Guest guest Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 It has NEVER been a win-win situation. Don't you see that. That junk they used to murder people is now coming all over the world, just like the chem trails everyone what's to say doesen't exist... I know it is just me. Anyway good luck. --- Bea Bernhausen <beabernhausen wrote: > I know how we can find out if DU is bad or > not----put all these guys including George and the > crew into a surroundings where the metal objects > around them are made of DU for a year. Since it's so > safe they won't have to worry---on the other hand if > they're wrong we won't have to worry....it's a > win/win.... > > Bill Kingsbury <kingsbry wrote: > ------- Forwarded message ------- > " Bruce Beach " <bbeach > <ArkTwo > Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:20:46 -0500 > [Arktwo] DU Doesn't Do it > > > I receive numerous emails > concerned about DU > (Depleted Uranium), > and I have promised to write > a newsletter on the subject - > so here it is. > > First what DU is. > It is what is left over > when uranium is enriched > to make nuclear weapons. > > Think of it as the hulls > when you shell peas. > Anything having to do > with radioactivity > sounds dangerous to many people - > and they sometimes become > unnecessarily frightened by it - > because they don't understand it. > > I give the example > of an alien from a waterless planet > who is sent to our planet as an envoy. > > " Take me to your leader. " > > Anyway - > before he headed for earth > he was warned - > > " Watch out for water - > there is a lot on earth > and it is easy to drown in it. " > > So - > first thing on earth > he is invited to sit down > for a banquet with the President - > and the server starts to pour > a goblet of water. > > " What is that? " asks the alien. > > " Water " , the server says. > > Jumping up from the table the alien yells - > > " Are you trying to kill me? " > > Similarly, > just say to many people > that something is radioactive - > and they will go into fear mode. > > In point of fact - > many things about us are radioactive. > Just living in a brick building > will expose one to a certain amount > of radiation from the bricks. > > http://www.hps1.org/glossary/natural.htm > > Some locations > are considerably more radioactive > than others. > Especially high altitude ones - > that receive more radiation from the cosmos > with less shielding by the earth's atmosphere. > > A certain amount of radiation > may be good for you. > Studies have shown > that people living in high altitudes > have less incidence of cancer. > > A coincidental controlled study occurred > when some metal scrap from buildings > destroyed by the atomic bomb on Japan > got into some steel girder construction. > > The steel was sold by mistake > and shipped to the US > for use in a large housing complex. > The occupants in the buildings in the complex > that received the radioactive steel > had a significantly lower incidence of cancer > than those in the buildings in the same complex > that received other steel. > > While this may seem strange - > it can be the nature of things. > For example - > arsenic is a deadly poison - > but if your body is completely deprived > of arsenic - > you will die as a result. > > There are many trace minerals in our bodies - > that probably serve an important purpose - > but of which in overdose would be fatal. > > So back to the DU. > People say - > > " Don't you know that DU > has a half-life of > FOUR and a Half BILLION YEARS! " > > http://www.ccnr.org/decay_U238.html > > Well, yes. > That is what makes it so safe. > The problem is > that people don't understand > the nature of half-life. > > It seems to them that it means > that the stuff is going to be around > giving off radioactivity > for a very long time - > and to them that is BAD. > > Actually, that is GOOD. > The stuff that you have to worry about > is that which has a > relatively short half-life. > > Really short half-lives are no problem either - > because the stuff burns out > and is gone in no time. > Even most longer radioactive stuff will be gone > in two or three weeks after a nuclear war > so if you have a fallout shelter > it will be safe to come out then. > > The REAL killers are > Strontium (Sr-90, 28 year half-life) > and > Cesium (Cs-137, 30 year half-life). > > http://tinyurl.com/nn4a8 > > But that is another matter - > and one that I have discussed > many times before - > regarding agriculture. > > I totally agree > that it is morally wrong > to create something that will be > a burden to future generations . > But - > DU isn't that thing. > > Something that is only giving off > half of its energy in 4 1/2 billion years - > isn't giving off any radioactivity to speak of. > > The reason that DU is used - > is that it greatly strengthens steel > (as used in bullets and armoured tanks). > If someone were to offer me a car > made out of DU - > I would gladly accept it - > either for myself or > my children and grandchildren > to ride around in. > > There may be other considerations - > such as DU in dust > as a result of explosions of weaponry. > However, > there is not much in the way > of good scientific evidence to support that - > and the damage of the weaponry > is the much more serious consideration. > > On the one side of the issue > we hear endless anecdotal stories > of malformed babies born in areas > where DU has been used - > and of military personnel > returning from those areas > with what we call Gulf War Syndrome - > supposedly as a result of DU. > This is mostly just all emotional > anti-war propaganda. > > On the other side of the issue - > most people today have a high-level > of distrust > for 'official' and 'government' information. > > http://www.nato.int/du/docu/d010123a.htm > > The reason is the overwhelming > and unreasonable secrecy - > the repeated manipulation through propaganda - > and the interlink > between government funding and research - > whether in giant corporations > or by academics in universities. > It is just very difficult today - > to get to what one can consider as being > an unbiased truth. > > But you can forget all the hype > about DU > with its 4 and a half billion year half-life > as being a threat - > because that part isn't. > Neither are its 'daughter' elements > as they degrade - > because they still only have that > miniscule amount of radiation > available to them in the original > four and a half billion years > and over the same period of time. > It is double counting to think otherwise. > > You are not going to be around that long > (except for those of you who > expect to rise from the dead > and live on the earth forever) - > and even then - > that is not going to be a problem for you. > Brick houses will give off lots more radiation. > Better to build them out of DU. > > Nope, > people should concern themselves > about REAL problems. > Like the number of nuclear weapons in the world - > and what the fallout - > and later reconstruction will be like - > after a nuclear war. > > It is best to keep things in perspective - > and this is one time - > with all their good intentions - > the anti-war activists should be ignored - > because this destroys their credibility > and detracts from efforts > to deal with the REAL problems. > > Peace and love, > > Bruce > > DawnSayer > > _____________ > Arktwo mailing list > Arktwo > http://ns.pairowoodies.com/mailman/listinfo/arktwo > > > =============================================================== > > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=52036 > > > > Re: HERE IS WHAT GEORGE BUSH JNR SAYS ABOUT DU > > Posted By: Nine_Of_Eleven > Friday, 9 July 2004, 7:43 a.m. > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > In Response HERE IS WHAT GEORGE BUSH JNR SAYS > ABOUT DU > > > If you would like to engage in an honest debate then > you > should do your own research instead of looking for > someone > else's " ax-to-grind " polemics. The article you > posted is not > research. It is not even an honest polemic based on > research. > It is " axe-to-grind " political propaganda that uses > half-truth > and distortion to present a picture it wants to > present. That > is fine if that is what you want to use in the > debate, but you > should know that it contains very little in the way > of facts > to support its claims... > > First, let's talk about radioactivity and its > dangers... > primary to the discussion is to first realize that > radioactive > elements and radioactivity itself surround us all > the time... > so let's get over the idea that " radioactivity " is, > in and of > itself, a horrible and avoidable environmental > danger that is > the " fault " of the United States or Russia or etc. > If it were > not for radioactivity in some form or another, we > might not > even exist. > > Like most " ax-to-grind " propagandists the person who > wrote > your article likes to use buzz words and fifty year > old > speculations at the dawning of the nuclear era, to > scare their > reader into a stampede of fear and misapprehension. > > > Secondary to this discussion is the realization not > only that > radioactivity is all around us, but so is Uranium... > Uranium > 235 -- the most fissionable form of Uranium used as > a nuclear > fuel in reactors -- occurs in nature as > approximately 0.71% of > naturally occurring uranium. Additionally, so those > who read > this debate will understand better, 238 Uranium is > used in > breeder reactors to construct the plutonium 239 > which is used > in nuclear weapons. > > Now, understand this, because it is important. Three > facts; > > 1) " naturally occurring uranium contains 235 U at > 0.71% " . > > 2) Naturally occurring uranium is more common than > once thought > as oxides and is more common than mercury, silver, > molybdenum, > arsenic and cadmium. > > 3) Depleted Uranium contains 235 U at the rate of > 0.2%, or > less than 1/3 the same as naturally occurring > Uranium. So, at > the very least, unless it is contained in > concentrations three > times higher than the naturally occurring Uranium in > every > square centimeter of earth on the planet, then it > does not > emit any more radiation than naturally occurring > uranium > through which human evolution has survived > apparently more > than several millions of years. > > I will post more later as I have time but there is a > lot of > misinformation going on about radioactivity and > nuclear > materials... > > Resistance is Informed... > > Nine of Eleven > > > =============================================================== > > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=50875 > > > > THE FACTS ABOUT THE HEALTH EFFECTS OF DU > > Posted By: Nine_Of_Eleven > Sunday, 20 June 2004, 11:33 p.m. > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > > DU is Depleted Uranium, which for those who are not > aware is a > substance used in armor piercing munitions, as well > as in > armored shields in many U.S. weapons systems. In > keeping with > the left wing propaganda techniques of mis- and > disinformation > there have been many and numerous claims that the > use of this > " radioactive material " in warfare is some kind of > huge public > health risk, and some kind of criminal behavior > directed at > some form of genocide. I thought it might be nice > to