Depleted Uranium and the United States Military

Theodore Kurita · 26th April 2004, 07:26 PM

I am pretty sure that this hasn't been hitting major news yet, I won't be suprised if it does after the War in Iraq is over with though.

Depleted Uranium is what is currently being used to build tanks, and make bullets for US Troops to use.

There has been some suspicion that it may be a primary cause of the "Gulf War Syndrome"

The Christian Science Monitor has been doing a really good series of well researched articles on that that can be found here:

http://www.csmonitor.com/atcsmonitor...leftNavInclude

I personally am against the use of DU after researching its potential effects.

However, I am going to leave this discussion open ended.

Please feel free to add your opinion.

Virgil · 26th April 2004, 07:41 PM

I was under the impression that the Army was going away from U to W instead.

Virgil

Ziggurat · 26th April 2004, 08:08 PM

I read through one of those articles. I'm quite disappointed by the fact that they didn't note that background radiation exposure is around 300 millirad/year. It's quite hard to interpret the numbers if you don't really know what they mean, and just giving the US government limits (which are extremely conservative, understandably) doesn't help much without at least some context. Of course, even knowing that isn't especially helpful in evaluating what the risk levels really are, but I would have considered that a minimum piece of info to include.

aerocontrols · 26th April 2004, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Theodore Kurita
I personally am against the use of DU after researching its potential effects.

I would like to see the research you've seen.

Quote:

Originally posted by Theodore Kurita
Please feel free to add your opinion.

I think we should use DU as required, based on my own research and prior discussions we've had on these boards.

Here
and
Here

For instance.

Segnosaur · 27th April 2004, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Theodore Kurita
There has been some suspicion that it may be a primary cause of the "Gulf War Syndrome"

There is a very good possibility that Gulf War Syndrome doesn't really exist. If you look at http://www.fumento.com/sugulf.html you'll see:

According to the American Journal of Epidemiology : It found that among hospitalized veterans, Gulf War vets are suffering no more illness than veterans who didn't deploy to the Gulf theater (See: With Gulf War Syndrome, No Disease Is No News)

If soldiers are getting sick because they've been exposed to Depleted Uranium, it isn't showing up in the statistics.

WildCat · 27th April 2004, 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Segnosaur

There is a very good possibility that Gulf War Syndrome doesn't really exist. If you look at http://www.fumento.com/sugulf.html you'll see:

According to the American Journal of Epidemiology : It found that among hospitalized veterans, Gulf War vets are suffering no more illness than veterans who didn't deploy to the Gulf theater (See: With Gulf War Syndrome, No Disease Is No News)

If soldiers are getting sick because they've been exposed to Depleted Uranium, it isn't showing up in the statistics.

Oh, it exists alright. Joint pain, lack of energy, etc. But it has nothing to do w/ the Gulf War, it has to do w/ not being 21 yo anymore.

Luke T. · 27th April 2004, 06:38 AM

DU causing Gulf War Syndrome. Yeah. Because every soldier is exposed to it!

Get real.

Virgil · 27th April 2004, 06:44 AM

what about the guy that claimed to puke day-glo yellow vomit every day...oh wait no one ever saved a sample for chemical analysis and I guess he doesn't puke it up anymore.

gulf war illness syndrome in general is a real disease, a mental health issue.

Virgil

Tricky · 27th April 2004, 06:46 AM

The DU controversy is not new, but it doesn't seem to inspire outrage in too many people. However, if DU were used against the US troops, I feel sure that Americans would be screaming "dirty bomb!" and claiming we had found WMDs.

Luke T. · 27th April 2004, 06:48 AM

TK, I've debunked this GWS crap several times on here.

Read this.

