uranium munitions burning in air, and ignited by propellant or explosiveN/Cl compounds

[James Salsman <james@bovik.org>]

I have just found this mailing list today, and I have read the

archives for about the last month.  I am under the impression that

many Health Physics Society members read and contribute to this

RADSAFE mailing list.  The extent to which those with a financial

interest in uranium commerce of one kind or another have repeatedly

been attempting to influence the determination of what should

rightfully be the province of the peer-reviewed medical literature

has not gone unnoticed.  I have decided to hold the authors of some

of the most egregious examples of apologism personally accountable

for their errors of commission here and in other fora.



In regard to the comments of Ed L. Battle, COL USAF (Ret.):



> There is nothing more important than caring for the illnesses of our

> civilians and military men and women who served in the two Gulf Wars.



That is false, because protecting those who are not already poisoned

is more important than attempting to find a cure for those who have

been poisoned when the best known combinations of antidotes must be

administered less than seven days after exposure to be effective.

The hyperbole is understood, but it detracts from the truth.  The

attempt to imply that burning uranium munitions are not the primary,

if not the only, cause of Gulf War Illness is already past the point

of absurdity, and has entered the realm of professional malfeasance

or abject negligence.  Moreover, the sharp and increasing incidence

of congenital malformations is of the utmost seriousness:

http://ije.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/full/33/1/74

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12854660&dopt=Abstract



> We can only hope that the true cause(s) of those illnesses will be

> discovered soon, so that they can be cured.



This is disingenuous at best and a cruel attempt at a fig leaf

at worst.  Back in 2000, before reports of the sharply-increased

congenital malformation rate were reported in the peer-reviewed

medical literature, there was still a small probability that the

anti-nerve gas agent pyridostigmine bromide (PB) was responsible.

That has since been ruled out by cohort analysis.  The evidence of

cancer and birth defect incidence rates are consistent with

partially-soluble uranium combustion product inhalation exposure,

in the time frame of Operation Desert Storm, and peer-reviewed

results from medical literature have the same consistent incidence

rate curve for U.S. and U.K. troops, which in turn is consistent

with informal cancer and birth defect statistics from the Basrah

medical research establishment.  The early data from the Balkan

conflict and Afghanistan are also in agreement.



> Meanwhile, allegations that they spring from an assumed single 

> source (DU) only serve to confuse the issue



Again on the contrary, combatant/noncombatant reserve cohort studies

had already ruled out all of the multi-source hypotheses as early as

2000, according to the responsible investigator then, former Army

General Dale Vesser, who said this in 2000:  "People talk about oil

well fires, DU (depleted uranium), PB (pyridostigmine bromide),

low-level chemical agents, and vaccines against biological weapons,

but at this point, we do not believe that any of the hazards to

which the Gulf War veterans were exposed are directly related to

their illnesses.  The only one we cannot rule out is PB."  So, he

plainly admitted four years ago that the only alternative

hypothesis, including the combinations, that had not already been

ruled out was PB.  The roughly-concurrent multi-volume RAND

Corporation report on the topic established that PB was not mutagenic

in any way.  All the combinations have already been ruled out by the

histories of other troops with the exact same medications and

pesticides deployed in noncombat areas.  The RAND study on uranium

inhalation was flawed in two ways.  First, it described in

quantitative terms effects of the low level of radiation from

uranium projectile munitions, to the exclusion of similar

quantification of uranium metal toxicity.  Second, it ignored the

uranium nitrates and other soluble compounds.



Two questions to which I have not yet been able to obtain a direct

answer are:



1.  What is the proportion of uranyl nitrate produced when burning

uranium in air at STP, relative to the other combustion products,

by mass of the uranium?



2.  What is the proportion of STP air-soluble uranium-halogen

compounds produced when burning uranium in the presence of

propellants used in uranium munitions?  High pressure combustion

may be assumed, but only for the time it takes for the round to

escape the gun barrel.



On these points, I note that uranium burning in air reaches a

temperature no lower than 3100 Kelvin, and that uranium will

burn in a pure nitrogen atmosphere at under 1000 Kelvin.

It is also helpful to know that, of the oxides, the UO3 form

represents approximately 1/5th of the combustion products by

mass.  So, my closest approximation is that uranyl nitrate

amounts to about 1/18th of the combustion products by mass of

the original uranium, when burning uranium in air at STP.