publish > a few of the facts associated with Depleted Uranium. > First, > Uranium is itself a naturally occurring element that > exists in > every environment on the planet and always has. > There is a > certain fixed level of the material in any given > square mile > of land on the planet and all of it is weakly > radioactive. > > Depleted Uranium is the by product of the process > used to > enrich uranium for use in nuclear power plants, and, > of course > in nuclear weapons as well. However, depleted > uranium is less > radioactive than naturally occurring uranium and, so > its > effects, if any, on individual health will be > related, not to > its radioactivity, but rather on its effects as a > heavy metal, > such as those like lead, or mercury. These effects > would be > dose but not time related. > > There was a big to-do made after the original Gulf > War because > Saddam Hussein pulled out a bunch of birth defected > babies and > had his doctors conduct a " study " that linked these > birth > defects to the Depleted Uranium used during the Gulf > War. > This study has since been debunked. > > The birth defects in question were from a population > of people > who were more likely to have been exposed to > chemical weapons > used during his own war with Iran, as well as with > those > chemical weapons he used on his own populations and > so > probably had nothing to do with the DU used during > the war. > These chemical weapons had far greater proven > mutagenic and > teratogenic properties than DU has ever > demonstrated. > > However, since the Iraqis raised the issue there > have been any > number of other studies done, both in Europe on > soldiers and > civilians wounded during the Bosnia/Kosovo conflict > as well as > with Gulf War veterans who were exposed to DU in > various > circumstances during the war and after. The > following is a > summary of the health effects and concerns that are > known as a > result of real scientific evidence and study of > Depleted > Uranium. > > The following paragraphs were extracted from the > broad > information on DU contained at: > > http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/ > > > DU - Health Concerns > > Chemical -- The major health concerns about DU > relate to its > chemical properties as a heavy metal rather than to > its > radioactivity, which is very low. As with all > chemicals, the > hazard depends mainly upon the amount taken into the > body. > Medical science recognizes that uranium at high > doses can > cause kidney damage. However, those levels are far > above > levels soldiers would have encountered in the Gulf > or the > Balkans. For a more in depth discussion of DU's > chemical > effects, see the section on Health Effects from the > Chemical > Toxicity of Depleted Uranium in our Environmental > Exposure > Report, Depleted Uranium in the Gulf (II). > > Radiation -- Because depleted uranium emits > primarily alpha > radiation, it is not considered a serious external > radiation > hazard. The depleted uranium in armor and rounds is > covered, > further reducing the radiation dose. When breathed > or eaten, > small amounts of depleted uranium are carried in the > blood to > body tissues and organs; much the same as the more > radioactive > natural uranium. Despite this, no radiological > health effects > are expected because the radioactivity of uranium > and depleted > uranium are so low. For a more in depth discussion > of DU's > radiological effects, see the section on Health > Effects from > the Radiological Toxicity of Depleted Uranium in our > Environmental Exposure Report, Depleted Uranium in > the Gulf > (II). > > > What do the experts say on cancer risk? > > RAND, 1999. " (N)o evidence is documented in the > literature of > cancer or any other negative health effect related > to the > radiation received from exposure to natural uranium, > whether > inhaled or ingested, even at very high doses. " > > Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for > Toxic > Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in 1999 > Toxicological > Profile for Uranium. " No human cancer of any type > has ever > been seen as a result of exposure to natural or > depleted > uranium. " > > United Kingdom Royal Society in May 2001. " Even if > the > estimates of risk are one hundred times too low, it > is > unlikely that any excess of fatal cancer would be > detected > within a group of 10,000 soldiers followed over 50 > years. " > > European Commission March, 2001 report. " Taking > into account > the pathways and realistic scenarios of human > exposure, > radiological exposure to depleted uranium could not > cause a > detectable effect on human health (e.g. cancer). " > > World Health Organization April, 2001 report. " The > radiological hazard is likely to be very small. No > increase > of leukemia or other cancers has been established > following > exposure to uranium or DU. " > > European Parliament April, 2001 report. " The fact > that there > is no evidence of an association between exposures > -- > sometimes high and lasting since the beginning of > the uranium > industry -- and health damages such as bone cancer, > lymphatic > or other forms of leukemia shows that these diseases > as a > consequence of an uranium exposure are either not > present or > very exceptional. " > > Swedish Military Headquarters Medical Department > Study, > January 2003. " Questionnaires, analysis of uranium > in the > urine and matching with the cancer register at the > National > Board of Health and Welfare failed to reveal any > link between > service on the Balkans and cancer or any other > illness. " In > fact, average urine uranium levels in two separate > groups > troops deployed for six months to the Balkans > decreased by 75 > percent and 90 percent during their deployment. The > study > attributed this decrease to the high natural uranium > levels in > Swedish drinking water supplies. > > DU Medical Follow-up Policy. On May 30, 2003, new > guidance > was issued by OSD/Health Affairs that clarifies who, > why, > when, and how the military should test for possible > depleted > uranium during and after deployment and combat > operations. > The purpose of the testing is to identify those who > may have > been exposed to significant levels of depleted > uranium while > deployed. After a decade of closely following many > depleted-uranium exposed Gulf War veterans who were > enrolled > in the Veterans Affairs depleted uranium medical > follow-up > program, the medical community has yet to identify > any > untoward health consequences associated with > depleted uranium > exposures on the battlefield. Still, it is important > to > implement these new guidelines which standardizes > the way > depleted uranium tests are performed; directs the > compliance > with an approved medical protocol following sound > clinical > practices; and helps DoD meet its obligations for > ensuring the > health of our deployed personnel. > > > What does medical follow-up tell us? > > The voluntary Veterans Affairs DU Medical Follow-up > Program > began in 1993-1994 with the medical evaluations of > 33 > friendly-fire DU-exposed veterans, many with > embedded DU > fragments. An additional 29 of the friendly-fire > victims were > added to the follow-up program in 1999. In 1998, > the scope of > the program was expanded to include Gulf War > veterans who may > have been exposed to DU through close contact with > DU > munitions, inhalation of smoke containing DU > particulate > during a fire at the Doha depot, or by entering or > salvaging > vehicles or bunkers that were hit with DU > projectiles. The > published results of these medical evaluations > indicate that > the presence of retained DU fragments is the only > scenario > predictive of a high urine uranium level, and those > with > embedded DU fragments continue to have elevated > urine uranium > levels ten years after the incident. It is unlikely > that an > individual without embedded DU fragments would have > an > elevated urine uranium level, and consequently any > uranium-related health effects. Those individuals > with normal > urine uranium levels now are unlikely to develop any > uranium-related toxicity in the future, regardless > of what > their DU exposure may have been in the Gulf War. > Those > individuals with elevated levels of urine uranium > ten years > after the Gulf War have not developed kidney > abnormalities, > leukemia, bone or lung cancer, or any other > uranium-related > adverse outcome. The DU Medical Follow-up Program > will > continue to monitor those individuals with elevated > urine > uranium levels to enable early detection of any > adverse health > effects due to their continued exposure to embedded > DU > fragments. > > > Resistance is Informed, > > Nine of Eleven > > > =============================================================== > > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi > > > > --- > > > > ��������������������������ï¿\ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï\ ¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ > > > � - PULSE ON WORLD HEALTH > CONSPIRACIES! � > > Subscribe:......... > - > > ��������������������������ï¿\ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï\ ¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ > > New Sister Group: > > MedicalConspiracies > > Subscribe: > MedicalConspiracies- > Post message: > MedicalConspiracies > List owner: > MedicalConspiracies-owner > > ��������������������������ï¿\ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï\ ¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ > > New Sister Group: MedicalConspiracies (One Word)at > Google groups: > > http://groups.google.comMedicalConspiracies > > Post message: > MedicalConspiracies (AT) googl (DOT) com > Subscribe: > MedicalConspiracies- (AT) googl (DOT) com > > Any information here in is for educational purpose > only, it may be news related, purely speculation or > someone's opinion. Always consult with a qualified > health practitioner before deciding on any course of > treatment, especially for serious or > life-threatening illnesses. > **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** > In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, > any copyrighted work in this message is distributed > under fair use without profit or payment to those > who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the > included information for non-profit research and > educational purposes only. > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 I know that--I was just being facetious---trying to point out the moronic....Joseph Toman <joseph_toman wrote: It has NEVER been a win-win situation. Don't you seethat. That junk they used to murder people is nowcoming all over the world, just like the chem trailseveryone what's to say doesen't exist... I know it isjust me. Anyway good luck.--- Bea Bernhausen <beabernhausen wrote:> I know how we can find out if DU is bad or> not----put all these guys including George and the> crew into a surroundings where the metal objects> around them are made of DU for a year. Since it's so> safe they won't have to worry---on the other hand if> they're wrong we won't have to worry....it's a> win/win....