Quote:

To assess the long-term health consequences of the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the authors compared causespecific
mortality rates of 621,902 Gulf War veterans with those of 746,248 non-Gulf veterans, by gender, with
adjustment for age, race, marital status, branch of service, and type of unit. Vital status follow-up began with the
date of exit from the Persian Gulf theater (Gulf veterans) or May 1, 1991 (control veterans). Follow-up for both
groups ended on the date of death or December 31, 1997, whichever came first. Cox proportional hazards
models were used for the multivariate analysis. For Gulf veterans, mortality risk was also assessed relative to
the likelihood of exposure to nerve gas at Khamisiyah, Iraq. Among Gulf veterans, the significant excess of
deaths due to motor vehicle accidents that was observed during the earlier postwar years had decreased
steadily to levels found in non-Gulf veterans. The risk of death from natural causes remained lower among Gulf
veterans compared with non-Gulf veterans. This was mainly accounted for by the relatively higher number of
deaths related to human immunodeficiency virus infection among non-Gulf veterans. There was no statistically
significant difference in cause-specific mortality among Gulf veterans relative to potential nerve gas exposure.
The risk of death for both Gulf veterans and non-Gulf veterans stayed less than half of that expected in their
civilian counterparts. The authors conclude that the excess risk of mortality from motor vehicle accidents that was
associated with Gulf War service has dissipated after 7 years of follow-up.

It has been found that the mortality rates for military vets is actually lower than for civilians. Probably because they are in better physical condition. The only area where military vets have a higher rate of mortality is in the area of traffic accidents, which is understandable because of long deployments where they aren't exercising their driving skills regularly, so when they return home and get behind the wheel, they are a little rusty.

Rob Lister · 27th April 2004, 06:54 AM

If you think DU is bad, consider the alternative: lead.

Still there have been hundreds if not thousands of fatalities directly related to the use of DU as bullets.

Toastrider · 27th April 2004, 07:11 AM

I believe that's referred to as 'getting shot'.

--Toasty

Richard G · 27th April 2004, 01:10 PM

I handled 20mm depleted uranium rounds every week in the Navy. That was 13 years ago, and I'm in perfect health.

Mr Manifesto · 27th April 2004, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Richard G
I handled 20mm depleted uranium rounds every week in the Navy. That was 13 years ago, and I'm in perfect health.

So it's safe to say DU rounds cause an uncontrollable urge to use anecdotes as the sole form of evidence to forward one's case.

Luke T. · 27th April 2004, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto

So it's safe to say DU rounds cause an uncontrollable urge to use anecdotes as the sole form of evidence to forward one's case.

It's safe to say that thousands of military personnel have handled DU rounds as part of their duties, and if it was as bad as some people think it is, we'd be hearing about medical problems coming from these people first, and we haven't.

Reginald · 27th April 2004, 04:04 PM

DU was also (not sure now) used as engine ballast in 747's.

IIRC it's also used in a similar role in the cargo version but in the tail section.

Segnosaur · 28th April 2004, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto

So it's safe to say DU rounds cause an uncontrollable urge to use anecdotes as the sole form of evidence to forward one's case.

Although in this case his "anecdote" doesn't prove anything, keep in mind that the evidence for "gulf war syndrome" is also based on anecdotes. Should the anecdotes against gulf war syndrom ("hey, I'm fine") be given any less weight than the ones for gulf war syndrome?

Wolrab · 28th April 2004, 02:53 PM

Here is the WHO factsheet. The stuff doesn't seem too bad if cleaned up.WHO factsheet

Bjorn · 28th April 2004, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Segnosaur
Although in this case his "anecdote" doesn't prove anything, keep in mind that the evidence for "gulf war syndrome" is also based on anecdotes. Should the anecdotes against gulf war syndrom ("hey, I'm fine") be given any less weight than the ones for gulf war syndrome?

As Luke posted above (Read this.) I'm not sure if there is much evidence for the Gulf War Syndrome at all - except anecdotes - while there is research showing that it might not exist.

Mr Manifesto · 28th April 2004, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Segnosaur

Although in this case his "anecdote" doesn't prove anything, keep in mind that the evidence for "gulf war syndrome" is also based on anecdotes. Should the anecdotes against gulf war syndrom ("hey, I'm fine") be given any less weight than the ones for gulf war syndrome?

I was referring to his habit of posting gun threads that he thinks proves his case, even though they are merely anecdotes (eg), although your point about his 'I'm fine' anecdote is equally valid.

