of symptoms, but that GWS is most
>likely the result of a mixture of physical stress and exposures to a number
>of chemicals, including various insecticides, pesticides, solvents, and
>anti-nerve-gas drugs (DU is hardly mentioned).
>
>Apparently the body can handle small doses of one or two things, but when
>you pile three or more of them on at once, it's too much. My undergrad
>degree is in biochemistry, and it makes a lot of sense from that
>standpoint. Heck, we can't use regular flea-control shampoo on our dog,
>because the pesticide ingredients screw up the way his body processses the
>phenobarbital we administer to control his epilepsy. The biochemistry of
>most mammals is similar enough that there's little reason to believe that
>humans are that much better at dealing with multiple simultaneous toxic
>exposures.
>
>
>Eric Denison
>1729 Penworth Drive
>Columbus OH 43229-5216
>denison.8@osu.edu
>(614) 433-0387
>
>
>************************************************************************
>The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
>information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html