> > Bill Kingsbury <kingsbry wrote: > ------- Forwarded message -------> "Bruce Beach" <bbeach> <ArkTwo> Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:20:46 -0500> [Arktwo] DU Doesn't Do it> > > I receive numerous emails > concerned about DU > (Depleted Uranium),> and I have promised to write > a newsletter on the subject -> so here it is.> > First what DU is.> It is what is left over > when uranium is enriched> to make nuclear weapons.> > Think of it as the hulls > when you shell peas. > Anything having to do > with radioactivity > sounds dangerous to many people -> and they sometimes become > unnecessarily frightened by it -> because they don't understand it.> > I give the example > of an alien from a waterless planet > who is sent to our planet as an envoy.> > "Take me to your leader."> > Anyway -> before he headed for earth > he was warned -> > "Watch out for water -> there is a lot on earth > and it is easy to drown in it."> > So - > first thing on earth > he is invited to sit down > for a banquet with the President - > and the server starts to pour > a goblet of water.> > "What is that?" asks the alien.> > "Water", the server says. > > Jumping up from the table the alien yells -> > "Are you trying to kill me?"> > Similarly, > just say to many people > that something is radioactive -> and they will go into fear mode.> > In point of fact - > many things about us are radioactive.> Just living in a brick building > will expose one to a certain amount > of radiation from the bricks.> > http://www.hps1.org/glossary/natural.htm> > Some locations > are considerably more radioactive > than others. > Especially high altitude ones - > that receive more radiation from the cosmos > with less shielding by the earth's atmosphere.> > A certain amount of radiation > may be good for you.> Studies have shown > that people living in high altitudes > have less incidence of cancer.> > A coincidental controlled study occurred > when some metal scrap from buildings > destroyed by the atomic bomb on Japan > got into some steel girder construction. > > The steel was sold by mistake> and shipped to the US > for use in a large housing complex. > The occupants in the buildings in the complex > that received the radioactive steel > had a significantly lower incidence of cancer > than those in the buildings in the same complex > that received other steel.> > While this may seem strange -> it can be the nature of things.> For example -> arsenic is a deadly poison -> but if your body is completely deprived > of arsenic -> you will die as a result.> > There are many trace minerals in our bodies -> that probably serve an important purpose - > but of which in overdose would be fatal. > > So back to the DU. > People say - > > "Don't you know that DU > has a half-life of > FOUR and a Half BILLION YEARS!"> > http://www.ccnr.org/decay_U238.html> > Well, yes. > That is what makes it so safe.> The problem is > that people don't understand > the nature of half-life.> > It seems to them that it means > that the stuff is going to be around > giving off radioactivity > for a very long time - > and to them that is BAD.> > Actually, that is GOOD. > The stuff that you have to worry about > is that which has a > relatively short half-life.> > Really short half-lives are no problem either - > because the stuff burns out > and is gone in no time.> Even most longer radioactive stuff will be gone > in two or three weeks after a nuclear war> so if you have a fallout shelter > it will be safe to come out then.> > The REAL killers are > Strontium (Sr-90, 28 year half-life)> and> Cesium (Cs-137, 30 year half-life).> > http://tinyurl.com/nn4a8> > But that is another matter -> and one that I have discussed > many times before -> regarding agriculture.> > I totally agree > that it is morally wrong > to create something that will be > a burden to future generations .> But - > DU isn't that thing.> > Something that is only giving off > half of its energy in 4 1/2 billion years -> isn't giving off any radioactivity to speak of.> > The reason that DU is used - > is that it greatly strengthens steel > (as used in bullets and armoured tanks).> If someone were to offer me a car > made out of DU - > I would gladly accept it - > either for myself or > my children and grandchildren > to ride around in.> > There may be other considerations - > such as DU in dust > as a result of explosions of weaponry. > However, > there is not much in the way > of good scientific evidence to support that - > and the damage of the weaponry > is the much more serious consideration. > > On the one side of the issue > we hear endless anecdotal stories > of malformed babies born in areas > where DU has been used - > and of military personnel > returning from those areas > with what we call Gulf War Syndrome -> supposedly as a result of DU.> This is mostly just all emotional > anti-war propaganda.> > On the other side of the issue - > most people today have a high-level > of distrust > for 'official' and 'government' information. > > http://www.nato.int/du/docu/d010123a.htm> > The reason is the overwhelming > and unreasonable secrecy - > the repeated manipulation through propaganda - > and the interlink > between government funding and research - > whether in giant corporations > or by academics in universities.> It is just very difficult today - > to get to what one can consider as being > an unbiased truth.> > But you can forget all the hype > about DU > with its 4 and a half billion year half-life > as being a threat - > because that part isn't. > Neither are its 'daughter' elements > as they degrade -> because they still only have that > miniscule amount of radiation > available to them in the original > four and a half billion years> and over the same period of time.> It is double counting to think otherwise.> > You are not going to be around that long > (except for those of you who > expect to rise from the dead > and live on the earth forever) -> and even then - > that is not going to be a problem for you. > Brick houses will give off lots more radiation.> Better to build them out of DU.> > Nope, > people should concern themselves > about REAL problems. > Like the number of nuclear weapons in the world -> and what the fallout - > and later reconstruction will be like - > after a nuclear war.> > It is best to keep things in perspective - > and this is one time - > with all their good intentions - > the anti-war activists should be ignored - > because this destroys their credibility > and detracts from efforts > to deal with the REAL problems.> > Peace and love,> > Bruce > > DawnSayer > > _____________> Arktwo mailing list> Arktwo http://ns.pairowoodies.com/mailman/listinfo/arktwo > > >===============================================================> > >http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=52036> > > > Re: HERE IS WHAT GEORGE BUSH JNR SAYS ABOUT DU> > Posted By: Nine_Of_Eleven> Friday, 9 July 2004, 7:43 a.m.> The Rumor Mill News Reading Room> > In Response HERE IS WHAT GEORGE BUSH JNR SAYS> ABOUT DU> > > If you would like to engage in an honest debate then> you> should do your own research instead of looking for> someone> else's "ax-to-grind" polemics. The article you> posted is not> research. It is not even an honest polemic based on> research.> It is "axe-to-grind" political propaganda that uses> half-truth> and distortion to present a picture it wants to> present. That> is fine if that is what you want to use in the> debate, but you> should know that it contains very little in the way> of facts> to support its claims... > > First, let's talk about radioactivity and its> dangers...> primary to the discussion is to first realize that> radioactive> elements and radioactivity itself surround us all> the time...> so let's get over the idea that "radioactivity" is,> in and of> itself, a horrible and avoidable environmental> danger that is> the "fault" of the United States or Russia or etc.> If it were> not for radioactivity in some form or another, we> might not> even exist. > > Like most "ax-to-grind" propagandists the person who> wrote> your article likes to use buzz words and fifty year> old> speculations at the dawning of the nuclear era, to> scare their> reader into a stampede of fear and misapprehension. > > > Secondary to this discussion is the realization not> only that> radioactivity is all around us, but so is Uranium...> Uranium> 235 -- the most fissionable form of Uranium used as> a nuclear> fuel in reactors -- occurs in nature as> approximately 0.71% of> naturally occurring uranium. Additionally, so those> who read> this debate will understand better, 238 Uranium is> used in> breeder reactors to construct the plutonium 239> which is used> in nuclear weapons. > > Now, understand this, because it is important. Three> facts; > > 1) "naturally occurring uranium contains 235 U at> 0.71%". > > 2) Naturally occurring uranium is more common than> once thought> as oxides and is more common than mercury, silver,> molybdenum,> arsenic and cadmium. > > 3) Depleted Uranium contains 235 U at the rate of> 0.2%, or> less than 1/3 the same as naturally occurring> Uranium. So, at> the very least, unless it is contained in> concentrations three> times higher than the naturally occurring Uranium in> every> square centimeter of earth on the planet, then it> does not> emit any more radiation than naturally occurring> uranium> through which human evolution has survived> apparently more> than several millions of years. > > I will post more later as I have time but there is a> lot of> misinformation going on about radioactivity and> nuclear> materials... > > Resistance is Informed... > > Nine of Eleven > > >===============================================================> > >http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=50875> > > > THE FACTS ABOUT THE HEALTH EFFECTS OF DU > > Posted By: Nine_Of_Eleven> Sunday, 20 June 2004, 11:33 p.m. > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room> > > DU is Depleted Uranium, which for those who are not> aware is a> substance used in armor piercing munitions, as well> as in> armored shields in many U.S. weapons systems. In> keeping with> the left wing propaganda techniques of mis- and> disinformation> there have been many and numerous claims that the> use of this> "radioactive material" in warfare is some kind of> huge public> health risk, and some kind of criminal behavior> directed at> some form of genocide. I thought it might be nice> to publish> a few of the facts associated with Depleted Uranium.> First,> Uranium is itself a naturally occurring element that> exists in> every environment on the planet and always has. > There is a> certain fixed level of the material in any given> square mile> of land on the planet and all of it is weakly> radioactive.