I don't know if used DU rounds are dangerous or not (some think that because they give off dust, they are). Until someone comprehensively says 'yay' or 'nay', I won't comment on it either way.

Richard G · 28th April 2004, 04:27 PM

I'm a hazmat technician. I have been trained by my local municipality, and recently the federal goverment on WMDs.

The symptoms of Gulf War Syndrom are dead on with exposure to chemical nerve agent, the kind army engineers destroyed in bunkers (burnt) durng the war. When they did that, the stuff was carried downwind for many miles.

With only minimal exposure (a few PPM), it will lie dormant in your system for years before manifesting any symptoms. Thats a fact regarding the agents.

Its hard to prove about the soldiers definitively, but that is my theory, as well as many Federal technician I've trained with.

All those guys aren't getting deathly sick from nothing.

Bjorn · 28th April 2004, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Richard G
I'm a hazmat technician. I have been trained by my local municipality, and recently the federal goverment on WMDs.

The symptoms of Gulf War Syndrom are dead on with exposure to chemical nerve agent, the kind army engineers destroyed in bunkers (burnt) durng the war. When they did that, the stuff was carried downwind for many miles.

With only minimal exposure (a few PPM), it will lie dormant in your system for years before manifesting any symptoms. Its hard to prove, but that is my theory, as well as many Federal technician I've trained with.

Did you ever read the research Luke was linking to (and I repeated)? If you did, what do you think about it?

The Fool · 28th April 2004, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Richard G
I'm a hazmat technician. I have been trained by my local municipality, and recently the federal goverment on WMDs.

local municipalities conduct training on WMD???

"The symptoms of Gulf War Syndrom are dead on with exposure to chemical nerve agent"
I'd like to hear more about this one...got any references?

These seems to be a "syndrome" for every war. I went thrugh the Agent orange business... Got sprayed by aircraft a couple of times and still have only one head...... I think being in a war is enough of a reason to make people unhealthy.....stress? fear? family and relationship problems ? bad temper? rage and hatred? these are the things I think are just as likely an explanation for post war ill health.

American · 28th April 2004, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Theodore Kurita

I personally am against the use of DU after researching its potential effects.

Here's are likely questions some might ask, should anyone ever care what you think:

A. You conducted a 12 year cohort study on the matter?

B. You typed "depleted uranium" in to Google and found a PDF brochure called ANOTHER WAR CRIME? IRAQI CITIES "HOT" WITH DEPLETED URANIUM, and believing any stupid thing you read on the internet, you are now against it?

You're an activist.

You are making a difference...

You're so smart, and everyone else is so dumb!!!

Theodore Kurita · 28th April 2004, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by American

Here's are likely questions some might ask, should anyone ever care what you think:

A. You conducted a 12 year cohort study on the matter?

B. You typed "depleted uranium" in to Google and found a PDF brochure called ANOTHER WAR CRIME? IRAQI CITIES "HOT" WITH DEPLETED URANIUM, and believing any stupid thing you read on the internet, you are now against it?

You're an activist.

You are making a difference...

You're so smart, and everyone else is so dumb!!!

Strawman and Ad Hominem.

I looked at LukeT's article and I say after reading is that I have to agree with him.

Still, it dissapoints me that the Christian Science Monitor, a usually extremely reliable source, is publishing utter B*.

Richard G · 29th April 2004, 08:21 AM

I looked at his link briefly. It references a study of mortality rates.

Most of the men with Gulf War syndrom aren't dying, they just suffer from debilitating nerological problems.

I would post some references, but with all those chemical agent names in one posting...on the internet...I'd have the FBI knocking on my door in no time.

The Germans invented nerve agent in WW1, that will get you started. All the nasty stuff out there today is pretty much the same as it was then.

Virgil · 29th April 2004, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Richard G
I looked at his link briefly. It references a study of mortality rates.

Most of the men with Gulf War syndrom aren't dying, they just suffer from debilitating nerological problems.

I would post some references, but with all those chemical agent names in one posting...on the internet...I'd have the FBI knocking on my door in no time.

