I was at a meeting yesterday where the subject was the US sanctions on
Iraq (the speaker, of course, was against them). Much of what he had to
say made a lot of sense; some did not.
In a leaflet he distributed and talked about was a description of what
was called "Depleted Uranium," (DU), which was also identified as the
isotope U-238. Included were all sorts of claims about it, claims which I
do not see as credible. But my physics career is too far remote now in
time for me to fairly judge these claims; perhaps someone here might
comment on them.
These are the claims, as extracted from somewhat more volitile phrases in
the leaflet:
1. The US used DU munitions in Iraq, Kuwait, Kosovo, Serbia, Bosnia,
Puerto Rico, Okinawa and within the US.
2. Thousands of individuals have been exposed (to what?) ...
3. DU is a health hazard if inhaled, ingested, or gets in wounds.
4. Respiratory and skin protection must be worn by everyone within 80
feet of DU contaminated equipment.
5. DU contamination makes water & food unusable.
6. DU is made from the non-fissionable byproduct of the uranium
enrichment process.
7. DU is used in munitions, shielding and commercial concrete.
8. DU munitions are solid U-238 (several examples given).
9. Upon impact, radioactive and heavy metal poison U-238 fragments &
oxides are created.
10. Reported health effects (official DOD document, not identified)
include (long list of diseases).
11. Doing nothing wall leave "thousands of radioactive heavy metal poison
bullets" around.
The article is written by a Doug Rome, Ph.D., who is identified as a
former ODS (?) health physicist and a former Army DU Project director.
If U-238 is a stable isotope, as I always thought it was, then whence
comes the radioactivity? And while I'm fairly sure that ground up U-238
powder is probably not good to inhale, is it really a poison? That is, is
it worse than, for instance, an equal amount of West Texas dust?
The anti-sanctions movement seems to me to be a good one to support. But
these claims, which seem wild to me, don't give me any confidence in the
rest of their message.
Comments appreciated.
Burgy (John Burgeson)
www.burgy.50megs.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 23 2001 - 15:16:33 EST