> > Depleted Uranium is the by product of the process> used to> enrich uranium for use in nuclear power plants, and,> of course> in nuclear weapons as well. However, depleted> uranium is less> radioactive than naturally occurring uranium and, so> its> effects, if any, on individual health will be> related, not to> its radioactivity, but rather on its effects as a> heavy metal,> such as those like lead, or mercury. These effects> would be> dose but not time related. > > There was a big to-do made after the original Gulf> War because> Saddam Hussein pulled out a bunch of birth defected> babies and> had his doctors conduct a "study" that linked these> birth> defects to the Depleted Uranium used during the Gulf> War. > This study has since been debunked. > > The birth defects in question were from a population> of people> who were more likely to have been exposed to> chemical weapons> used during his own war with Iran, as well as with> those> chemical weapons he used on his own populations and> so> probably had nothing to do with the DU used during> the war. > These chemical weapons had far greater proven> mutagenic and> teratogenic properties than DU has ever> demonstrated. > > However, since the Iraqis raised the issue there> have been any> number of other studies done, both in Europe on> soldiers and> civilians wounded during the Bosnia/Kosovo conflict> as well as> with Gulf War veterans who were exposed to DU in> various> circumstances during the war and after. The> following is a> summary of the health effects and concerns that are> known as a> result of real scientific evidence and study of> Depleted> Uranium. > > The following paragraphs were extracted from the> broad> information on DU contained at: > > http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/ > > > DU - Health Concerns > > Chemical -- The major health concerns about DU> relate to its> chemical properties as a heavy metal rather than to> its> radioactivity, which is very low. As with all> chemicals, the> hazard depends mainly upon the amount taken into the> body.> Medical science recognizes that uranium at high> doses can> cause kidney damage. However, those levels are far> above> levels soldiers would have encountered in the Gulf> or the> Balkans. For a more in depth discussion of DU's> chemical> effects, see the section on Health Effects from the> Chemical> Toxicity of Depleted Uranium in our Environmental> Exposure> Report, Depleted Uranium in the Gulf (II). > > Radiation -- Because depleted uranium emits> primarily alpha> radiation, it is not considered a serious external> radiation> hazard. The depleted uranium in armor and rounds is> covered,> further reducing the radiation dose. When breathed> or eaten,> small amounts of depleted uranium are carried in the> blood to> body tissues and organs; much the same as the more> radioactive> natural uranium. Despite this, no radiological> health effects> are expected because the radioactivity of uranium> and depleted> uranium are so low. For a more in depth discussion> of DU's> radiological effects, see the section on Health> Effects from> the Radiological Toxicity of Depleted Uranium in our> Environmental Exposure Report, Depleted Uranium in> the Gulf> (II). > > > What do the experts say on cancer risk? > > RAND, 1999. "(N)o evidence is documented in the> literature of> cancer or any other negative health effect related> to the> radiation received from exposure to natural uranium,> whether> inhaled or ingested, even at very high doses." > > Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for> Toxic> Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in 1999> Toxicological> Profile for Uranium. "No human cancer of any type> has ever> been seen as a result of exposure to natural or> depleted> uranium." > > United Kingdom Royal Society in May 2001. "Even if> the> estimates of risk are one hundred times too low, it> is> unlikely that any excess of fatal cancer would be> detected> within a group of 10,000 soldiers followed over 50> years." > > European Commission March, 2001 report. "Taking> into account> the pathways and realistic scenarios of human> exposure,> radiological exposure to depleted uranium could not> cause a> detectable effect on human health (e.g. cancer)." > > World Health Organization April, 2001 report. "The> radiological hazard is likely to be very small. No> increase> of leukemia or other cancers has been established> following> exposure to uranium or DU." > > European Parliament April, 2001 report. "The fact> that there> is no evidence of an association between exposures> --> sometimes high and lasting since the beginning of> the uranium> industry -- and health damages such as bone cancer,> lymphatic> or other forms of leukemia shows that these diseases> as a> consequence of an uranium exposure are either not> present or> very exceptional." > > Swedish Military Headquarters Medical Department> Study,> January 2003. "Questionnaires, analysis of uranium> in the> urine and matching with the cancer register at the> National> Board of Health and Welfare failed to reveal any> link between> service on the Balkans and cancer or any other> illness." In> fact, average urine uranium levels in two separate> groups> troops deployed for six months to the Balkans> decreased by 75> percent and 90 percent during their deployment. The> study> attributed this decrease to the high natural uranium> levels in> Swedish drinking water supplies. > > DU Medical Follow-up Policy. On May 30, 2003, new> guidance> was issued by OSD/Health Affairs that clarifies who,> why,> when, and how the military should test for possible> depleted> uranium during and after deployment and combat> operations. > The purpose of the testing is to identify those who> may have> been exposed to significant levels of depleted> uranium while> deployed. After a decade of closely following many> depleted-uranium exposed Gulf War veterans who were> enrolled> in the Veterans Affairs depleted uranium medical> follow-up> program, the medical community has yet to identify> any> untoward health consequences associated with> depleted uranium> exposures on the battlefield. Still, it is important> to> implement these new guidelines which standardizes> the way> depleted uranium tests are performed; directs the> compliance> with an approved medical protocol following sound> clinical> practices; and helps DoD meet its obligations for> ensuring the> health of our deployed personnel. > > > What does medical follow-up tell us? > > The voluntary Veterans Affairs DU Medical Follow-up> Program> began in 1993-1994 with the medical evaluations of> 33> friendly-fire DU-exposed veterans, many with> embedded DU> fragments. An additional 29 of the friendly-fire> victims were> added to the follow-up program in 1999. In 1998,> the scope of> the program was expanded to include Gulf War> veterans who may> have been exposed to DU through close contact with> DU> munitions, inhalation of smoke containing DU> particulate> during a fire at the Doha depot, or by entering or> salvaging> vehicles or bunkers that were hit with DU> projectiles. The> published results of these medical evaluations> indicate that> the presence of retained DU fragments is the only> scenario> predictive of a high urine uranium level, and those> with> embedded DU fragments continue to have elevated> urine uranium> levels ten years after the incident. It is unlikely> that an> individual without embedded DU fragments would have> an> elevated urine uranium level, and consequently any> uranium-related health effects. Those individuals> with normal> urine uranium levels now are unlikely to develop any> uranium-related toxicity in the future, regardless> of what> their DU exposure may have been in the Gulf War. > Those> individuals with elevated levels of urine uranium> ten years> after the Gulf War have not developed kidney> abnormalities,> leukemia, bone or lung cancer, or any other> uranium-related> adverse outcome. The DU Medical Follow-up Program> will> continue to monitor those individuals with elevated> urine> uranium levels to enable early detection of any> adverse health> effects due to their continued exposure to embedded> DU> fragments. > > > Resistance is Informed, > > Nine of Eleven > > >===============================================================> > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi > > > > ---> > > >�����������������������������������������������������������������������������> > > � - PULSE ON WORLD HEALTH> CONSPIRACIES! �> > Subscribe:.........> - > >�����������������������������������������������������������������������������> > New Sister Group: > > MedicalConspiracies> > Subscribe: > MedicalConspiracies- > Post message: > MedicalConspiracies > List owner: > MedicalConspiracies-owner > >�����������������������������������������������������������������������������> > New Sister Group: MedicalConspiracies (One Word)at> Google groups:> > http://groups.google.comMedicalConspiracies> > Post message: > MedicalConspiracies (AT) googl (DOT) com> Subscribe: > MedicalConspiracies- (AT) googl (DOT) com> > Any information here in is for educational purpose> only, it may be news related, purely speculation or> someone's opinion. Always consult with a qualified> health practitioner before deciding on any course of> treatment, especially for serious or> life-threatening illnesses.> **COPYRIGHT NOTICE**> In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,> any copyrighted work in this message is distributed> under fair use without profit or payment to those> who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the> included information for non-profit research and> educational purposes only. > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 Thanks, but being a moron to begin with it sometimes gets hard to know what to respond to. No offense intended. I always need to apologise,,, --- Bea Bernhausen <beabernhausen wrote: > I know that--I was just being facetious---trying to > point out the moronic.... > > Joseph Toman <joseph_toman wrote: It has > NEVER been a win-win situation. Don't you see > that. That junk they used to murder people is now > coming all over the world, just like the chem trails > everyone what's to say doesen't exist... I know it > is > just me. Anyway good luck. > > --- Bea Bernhausen <beabernhausen wrote: > > > I know how we can find out if DU is bad or > > not----put all these guys including George and the > > crew into a surroundings where the metal objects > > around them are made of DU for a year. Since it's > so > > safe they won't have to worry---on the other hand > if > > they're wrong we won't have to worry....it's a > > win/win.... > > > > Bill Kingsbury <kingsbry wrote: > > ------- Forwarded message ------- > > " Bruce Beach " <bbeach > > <ArkTwo > > Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:20:46 -0500 > > [Arktwo] DU Doesn't Do it > > > > > > I receive numerous emails > > concerned about DU > > (Depleted Uranium), > > and I have promised to write > > a newsletter on the subject - > > so here it is. > > > > First what DU is. > > It is what is left over > > when uranium is enriched > > to make nuclear weapons. > > > > Think of it as the hulls > > when you shell peas. > > Anything having to do > > with radioactivity > > sounds dangerous to many people - > > and they sometimes become > > unnecessarily frightened by it - > > because they don't understand it. > > > > I give the example > > of an alien from a waterless planet > > who is sent to our planet as an envoy. > > > > " Take me to your leader. " > > > > Anyway - > > before he headed for earth > > he was warned - > > > > " Watch out for water - > > there is a lot on earth > > and it is easy to drown in it. " > > > > So - > > first thing on earth > > he is invited to sit down > > for a banquet with the President - > > and the server starts to pour > > a goblet of water. > > > > " What is that? " asks the alien. > > > > " Water " , the server says. > > > > Jumping up from the table the