The Germans invented nerve agent in WW1, that will get you started. All the nasty stuff out there today is pretty much the same as it was then.

The Germans had blister agents and outright toxics but I don't think they had modern nerve agents...if I recall corectly the British (did most of the sarin and cyclosarin research ca. 1950-60).

please correct me if I'm having a senior moment.

most of the nerve agents are easy to make, just check the patents or the journals....

Virgil

Luke T. · 29th April 2004, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Richard G
I looked at his link briefly. It references a study of mortality rates.

Most of the men with Gulf War syndrom aren't dying, they just suffer from debilitating nerological problems.

I had a better link to a VA study when this came up a long time ago. Unfortunately, the topic seems to have been lost in the pruning, and I don't remember the link.

However, think about what you are saying. A debilitating syndrome that doesn't raise the mortality rate?

Luke T. · 29th April 2004, 09:27 AM

Another link.

Quote:

The new studies report

No excess deaths among Gulf War veterans as compared to other veterans (study funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs); and

No excess in hospitalizations among Gulf War veterans as compared to other veterans (study funded by the Department of Defense).

As reported in the The New England Journal of Medicine (November 14, 1996).

Luke T. · 29th April 2004, 09:34 AM

A CDC report.

From page 6:

Quote:

Published epidemiological studies of mortality rates, rates of hospitalizations, and rates of birth defects after the Gulf War have not found consistent, statistically significant differences between active-duty U.S. military personnel who were deployed to the Gulf War compared with active duty personnel who were not deployed to the Gulf, except for a higher rate of mortality from
unintentional injuries (such as automobile accidents). Further epidemiological research efforts are ongoing to track mortality, hospitalization, and reproductive outcome among groups of Gulf deployed veterans and non-deployed veterans of the same era.

_Q_ · 29th April 2004, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Virgil

The Germans had blister agents and outright toxics but I don't think they had modern nerve agents...if I recall corectly the British (did most of the sarin and cyclosarin research ca. 1950-60).

please correct me if I'm having a senior moment.

I think that Tabun and Sarin were known to Germany in the late 1930s (came out of pesticide research).

The British came up with VX in the 1950s.

26th April 2004, 07:26 PM	#1
Theodore Kurita Leader of the Draconis Combine Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 907	Depleted Uranium and the United States Military I am pretty sure that this hasn't been hitting major news yet, I won't be suprised if it does after the War in Iraq is over with though. Depleted Uranium is what is currently being used to build tanks, and make bullets for US Troops to use. There has been some suspicion that it may be a primary cause of the "Gulf War Syndrome" The Christian Science Monitor has been doing a really good series of well researched articles on that that can be found here: http://www.csmonitor.com/atcsmonitor...leftNavInclude I personally am against the use of DU after researching its potential effects. However, I am going to leave this discussion open ended. Please feel free to add your opinion.

26th April 2004, 07:41 PM	#2
Virgil Muse Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 682	I was under the impression that the Army was going away from U to W instead. Virgil
Virgil Muse Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 682

26th April 2004, 08:08 PM	#3
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,195	I read through one of those articles. I'm quite disappointed by the fact that they didn't note that background radiation exposure is around 300 millirad/year. It's quite hard to interpret the numbers if you don't really know what they mean, and just giving the US government limits (which are extremely conservative, understandably) doesn't help much without at least some context. Of course, even knowing that isn't especially helpful in evaluating what the risk levels really are, but I would have considered that a minimum piece of info to include.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

26th April 2004, 08:24 PM	#4
aerocontrols Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 3,445	Quote: Originally posted by Theodore Kurita I personally am against the use of DU after researching its potential effects. I would like to see the research you've seen. Quote: Originally posted by Theodore Kurita Please feel free to add your opinion. I think we should use DU as required, based on my own research and prior discussions we've had on these boards. Here and Here For instance.
	__________________ Misunderestimated in 2000. Unredefeated in 2004. My dog does his tricks. My roomate's dog tries to escape the kitchen. We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest. Source

27th April 2004, 02:15 AM	#5
Segnosaur Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 6,066	Re: Depleted Uranium and the United States Military Quote: Originally posted by Theodore Kurita There has been some suspicion that it may be a primary cause of the "Gulf War Syndrome" There is a very good possibility that Gulf War Syndrome doesn't really exist. If you look at http://www.fumento.com/sugulf.html you'll see: According to the American Journal of Epidemiology : It found that among hospitalized veterans, Gulf War vets are suffering no more illness than veterans who didn't deploy to the Gulf theater (See: With Gulf War Syndrome, No Disease Is No News) If soldiers are getting sick because they've been exposed to Depleted Uranium, it isn't showing up in the statistics.
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I cheered when then the WTC came down. - UndercoverElephant (a.k.a. JustGeoff) I cheer Bin Laden... - JustGeoff (a.k.a. UndercoverElephant) Bin Laden delivered justice - JustGeoff (a.k.a. UndercoverElephant) Men shop for lingerie the way kids shop for breakfast cereal... they will buy something they know nothing about, just to get the prize inside. - Jeff Foxworthy

27th April 2004, 05:15 AM	#6
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,031	Re: Re: Depleted Uranium and the United States Military Quote: Originally posted by Segnosaur There is a very good possibility that Gulf War Syndrome doesn't really exist. If you look at http://www.fumento.com/sugulf.html you'll see: According to the American Journal of Epidemiology : It found that among hospitalized veterans, Gulf War vets are suffering no more illness than veterans who didn't deploy to the Gulf theater (See: With Gulf War Syndrome, No Disease Is No News) If soldiers are getting sick because they've been exposed to Depleted Uranium, it isn't showing up in the statistics. Oh, it exists alright. Joint pain, lack of energy, etc. But it has nothing to do w/ the Gulf War, it has to do w/ not being 21 yo anymore.

27th April 2004, 06:38 AM	#7
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759	DU causing Gulf War Syndrome. Yeah. Because every soldier is exposed to it! Get real.
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759

27th April 2004, 06:44 AM	#8
Virgil Muse Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 682	what about the guy that claimed to puke day-glo yellow vomit every day...oh wait no one ever saved a sample for chemical analysis and I guess he doesn't puke it up anymore. gulf war illness syndrome in general is a real disease, a mental health issue. Virgil
Virgil Muse Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 682

27th April 2004, 06:46 AM	#9
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,359	The DU controversy is not new, but it doesn't seem to inspire outrage in too many people. However, if DU were used against the US troops, I feel sure that Americans would be screaming "dirty bomb!" and claiming we had found WMDs.

27th April 2004, 06:48 AM	#10
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759	TK, I've debunked this GWS crap several times on here. Read this. Quote: To assess the long-term health consequences of the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the authors compared causespecific mortality rates of 621,902 Gulf War veterans with those of 746,248 non-Gulf veterans, by gender, with adjustment for age, race, marital status, branch of service, and type of unit. Vital status follow-up began with the date of exit from the Persian Gulf theater (Gulf veterans) or May 1, 1991 (control veterans). Follow-up for both groups ended on the date of death or December 31, 1997, whichever came first. Cox proportional hazards models were used for the multivariate analysis. For Gulf veterans, mortality risk was also assessed relative to the likelihood of exposure to nerve gas at Khamisiyah, Iraq. Among Gulf veterans, the significant excess of deaths due to motor vehicle accidents that was observed during the earlier postwar years had decreased steadily to levels found in non-Gulf veterans. The risk of death from natural causes remained lower among Gulf veterans compared with non-Gulf veterans. This was mainly accounted for by the relatively higher number of deaths related to human immunodeficiency virus infection among non-Gulf veterans. There was no statistically significant difference in cause-specific mortality among Gulf veterans relative to potential nerve gas exposure. The risk of death for both Gulf veterans and non-Gulf veterans stayed less than half of that expected in their civilian counterparts. The authors conclude that the excess risk of mortality from motor vehicle accidents that was associated with Gulf War service has dissipated after 7 years of follow-up. It has been found that the mortality rates for military vets is actually lower than for civilians. Probably because they are in better physical condition. The only area where military vets have a higher rate of mortality is in the area of traffic accidents, which is understandable because of long deployments where they aren't exercising their driving skills regularly, so when they return home and get behind the wheel, they are a little rusty.
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759

27th April 2004, 06:54 AM	#11
Rob Lister Suspended Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 8,523	If you think DU is bad, consider the alternative: lead. Still there have been hundreds if not thousands of fatalities directly related to the use of DU as bullets.

27th April 2004, 07:11 AM	#12
Toastrider Scholar Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 80	I believe that's referred to as 'getting shot'. --Toasty
Toastrider Scholar Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 80	__________________ "You now have a plunger stuck to your head..."

27th April 2004, 01:10 PM	#13
Richard G Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 940	I handled 20mm depleted uranium rounds every week in the Navy. That was 13 years ago, and I'm in perfect health.
Richard G Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 940

27th April 2004, 01:52 PM	#14
Mr Manifesto Hierophant Walrus of the Secret Clique Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 4,824	Quote: Originally posted by Richard G I handled 20mm depleted uranium rounds every week in the Navy. That was 13 years ago, and I'm in perfect health. So it's safe to say DU rounds cause an uncontrollable urge to use anecdotes as the sole form of evidence to forward one's case.

27th April 2004, 02:04 PM	#15
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759	Quote: Originally posted by Mr Manifesto So it's safe to say DU rounds cause an uncontrollable urge to use anecdotes as the sole form of evidence to forward one's case. It's safe to say that thousands of military personnel have handled DU rounds as part of their duties, and if it was as bad as some people think it is, we'd be hearing about medical problems coming from these people first, and we haven't.
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759

27th April 2004, 04:04 PM	#16
Reginald Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 1,641	DU was also (not sure now) used as engine ballast in 747's. IIRC it's also used in a similar role in the cargo version but in the tail section.
	__________________ No one's in the dark, no one's in the corner and no one's in the wardrobe just waiting to pounce.

28th April 2004, 02:46 PM	#17
Segnosaur Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 6,066	Quote: Originally posted by Mr Manifesto So it's safe to say DU rounds cause an uncontrollable urge to use anecdotes as the sole form of evidence to forward one's case. Although in this case his "anecdote" doesn't prove anything, keep in mind that the evidence for "gulf war syndrome" is also based on anecdotes. Should the anecdotes against gulf war syndrom ("hey, I'm fine") be given any less weight than the ones for gulf war syndrome?
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I cheered when then the WTC came down. - UndercoverElephant (a.k.a. JustGeoff) I cheer Bin Laden... - JustGeoff (a.k.a. UndercoverElephant) Bin Laden delivered justice - JustGeoff (a.k.a. UndercoverElephant) Men shop for lingerie the way kids shop for breakfast cereal... they will buy something they know nothing about, just to get the prize inside. - Jeff Foxworthy

28th April 2004, 02:53 PM	#18
Wolrab Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: The Beautiful Finger Lakes Posts: 1,711	Here is the WHO factsheet. The stuff doesn't seem too bad if cleaned up.WHO factsheet

28th April 2004, 04:13 PM	#19
Bjorn Off Topic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,974	Quote: Originally posted by Segnosaur Although in this case his "anecdote" doesn't prove anything, keep in mind that the evidence for "gulf war syndrome" is also based on anecdotes. Should the anecdotes against gulf war syndrom ("hey, I'm fine") be given any less weight than the ones for gulf war syndrome? As Luke posted above (Read this.) I'm not sure if there is much evidence for the Gulf War Syndrome at all - except anecdotes - while there is research showing that it might not exist.
	__________________ Little did I know, that all those days that came and went, were my life ....