The extent to which uranyl nitrate remains dissolved in the

atmosphere is also an open question.  It precipitates slowly,

with a melting point of 60 deg. C.  None of the publications

of the Health Physics Society have directly addressed the

aerosol dispersion of uranyl nitrate, some having gone so far

to consider only the oxides to the exclusion of the nitrate.

Moreover, there is nothing on the Health Physics Society web

site directly stating that uranium attacks any organ other

than the kidneys, when it is known to accumulate in the bone

(with the U232 isotope embedded permanently, with no half-life

of organ clearance) and in the testicles, which explains the

5% incidence rate of birth defects reported about 1999 when

compared to the 3% rate in the population as a whole.  These

results are both statistically significant at the 99% level

and predictive of further increases in cancers in veterans

and birth defects among their children.



More pressing is the issue of indirect contamination of Indian

Ocean fish.  What are we going to do about people who want to

eat fish from any of the Tigris and Euphrates' tributaries, up

to and including the Indian Ocean?  At the rate UO3 and uranyl

nitrate flow into the groundwater and streams, we should already

be able to detect unsafe levels of uranium in the skeletons of

Persian Gulf fish.  Does anyone on this list remember "Fallout and

Reproduction of Ocean Fish Populations" by E.J. Sternglass (1971)?

   http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/Fallout-Fish-Sternglass8oct71.htm



The U.S. Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute has

found that uranium exposure can produce literally one million

times as much chromosome damage as would be predicted from its

radioactivity alone (J Inorg Biochem. 2002 Jul 25;91(1):246-52),

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12121782

... and that it causes a form of "delayed reproductive death,"

which doesn't cease like exposure to simple radioactivity does

(J Environ Radioact. 2003; 64(2-3): 247-59.)  The U.S. military

has admitted that DU is "both neoplastically transforming and

genotoxic" (Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2002; 99(1-4): 275-8.)



A February, 2004, U.K. Pension Appeal Tribunal Service decision

in Edinburgh implicated depleted uranium directly in the birth

defects of children fathered by Gulf War veteran Kenny Duncan,

of Clackmannan, U.K.:

   http://www.denniskyne.com/KennyDuncan.htm

   http://idust.net/News/DUVetsClaims01.htm

   http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1122566.stm

... after Dr. Albrect Schott of Germany found that damage to

chromosomes in the white blood cells of Gulf War veterans was

about five times greater than the rest of the population:

Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry, 2003; 103(3):211-9 --

   http://rpd.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/103/3/211



The new U.K. combat regulations require a 50 meter stand-off for

shell targets, and also mention gun barrel contamination, but that

part doesn't make a distinction between shells and bullet ordnance,

and nobody, frustratingly enough, is quantifying the contamination.



The U.S. government admitted back in 2001 that inhaled uranium

accumulates in the testes:

   http://www.bovik.org/du/reproduction-review-2001.pdf



The incidence of birth defects are skyrocketing after having

laid dormant for several years.  Congenital malformations in

Basrah's civilian population soared 600% in 2000 from

just-above-baseline levels in 1997:

   http://www.bovik.org/du/basrah.gif

Very frightening similar incidence rate patterns have been

observed in U.K. and U.S. troops.



The cancer rate increase over time in consistent with "low

level" uranium inhalation poisoning:

   http://www.bovik.org/du/Effects-of-DU-war.pdf

I estimate that at least 40,000,000 have already lost more

than half of their remaining life expectancy to cancers alone

(i.e., not counting the obvious immune system damage or any

of the birth defects) from uranium inhalation and secondary

food chain contamination.  I am waiting on more accurate data

in order to be able to produce a 95% confidence interval.



There are simply no alternative epidemiological hypotheses

consistent with the observations.  Burning uranium produces

poison gas which kills friend and foe alike.  This is in fact

the largest "friendly fire" incident ever.  This is against

the international laws of war, and other treaty obligations.

The U.S. must me held financially accountable, and punitive

measures must be imposed to prevent such breaches in the future.



I have placed additional supporting documents here:

   http://www.bovik.org/du



Please join my petition:  http://www.bovik.org/du/du-petition.html



Sincerely,

James Salsman

Mountain View, California

650.793.0162





************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To

unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the

text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,

with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/