alien yells - > > > > " Are you trying to kill me? " > > > > Similarly, > > just say to many people > > that something is radioactive - > > and they will go into fear mode. > > > > In point of fact - > > many things about us are radioactive. > > Just living in a brick building > > will expose one to a certain amount > > of radiation from the bricks. > > > > http://www.hps1.org/glossary/natural.htm > > > > Some locations > > are considerably more radioactive > > than others. > > Especially high altitude ones - > > that receive more radiation from the cosmos > > with less shielding by the earth's atmosphere. > > > > A certain amount of radiation > > may be good for you. > > Studies have shown > > that people living in high altitudes > > have less incidence of cancer. > > > > A coincidental controlled study occurred > > when some metal scrap from buildings > > destroyed by the atomic bomb on Japan > > got into some steel girder construction. > > > > The steel was sold by mistake > > and shipped to the US > > for use in a large housing complex. > > The occupants in the buildings in the complex > > that received the radioactive steel > > had a significantly lower incidence of cancer > > than those in the buildings in the same complex > > that received other steel. > > > > While this may seem strange - > > it can be the nature of things. > > For example - > > arsenic is a deadly poison - > > but if your body is completely deprived > > of arsenic - > > you will die as a result. > > > > There are many trace minerals in our bodies - > > that probably serve an important purpose - > > but of which in overdose would be fatal. > > > > So back to the DU. > > People say - > > > > " Don't you know that DU > > has a half-life of > > FOUR and a Half BILLION YEARS! " > > > > http://www.ccnr.org/decay_U238.html > > > > Well, yes. > > That is what makes it so safe. > > The problem is > > that people don't understand > > the nature of half-life. > > > > It seems to them that it means > > that the stuff is going to be around > > giving off radioactivity > > for a very long time - > > and to them that is BAD. > > > > Actually, that is GOOD. > > The stuff that you have to worry about > > is that which has a > > relatively short half-life. > > > > Really short half-lives are no problem either - > > because the stuff burns out > > and is gone in no time. > > Even most longer radioactive stuff will be gone > > in two or three weeks after a nuclear war > > so if you have a fallout shelter > > it will be safe to come out then. > > > > The REAL killers are > > Strontium (Sr-90, 28 year half-life) > > and > > Cesium (Cs-137, 30 year half-life). > > > > http://tinyurl.com/nn4a8 > > > > But that is another matter - > > and one that I have discussed > > many times before - > > regarding agriculture. > > > > I totally agree > > that it is morally wrong > > to create something that will be > > a burden to future generations . > > But - > > DU isn't that thing. > > > > Something that is only giving off > > half of its energy in 4 1/2 billion years - > > isn't giving off any radioactivity to speak of. > > > > The reason that DU is used - > > is that it greatly strengthens steel > > (as used in bullets and armoured tanks). > > If someone were to offer me a car > > made out of DU - > > I would gladly accept it - > > either for myself or > > my children and grandchildren > > to ride around in. > > > > There may be other considerations - > > such as DU in dust > > as a result of explosions of weaponry. > > However, > > there is not much in the way > > of good scientific evidence to support that - > > and the damage of the weaponry > > is the much more serious consideration. > > > > On the one side of the issue > > we hear endless anecdotal stories > > of malformed babies born in areas > > where DU has been used - > > and of military personnel > > returning from those areas > > with what we call Gulf War Syndrome - > > supposedly as a result of DU. > > This is mostly just all emotional > > anti-war propaganda. > > > > On the other side of the issue - > > most people today have a high-level > > of distrust > > for 'official' and 'government' information. > > > > http://www.nato.int/du/docu/d010123a.htm > > > > The reason is the overwhelming > > and unreasonable secrecy - > > the repeated manipulation through propaganda - > > and the interlink > > between government funding and research - > > whether in giant corporations > > or by academics in universities. > > It is just very difficult today - > > to get to what one can consider as being > > an unbiased truth. > > > > But you can forget all the hype > > about DU > > with its 4 and a half billion year half-life > > as being a threat - > > because that part isn't. > > Neither are its 'daughter' elements > > as they degrade - > > because they still only have that > > miniscule amount of radiation > > available to them in the original > > four and a half billion years > > and over the same period of time. > > It is double counting to think otherwise. > > > > You are not going to be around that long > > (except for those of you who > > expect to rise from the dead > > and live on the earth forever) - > > and even then - > > that is not going to be a problem for you. > > Brick houses will give off lots more radiation. > > Better to build them out of DU. > > > > Nope, > > people should concern themselves > > about REAL problems. > > Like the number of nuclear weapons in the world - > > and what the fallout - > > and later reconstruction will be like - > > after a nuclear war. > > > > It is best to keep things in perspective - > > and this is one time - > > with all their good intentions - > > the anti-war activists should be ignored - > > because this destroys their credibility > > and detracts from efforts > > to deal with the REAL problems. > > > > Peace and love, > > > > Bruce > > > > DawnSayer > > > > _____________ > > Arktwo mailing list > > Arktwo > > http://ns.pairowoodies.com/mailman/listinfo/arktwo > > > > > > > > =============================================================== > > > > > > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=52036 > > > > > > > > Re: HERE IS WHAT GEORGE BUSH JNR SAYS ABOUT DU > > > > Posted By: Nine_Of_Eleven > > Friday, 9 July 2004, 7:43 a.m. > > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > > > In Response HERE IS WHAT GEORGE BUSH JNR SAYS > > ABOUT DU > > > > > > If you would like to engage in an honest debate > then > > you > > should do your own research instead of looking for > > someone > > else's " ax-to-grind " polemics. The article you > > posted is not > > research. It is not even an honest polemic based > on > > research. > > It is " axe-to-grind " political propaganda that > uses > > half-truth > > and distortion to present a picture it wants to > > present. That > > is fine if that is what you want to use in the > > debate, but you > > should know that it contains very little in the > way > > of facts > > to support its claims... > > > > First, let's talk about radioactivity and its > > dangers... > > primary to the discussion is to first realize that > > radioactive > > elements and radioactivity itself surround us all > > the time... > > so let's get over the idea that " radioactivity " > is, > > in and of > > itself, a horrible and avoidable environmental > > danger that is > > the " fault " of the United States or Russia or etc. > > If it were > > not for radioactivity in some form or another, we > > might not > > even exist. > > > > Like most " ax-to-grind " propagandists the person > who > > wrote > > your article likes to use buzz words and fifty > year > > old > > speculations at the dawning of the nuclear era, to > > scare their > > reader into a stampede of fear and > misapprehension. > > > > > > Secondary to this discussion is the realization > not > > only that > > radioactivity is all around us, but so is > Uranium... > > Uranium > > 235 -- the most fissionable form of Uranium used > as > > a nuclear > > fuel in reactors -- occurs in nature as > > approximately 0.71% of > > naturally occurring uranium. Additionally, so > those > > who read > > this debate will understand better, 238 Uranium is > > used in > > breeder reactors to construct the plutonium 239 > > which is used > > in nuclear weapons. > > > > Now, understand this, because it is important. > Three > > facts; > > > > 1) " naturally occurring uranium contains 235 U at > > 0.71% " . > > > > 2) Naturally occurring uranium is more common than > > once thought > > as oxides and is more common than mercury, silver, > > molybdenum, > > arsenic and cadmium. > > > > 3) Depleted Uranium contains 235 U at the rate of > > 0.2%, or > > less than 1/3 the same as naturally occurring > > Uranium. So, at > > the very least, unless it is contained in > > concentrations three > > times higher than the naturally occurring Uranium > in > > every > > square centimeter of earth on the planet, then it > > does not > > emit any more radiation than naturally occurring > > uranium > > through which human evolution has survived > > apparently more > > than several millions of years. > > > > I will post more later as I have time but there is > a > > lot of > > misinformation going on about radioactivity and > > nuclear > > materials... > > > > Resistance is Informed... > > > > Nine of Eleven > > > > > > > =============================================================== > > > > > > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=50875 > > > > > > > > THE FACTS ABOUT THE HEALTH EFFECTS OF DU > > > > Posted By: Nine_Of_Eleven > > Sunday, 20 June 2004, 11:33 p.m. > > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > > > > > DU is Depleted Uranium, which for those who are > not > > aware is a > > substance used in armor piercing munitions, as > well > > as in > > armored shields in many U.S. weapons systems. In > > keeping with > > the left wing propaganda techniques of mis- and > > disinformation > > there have been many and numerous claims that the > > use of this > > " radioactive material " in warfare is some kind of > > huge public > > health risk, and some kind of criminal behavior > > directed at > > some form of genocide. I thought it might be nice > > to publish > > a few of the facts associated with Depleted > Uranium. > > First, > > Uranium is itself a naturally occurring element > that > > exists in > > every environment on the planet and always has. > > There is a > > certain fixed level of the material in any given > > square mile > > of land on the planet and all of it is weakly > > radioactive. > > > > Depleted Uranium is the by product of the process > > used to > > enrich uranium for use in nuclear power plants, > and, > > of course > > in nuclear weapons as well. However, depleted > > uranium is less > > radioactive than naturally occurring uranium and, > so > > its > > effects, if any, on individual health will be > > related, not to > > its radioactivity, but rather on its effects as a > > heavy metal, > > such as those like lead, or mercury. These > effects > > would be > > dose but not time related. > > > > There was a big to-do made after the original Gulf > > War because > > Saddam Hussein pulled out a bunch of birth > defected > > babies and > > had his doctors conduct a " study " that linked > these > > birth > > defects to the Depleted Uranium used