[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: DU legislation?

To: liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM, fd003f0606@blueyonder.co.uk
Subject: Re: DU legislation?
From: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 23:34:41 EDT
CC: phil.egidi@state.co.us, radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
Reply-To: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM
Sender: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

In a message dated 4/7/03 12:54:29 PM Mountain Daylight Time, liptonw@DTEENERGY.COM writes:

. Perception is reality.

No it isn't
We have to address the radiological and

toxic risks of DU.

A numbe of responders HAVE addressed them. Just because they are small doesn't mean they haven't been addressed.
There's still a lot we don't know.

About metallic depleted uranium? Like what?

Oh I'm just being my usual arrogant self!

Ruth

Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.
ruthweiner@aol.com

Prev by Date: RE: Bq soon
Next by Date: Faults in Swedish study adressed by J. Moulder? was: Re: Teencellphone risk.
Prev by thread: RE: DU legislation?
Next by thread: California: "New debate on radiation at landfills"
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread