RE: more Rokke-DU....

["A Karam" <paksbi@rit.edu>]

At the risk of provoking yet more comment, there are a few things that bear mention.  If one reads the most recent Toxicological Profile for uranium (published by the ATSDR), you will find that exposure to it can cause some types of harm, although not the wide range of problems typically attributed to it.  Virtually all of these problems are due to the chemical effects.  They include:

 

Skin rash (dermatitis) following deposition of large quantities of U-bearing dusts

Lung damage, including fibrosis, following inhalation of large quantities of uranium dusts

Kidney damage following uptake of sufficient quantities of uranium

 

In addition, some physicians with whom I have spoken (and who have had experience treating soldiers with DU shrapnel) have noted the presence of some degree of encapsulation by the body - covering the shrapnel with tissue to effectively isolate it from the body.  This happens with other foreign objects; U is not unique in this regard.

 

So - is DU responsible for widespread birth defects, cancer, etc?  Very likely no, and the further from the battlefield one is, the lower the concentrations of DU to which one is exposed.  However, we also must admit that DU can have toxicological effects, and that exposure to sufficiently large concentrations can have adverse health effects - the key part of this is the "sufficiently large" part.  It is almost certainly NOT responsible for the wide range of effects attributed, but it is also not harmless. 

 

Andy



	-----Original Message----- 

	From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu on behalf of RadSafeInst 

	

	

	So many lies and exaggerations in one place leave me breathless!!! The article itself contains it's own internal contradictions, as you know, but the general public won't know that! Doug Rokke is like a bad rash!     Ed Battle