during the > Gulf > > War. > > This study has since been debunked. > > > > The birth defects in question were from a > population > > of people > > who were more likely to have been exposed to > > chemical weapons > > used during his own war with Iran, as well as with > > those > > chemical weapons he used on his own populations > and > > so > > probably had nothing to do with the DU used during > > the war. > > These chemical weapons had far greater proven > > mutagenic and > > teratogenic properties than DU has ever > > demonstrated. > > > > However, since the Iraqis raised the issue there > > have been any > > number of other studies done, both in Europe on > > soldiers and > > civilians wounded during the Bosnia/Kosovo > conflict > > as well as > > with Gulf War veterans who were exposed to DU in > > various > > circumstances during the war and after. The > > following is a > > summary of the health effects and concerns that > are > > known as a > > result of real scientific evidence and study of > > Depleted > > Uranium. > > > > The following paragraphs were extracted from the > > broad > > information on DU contained at: > > > > http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/ > > > > > > DU - Health Concerns > > > > Chemical -- The major health concerns about DU > > relate to its > > chemical properties as a heavy metal rather than > to > > its > > radioactivity, which is very low. As with all > > chemicals, the > > hazard depends mainly upon the amount taken into > the > > body. > > Medical science recognizes that uranium at high > > doses can > > cause kidney damage. However, those levels are > far > > above > > levels soldiers would have encountered in the Gulf > > or the > > Balkans. For a more in depth discussion of DU's > > chemical > > effects, see the section on Health Effects from > the > > Chemical > > Toxicity of Depleted Uranium in our Environmental > > Exposure > > Report, Depleted Uranium in the Gulf (II). > > > > Radiation -- Because depleted uranium emits > > primarily alpha > > radiation, it is not considered a serious external > > radiation > > hazard. The depleted uranium in armor and rounds > is > > covered, > > further reducing the radiation dose. When > breathed > > or eaten, > > small amounts of depleted uranium are carried in > the > > blood to > > body tissues and organs; much the same as the more > > radioactive > > natural uranium. Despite this, no radiological > > health effects > > are expected because the radioactivity of uranium > > and depleted > > uranium are so low. For a more in depth > discussion > > of DU's > > radiological effects, see the section on Health > > Effects from > > the Radiological Toxicity of Depleted Uranium in > our > > Environmental Exposure Report, Depleted Uranium in > > the Gulf > > (II). > > > > > > What do the experts say on cancer risk? > > > > RAND, 1999. " (N)o evidence is documented in the > > literature of > > cancer or any other negative health effect related > > to the > > radiation received from exposure to natural > uranium, > > whether > > inhaled or ingested, even at very high doses. " > > > > Department of Health and Human Services, Agency > for > > Toxic > > Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in 1999 > > Toxicological > > Profile for Uranium. " No human cancer of any type > > has ever > > been seen as a result of exposure to natural or > > depleted > > uranium. " > > > > United Kingdom Royal Society in May 2001. " Even > if > > the > > estimates of risk are one hundred times too low, > it > > is > > unlikely that any excess of fatal cancer would be > > detected > > within a group of 10,000 soldiers followed over 50 > > years. " > > > > European Commission March, 2001 report. " Taking > > into account > > the pathways and realistic scenarios of human > > exposure, > > radiological exposure to depleted uranium could > not > > cause a > > detectable effect on human health (e.g. cancer). " > > > > World Health Organization April, 2001 report. " The > > radiological hazard is likely to be very small. > No > > increase > > of leukemia or other cancers has been established > > following > > exposure to uranium or DU. " > > > > European Parliament April, 2001 report. " The fact > > that there > > is no evidence of an association between exposures > > -- > > sometimes high and lasting since the beginning of > > the uranium > > industry -- and health damages such as bone > cancer, > > lymphatic > > or other forms of leukemia shows that these > diseases > > as a > > consequence of an uranium exposure are either not > > present or > > very exceptional. " > > > > Swedish Military Headquarters Medical Department > > Study, > > January 2003. " Questionnaires, analysis of > uranium > > in the > > urine and matching with the cancer register at the > > National > > Board of Health and Welfare failed to reveal any > > link between > > service on the Balkans and cancer or any other > > illness. " In > > fact, average urine uranium levels in two separate > > groups > > troops deployed for six months to the Balkans > > decreased by 75 > > percent and 90 percent during their deployment. > The > > study > > attributed this decrease to the high natural > uranium > > levels in > > Swedish drinking water supplies. > > > > DU Medical Follow-up Policy. On May 30, 2003, new > > guidance > > was issued by OSD/Health Affairs that clarifies > who, > > why, > > when, and how the military should test for > possible > > depleted > > uranium during and after deployment and combat > > operations. > > The purpose of the testing is to identify those > who > > may have > > been exposed to significant levels of depleted > > uranium while > > deployed. After a decade of closely following > many > > depleted-uranium exposed Gulf War veterans who > were > > enrolled > > in the Veterans Affairs depleted uranium medical > > follow-up > > program, the medical community has yet to identify > > any > > untoward health consequences associated with > > depleted uranium > > exposures on the battlefield. Still, it is > important > > to > > implement these new guidelines which standardizes > > the way > > depleted uranium tests are performed; directs the > > compliance > > with an approved medical protocol following sound > > clinical > > practices; and helps DoD meet its obligations for > > ensuring the > > health of our deployed personnel. > > > > > > What does medical follow-up tell us? > > > > The voluntary Veterans Affairs DU Medical > Follow-up > > Program > > began in 1993-1994 with the medical evaluations of > > 33 > > friendly-fire DU-exposed veterans, many with > > embedded DU > > fragments. An additional 29 of the friendly-fire > > victims were > > added to the follow-up program in 1999. In 1998, > > the scope of > > the program was expanded to include Gulf War > > veterans who may > > have been exposed to DU through close contact with > > DU > > munitions, inhalation of smoke containing DU > > particulate > > during a fire at the Doha depot, or by entering or > > salvaging > > vehicles or bunkers that were hit with DU > > projectiles. The > > published results of these medical evaluations > > indicate that > > the presence of retained DU fragments is the only > > scenario > > predictive of a high urine uranium level, and > those > > with > > embedded DU fragments continue to have elevated > > urine uranium > > levels ten years after the incident. It is > unlikely > > that an > > individual without embedded DU fragments would > have > > an > > elevated urine uranium level, and consequently any > > uranium-related health effects. Those individuals > > with normal > > urine uranium levels now are unlikely to develop > any > > uranium-related toxicity in the future, regardless > > of what > > their DU exposure may have been in the Gulf War. > > Those > > individuals with elevated levels of urine uranium > > ten years > > after the Gulf War have not developed kidney > > abnormalities, > > leukemia, bone or lung cancer, or any other > > uranium-related > > adverse outcome. The DU Medical Follow-up Program > > will > > continue to monitor those individuals with > elevated > > urine > > uranium levels to enable early detection of any > > adverse health > > effects due to their continued exposure to > embedded > > DU > > fragments. > > > > > > Resistance is Informed, > > > > Nine of Eleven > > > > > > > =============================================================== > > > > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > ��������������������������ï¿\ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï\ ¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ > > > > > > � - PULSE ON WORLD HEALTH > > CONSPIRACIES! � > > > > Subscribe:......... > > - > > > > > ��������������������������ï¿\ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï\ ¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ > > > > New Sister Group: > > > > MedicalConspiracies > > > > Subscribe: > > MedicalConspiracies- > > Post message: > > MedicalConspiracies > > List owner: > > MedicalConspiracies-owner > > > > > ��������������������������ï¿\ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï\ ¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ > > > > New Sister Group: MedicalConspiracies (One Word)at > > Google groups: > > > > http://groups.google.comMedicalConspiracies > > > > Post message: > > MedicalConspiracies (AT) googl (DOT) com > > Subscribe: > > MedicalConspiracies- (AT) googl (DOT) com > > > > Any information here in is for educational purpose > > only, it may be news related, purely speculation > or > > someone's opinion. Always consult with a qualified > > health practitioner before deciding on any course > of > > treatment, especially for serious or > > life-threatening illnesses. > > **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** > > In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, > > any copyrighted work in this message is > distributed > > under fair use without profit or payment to those > > who have expressed a prior interest in receiving > the > > included information for non-profit research and > > educational purposes only. > > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 Well you need to be careful, I am one of those morons... Right now, I am really looking for an outlet. Perhaps off group, --- Bea Bernhausen <beabernhausen wrote: > I know that--I was just being facetious---trying to > point out the moronic.... > > Joseph Toman <joseph_toman wrote: It has > NEVER been a win-win situation. Don't you see > that. That junk they used to murder people is now > coming all over the world, just like the chem trails > everyone what's to say doesen't exist... I know it > is > just me. Anyway good luck. > > --- Bea Bernhausen <beabernhausen wrote: > > > I know how we can find out if DU is bad or > > not----put all these guys including George and the > > crew into a surroundings where the metal objects > > around them are made of DU for a year. Since it's > so > > safe they won't have to worry---on the other hand > if > > they're wrong we won't have to worry....it's a > > win/win.... > > > > Bill Kingsbury <kingsbry wrote: > > ------- Forwarded message ------- > > " Bruce Beach " <bbeach > > <ArkTwo > > Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:20:46 -0500 > > [Arktwo] DU Doesn't Do it > > > > > > I receive numerous emails > > concerned about DU > > (Depleted Uranium), > > and I have promised to write > > a newsletter on the subject - > > so here it is. > > > > First what DU is. > > It is what is left over > > when uranium is enriched > > to make nuclear weapons. > > > > Think of it as the hulls > > when you shell peas. > > Anything having to do > > with radioactivity > > sounds dangerous to many people - > > and they sometimes become > > unnecessarily frightened by it - > > because they don't understand it. > > > > I give the example > > of an alien from a waterless planet > > who is sent to our planet as an envoy. > > > > " Take me to your leader. " > > > > Anyway - > > before he headed for earth > > he was warned - > > > > " Watch out for water - > > there is a lot on earth > > and it is easy to drown in it. " > > > > So - > > first thing on earth > > he is invited to sit down > > for a banquet with the President - > > and the server starts to pour > > a goblet of water. > > > > " What is that? " asks the alien. > > > > " Water " , the server says. > > > > Jumping up from the table the alien yells - > > > > " Are you trying to kill me? " > > > > Similarly, > > just say to many people > > that something is radioactive - > > and they will go into fear mode. > > > > In point of fact - > > many things about us are radioactive. > > Just living in a brick building > > will expose one to a certain amount > > of radiation from the bricks. > > > > http://www.hps1.org/glossary/natural.htm > > > > Some locations > > are considerably more radioactive > > than others. > > Especially high altitude ones - > > that receive more radiation from the cosmos > > with less shielding by the earth's atmosphere. > > > > A certain amount of radiation > > may be good for you. > > Studies have shown > > that people living in high altitudes > > have less incidence of cancer. > > > > A coincidental controlled study occurred > > when some metal scrap from buildings > > destroyed by the atomic bomb on Japan > > got into some steel girder construction. > > > > The steel was sold by mistake > > and shipped to the US > > for use in a large housing complex. > > The occupants in the buildings in the complex > > that received the radioactive steel > > had a significantly lower incidence of cancer > > than those in the buildings in the same complex > > that received other steel. > > > > While this may seem strange - > > it can be the nature of things. > > For example - > > arsenic is a deadly poison - > > but if your body is completely deprived > > of arsenic - > > you will die as a result. > > > > There are many trace minerals in our bodies - > > that probably serve an important purpose - > > but of which in overdose would be fatal. > > > > So back to the DU. > > People say - > > > > " Don't you know that DU > > has a half-life of > > FOUR and a Half BILLION YEARS! " > > > > http://www.ccnr.org/decay_U238.html > > > > Well, yes. > > That is what makes it so safe. > > The problem is > > that people don't understand > > the nature of half-life. > > > > It seems to them that it means > > that the stuff is going to be around > > giving off radioactivity > > for a very long time - > > and to them that is BAD. > > > > Actually, that is GOOD. > > The stuff that you have to worry about > > is that which has a > > relatively short half-life. > > > > Really short half-lives are no problem either - > > because the stuff burns out > > and is gone in no time. > > Even most longer radioactive stuff will be gone > > in two or three weeks after a nuclear war > > so if you have a fallout shelter > > it will be safe to come out then. > > > > The REAL killers are > > Strontium (Sr-90, 28 year half-life) > > and > > Cesium (Cs-137, 30 year half-life). > > > > http://tinyurl.com/nn4a8 > > > > But that is another matter - > > and one that I have discussed > > many times before - > > regarding agriculture. > > > > I totally agree > > that it is morally wrong > > to create something that will be > > a burden to future generations . > > But - > > DU isn't that thing. > > > > Something that is only giving off > > half of its energy in 4 1/2 billion years - > > isn't giving off any radioactivity to speak of. > > > > The reason that DU is used - > > is that it greatly strengthens steel > > (as used in bullets and armoured tanks). > > If someone were to offer me a car > > made out of DU - > > I would gladly accept it - > > either for myself or > > my children and grandchildren > > to ride around in. > > > > There may be other considerations - > > such as DU in dust > > as a result of explosions of weaponry. > > However, > > there is not much in the way > > of good scientific evidence to support that - > > and the damage of the weaponry > > is the much more serious consideration. > > > > On the one side of the issue > > we hear endless anecdotal stories > > of malformed babies born in areas > > where DU has been used - > > and of military personnel > > returning from those areas > > with what we call Gulf War Syndrome - > > supposedly as a result of DU. > > This is mostly just all emotional > > anti-war propaganda. > > > > On the other side of the issue - > > most people today have a high-level > > of distrust > > for 'official' and 'government' information. > > > > http://www.nato.int/du/docu/d010123a.htm > > > > The reason is the overwhelming > > and unreasonable secrecy - > > the repeated manipulation through propaganda - > > and the interlink > > between government funding and research - > > whether in giant corporations > > or by academics in universities. > > It is just very difficult today - > > to get to what one can consider as being > > an unbiased truth. > > > > But you can forget all the hype > > about DU > > with its 4 and a half billion year half-life > > as being a threat - > > because that part isn't. > > Neither are its 'daughter' elements > > as they degrade - > > because they still only have that > > miniscule amount of radiation > > available to them in the original > > four and a half billion years > > and over the same period of time. > > It is double counting to think otherwise. > > > > You are not going to be around that long > > (except for those of you who > > expect to rise from the dead > > and live on the earth forever) - > > and even then - > > that is not going to be a problem for you. > > Brick houses will give off lots more radiation. > > Better to build them out of DU. > > > > Nope, > > people should concern themselves > > about REAL problems. > > Like the number of nuclear weapons in the world - > > and what the fallout - > > and later reconstruction will be like - > > after a nuclear war. > > > > It is best to keep things in perspective - > > and this is one time - > > with all their good intentions - > > the anti-war activists should be ignored - > > because this destroys their credibility > > and detracts from efforts > > to deal with the REAL problems. > > > > Peace and love, > > > > Bruce > > > > DawnSayer > > > > _____________ > > Arktwo mailing list > > Arktwo > > http://ns.pairowoodies.com/mailman/listinfo/arktwo > > > > > > > > =============================================================== > > > > > > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=52036 > > > > > > > > Re: HERE IS WHAT GEORGE BUSH JNR SAYS ABOUT DU > > > > Posted By: Nine_Of_Eleven > > Friday, 9 July 2004, 7:43 a.m. > > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > > > In Response HERE IS WHAT GEORGE BUSH JNR SAYS > > ABOUT DU > > > > > > If you would like to engage in an honest debate > then > > you > > should do your own research instead of looking for > > someone > > else's " ax-to-grind " polemics. The article you > > posted is not > > research. It is not even an honest polemic based > on > > research. > > It is " axe-to-grind " political propaganda that > uses > > half-truth > > and distortion to present a picture it wants to > > present. That > > is fine if that is what you want to use in the > > debate, but you > > should know that it contains very little in the > way > > of facts > > to support its claims... > > > > First, let's talk about radioactivity and its > > dangers... > > primary to the discussion is to first realize that > > radioactive > > elements and radioactivity itself surround us all > > the time... > > so let's get over the idea that " radioactivity " > is, > > in and of > > itself, a horrible and avoidable environmental > > danger that is > > the " fault " of the United States or Russia or etc. > > If it were > > not for radioactivity in some form or another, we > > might not > > even exist. > > > > Like most " ax-to-grind " propagandists the person > who > > wrote > > your article likes to use buzz words and fifty > year > > old > > speculations at the dawning of the nuclear era, to > > scare their > > reader into a stampede of fear and > misapprehension. > > > > > > Secondary to this discussion is the realization > not > > only that > > radioactivity is all around us, but so is > Uranium... > > Uranium > > 235 -- the most fissionable form of Uranium used > as > > a nuclear > > fuel in reactors -- occurs in nature as > > approximately 0.71% of > > naturally occurring uranium. Additionally, so > those > > who read > > this debate will understand better, 238 Uranium is > > used in > > breeder reactors to construct the plutonium 239 > > which is used > > in nuclear weapons. > > > > Now, understand this, because it is important. > Three > > facts; > > > > 1) " naturally occurring uranium contains 235 U at > > 0.71% " . > > > > 2) Naturally occurring uranium is more common than > > once thought > > as oxides and is more common than mercury, silver, > > molybdenum, > > arsenic and cadmium. > > > > 3) Depleted Uranium contains 235 U at the rate of > > 0.2%, or > > less than 1/3 the same as naturally occurring > > Uranium. So, at > > the very least, unless it is contained in > > concentrations three > > times higher than the naturally occurring Uranium > in > > every > > square centimeter of earth on the planet, then it > > does not > > emit any more radiation than naturally occurring > > uranium > > through which human evolution has survived > > apparently more > > than several millions of years. > > > > I will post more later as I have time but there is > a > > lot of > > misinformation going on about radioactivity and > > nuclear > > materials... > > > > Resistance is Informed... > > > > Nine of Eleven > > > > > > > =============================================================== > > > > > > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=50875 > > > > > > > > THE FACTS ABOUT THE HEALTH EFFECTS OF DU > > > > Posted By: Nine_Of_Eleven > > Sunday, 20 June 2004, 11:33 p.m. > > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > > > > > DU is Depleted Uranium, which for those who are > not > > aware is a > > substance used in armor piercing munitions, as > well > > as in > > armored shields in many U.S. weapons systems. In > > keeping with > > the left wing propaganda techniques of mis- and > > disinformation > > there have been many and numerous claims that the > > use of this > > " radioactive material " in warfare is some kind of > > huge public > > health risk, and some kind of criminal behavior > > directed at > > some form of genocide. I thought it might be nice > > to publish > > a few of the facts associated with Depleted > Uranium. > > First, > > Uranium is itself a naturally occurring element > that > > exists in > > every environment on the planet and always has. > > There is a > > certain fixed level of the material in any given > > square mile > > of land on the planet and all of it is weakly > > radioactive. > > > > Depleted Uranium is the by product of the process > > used to > > enrich uranium for use in nuclear power plants, > and, > > of course > > in nuclear weapons as well. However, depleted > > uranium is less > > radioactive than naturally occurring uranium and, > so > > its > > effects, if any, on individual health will be > > related, not to > > its radioactivity, but rather on its effects as a > > heavy metal, > > such as those like lead, or mercury. These > effects > > would be > > dose but not time related. > > > > There was a big to-do made after the original Gulf > > War because > > Saddam Hussein pulled out a bunch of birth > defected > > babies and > > had his doctors conduct a " study " that linked > these > > birth > > defects to the Depleted Uranium used during the > Gulf > > War. > > This study has since been debunked. > > > > The birth defects in question were from a > population > > of people > > who were more likely to have been exposed to > > chemical weapons > > used during his own war with Iran, as well as with > > those > > chemical weapons he used on his own populations > and > > so > > probably had nothing to do with the DU used during > > the war. > > These chemical weapons had far greater proven > > mutagenic and > > teratogenic properties than DU has ever > > demonstrated. > > > > However, since the Iraqis raised the issue there > > have been any > > number of other studies done, both in Europe on > > soldiers and > > civilians wounded during the Bosnia/Kosovo > conflict > > as well as > > with Gulf War veterans who were exposed to DU in > > various > > circumstances during the war and after. The > > following is a > > summary of the health effects and concerns that > are > > known as a > > result of real scientific evidence and study of > > Depleted > > Uranium. > > > > The following paragraphs were extracted from the > > broad > > information on DU contained at: > > > > http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/ > > > > > > DU - Health Concerns > > > > Chemical -- The major health concerns about DU > > relate to its > > chemical properties as a heavy metal rather than > to > > its > > radioactivity, which is very low. As with all > > chemicals, the > > hazard depends mainly upon the amount taken into > the > > body. > > Medical science recognizes that uranium at high > > doses can > > cause kidney damage. However, those levels are > far > > above > > levels soldiers would have encountered in the Gulf > > or the > > Balkans. For a more in depth discussion of DU's > > chemical > > effects, see the section on Health Effects from > the > > Chemical > > Toxicity of Depleted Uranium in our Environmental > > Exposure > > Report, Depleted Uranium in the Gulf (II). > > > > Radiation -- Because depleted uranium emits > > primarily alpha > > radiation, it is not considered a serious external > > radiation > > hazard. The depleted uranium in armor and rounds > is > > covered, > > further reducing the radiation dose. When > breathed > > or eaten, > > small amounts of depleted uranium are carried in > the > > blood to > > body tissues and organs; much the same as the more > > radioactive > > natural uranium. Despite this, no radiological > > health effects > > are expected because the radioactivity of uranium > > and depleted > > uranium are so low. For a more in depth > discussion > > of DU's > > radiological effects, see the section on Health > > Effects from > > the Radiological Toxicity of Depleted Uranium in > our > > Environmental Exposure Report, Depleted Uranium in > > the Gulf > > (II). > > > > > > What do the experts say on cancer risk? > > > > RAND, 1999. " (N)o evidence is documented in the > > literature of > > cancer or any other negative health effect related > > to the > > radiation received from exposure to natural > uranium, > > whether > > inhaled or ingested, even at very high doses. " > > > > Department of Health and Human Services, Agency > for > > Toxic > > Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in 1999 > > Toxicological > > Profile for Uranium. " No human cancer of any type > > has ever > > been seen as a result of exposure to natural or > > depleted > > uranium. " > > > > United Kingdom Royal Society in May 2001. " Even > if > > the > > estimates of risk are one hundred times too low, > it > > is > > unlikely that any excess of fatal cancer would be > > detected > > within a group of 10,000 soldiers followed over 50 > > years. " > > > > European Commission March, 2001 report. " Taking > > into account > > the pathways and realistic scenarios of human > > exposure, > > radiological exposure to depleted uranium could > not > > cause a > > detectable effect on human health (e.g. cancer). " > > > > World Health Organization April, 2001 report. " The > > radiological hazard is likely to be very small. > No > > increase > > of leukemia or other cancers has been established > > following > > exposure to uranium or DU. " > > > > European Parliament April, 2001 report. " The fact > > that there > > is no evidence of an association between exposures > > -- > > sometimes high and lasting since the beginning of > > the uranium > > industry -- and health damages such as bone > cancer, > > lymphatic > > or other forms of leukemia shows that these > diseases > > as a > > consequence of an uranium exposure are either not > > present or > > very exceptional. " > > > > Swedish Military Headquarters Medical Department > > Study, > > January 2003. " Questionnaires, analysis of > uranium > > in the > > urine and matching with the cancer register at the > > National > > Board of Health and Welfare failed to reveal any > > link between > > service on the Balkans and cancer or any other > > illness. " In > > fact, average urine uranium levels in two separate > > groups > > troops deployed for six months to the Balkans > > decreased by 75 > > percent and 90 percent during their deployment. > The > > study > > attributed this decrease to the high natural > uranium > > levels in > > Swedish drinking water supplies. > > > > DU Medical Follow-up Policy. On May 30, 2003, new > > guidance > > was issued by OSD/Health Affairs that clarifies > who, > > why, > > when, and how the military should test for > possible > > depleted > > uranium during and after deployment and combat > > operations. > > The purpose of the testing is to identify those > who > > may have > > been exposed to significant levels of depleted > > uranium while > > deployed. After a decade of closely following > many > > depleted-uranium exposed Gulf War veterans who > were > > enrolled > > in the Veterans Affairs depleted uranium medical > > follow-up > > program, the medical community has yet to identify > > any > > untoward health consequences associated with > > depleted uranium > > exposures on the battlefield. Still, it is > important > > to > > implement these new guidelines which standardizes > > the way > > depleted uranium tests are performed; directs the > > compliance > > with an approved medical protocol following sound > > clinical > > practices; and helps DoD meet its obligations for > > ensuring the > > health of our deployed personnel. > > > > > > What does medical follow-up tell us? > > > > The voluntary Veterans Affairs DU Medical > Follow-up > > Program > > began in 1993-1994 with the medical evaluations of > > 33 > > friendly-fire DU-exposed veterans, many with > > embedded DU > > fragments. An additional 29 of the friendly-fire > > victims were > > added to the follow-up program in 1999. In 1998, > > the scope of > > the program was expanded to include Gulf War > > veterans who may > > have been exposed to DU through close contact with > > DU > > munitions, inhalation of smoke containing DU > > particulate > > during a fire at the Doha depot, or by entering or > > salvaging > > vehicles or bunkers that were hit with DU > > projectiles. The > > published results of these medical evaluations > > indicate that > > the presence of retained DU fragments is the only > > scenario > > predictive of a high urine uranium level, and > those > > with > > embedded DU fragments continue to have elevated > > urine uranium > > levels ten years after the incident. It is > unlikely > > that an > > individual without embedded DU fragments would > have > > an > > elevated urine uranium level, and consequently any > > uranium-related health effects. Those individuals > > with normal > > urine uranium levels now are unlikely to develop > any > > uranium-related toxicity in the future, regardless > > of what > > their DU exposure may have been in the Gulf War. > > Those > > individuals with elevated levels of urine uranium > > ten years > > after the Gulf War have not developed kidney > > abnormalities, > > leukemia, bone or lung cancer, or any other > > uranium-related > > adverse outcome. The DU Medical Follow-up Program > > will > > continue to monitor those individuals with > elevated > > urine > > uranium levels to enable early detection of any > > adverse health > > effects due to their continued exposure to > embedded > > DU > > fragments. > > > > > > Resistance is Informed, > > > > Nine of Eleven > > > > > > > =============================================================== > > > > The Rumor Mill News Reading Room > > > > http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > ��������������������������ï¿\ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï\ ¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ > > > > > > � - PULSE ON WORLD HEALTH > > CONSPIRACIES! � > > > > Subscribe:......... > > - > > > > > ��������������������������ï¿\ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï\ ¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ > > > > New Sister Group: > > > > MedicalConspiracies > > > > Subscribe: > > MedicalConspiracies- > > Post message: > > MedicalConspiracies > > List owner: > > MedicalConspiracies-owner > > > > > ��������������������������ï¿\ ½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï\ ¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ > > > > New Sister Group: MedicalConspiracies (One Word)at > > Google groups: > > > > http://groups.google.comMedicalConspiracies > > > > Post message: > > MedicalConspiracies (AT) googl (DOT) com > > Subscribe: > > MedicalConspiracies- (AT) googl (DOT) com > > > > Any information here in is for educational purpose > > only, it may be news related, purely speculation > or > > someone's opinion. Always consult with a qualified > > health practitioner before deciding on any course > of > > treatment, especially for serious or > > life-threatening illnesses. > > **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** > > In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, > > any copyrighted work in this message is > distributed > > under fair use without profit or payment to those > > who have expressed a prior interest in receiving > the > > included information for non-profit research and > > educational purposes only. > > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.