28th April 2004, 04:20 PM	#20
Mr Manifesto Hierophant Walrus of the Secret Clique Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 4,824	Quote: Originally posted by Segnosaur Although in this case his "anecdote" doesn't prove anything, keep in mind that the evidence for "gulf war syndrome" is also based on anecdotes. Should the anecdotes against gulf war syndrom ("hey, I'm fine") be given any less weight than the ones for gulf war syndrome? I was referring to his habit of posting gun threads that he thinks proves his case, even though they are merely anecdotes (eg), although your point about his 'I'm fine' anecdote is equally valid. I don't know if used DU rounds are dangerous or not (some think that because they give off dust, they are). Until someone comprehensively says 'yay' or 'nay', I won't comment on it either way.

28th April 2004, 04:27 PM	#21
Richard G Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 940	I'm a hazmat technician. I have been trained by my local municipality, and recently the federal goverment on WMDs. The symptoms of Gulf War Syndrom are dead on with exposure to chemical nerve agent, the kind army engineers destroyed in bunkers (burnt) durng the war. When they did that, the stuff was carried downwind for many miles. With only minimal exposure (a few PPM), it will lie dormant in your system for years before manifesting any symptoms. Thats a fact regarding the agents. Its hard to prove about the soldiers definitively, but that is my theory, as well as many Federal technician I've trained with. All those guys aren't getting deathly sick from nothing.
Richard G Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 940

28th April 2004, 04:30 PM	#22
Bjorn Off Topic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,974	Quote: Originally posted by Richard G I'm a hazmat technician. I have been trained by my local municipality, and recently the federal goverment on WMDs. The symptoms of Gulf War Syndrom are dead on with exposure to chemical nerve agent, the kind army engineers destroyed in bunkers (burnt) durng the war. When they did that, the stuff was carried downwind for many miles. With only minimal exposure (a few PPM), it will lie dormant in your system for years before manifesting any symptoms. Its hard to prove, but that is my theory, as well as many Federal technician I've trained with. Did you ever read the research Luke was linking to (and I repeated)? If you did, what do you think about it?
	__________________ Little did I know, that all those days that came and went, were my life ....

28th April 2004, 04:33 PM	#23
The Fool Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 11,558	Quote: Originally posted by Richard G I'm a hazmat technician. I have been trained by my local municipality, and recently the federal goverment on WMDs. local municipalities conduct training on WMD??? "The symptoms of Gulf War Syndrom are dead on with exposure to chemical nerve agent" I'd like to hear more about this one...got any references? These seems to be a "syndrome" for every war. I went thrugh the Agent orange business... Got sprayed by aircraft a couple of times and still have only one head...... I think being in a war is enough of a reason to make people unhealthy.....stress? fear? family and relationship problems ? bad temper? rage and hatred? these are the things I think are just as likely an explanation for post war ill health.
	__________________ And what is good, Phaedrus,and what is not good. Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? R. M. Pirsig. (Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance) Lose half your IQ....Ask me how.

28th April 2004, 05:13 PM	#24
American Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: CA Posts: 3,842	Re: Depleted Uranium and the United States Military Quote: Originally posted by Theodore Kurita I personally am against the use of DU after researching its potential effects. Here's are likely questions some might ask, should anyone ever care what you think: A. You conducted a 12 year cohort study on the matter? B. You typed "depleted uranium" in to Google and found a PDF brochure called ANOTHER WAR CRIME? IRAQI CITIES "HOT" WITH DEPLETED URANIUM, and believing any stupid thing you read on the internet, you are now against it? You're an activist. You are making a difference... You're so smart, and everyone else is so dumb!!!

28th April 2004, 05:54 PM	#25
Theodore Kurita Leader of the Draconis Combine Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 907	Re: Re: Depleted Uranium and the United States Military Quote: Originally posted by American Here's are likely questions some might ask, should anyone ever care what you think: A. You conducted a 12 year cohort study on the matter? B. You typed "depleted uranium" in to Google and found a PDF brochure called ANOTHER WAR CRIME? IRAQI CITIES "HOT" WITH DEPLETED URANIUM, and believing any stupid thing you read on the internet, you are now against it? You're an activist. You are making a difference... You're so smart, and everyone else is so dumb!!! Strawman and Ad Hominem. I looked at LukeT's article and I say after reading is that I have to agree with him. Still, it dissapoints me that the Christian Science Monitor, a usually extremely reliable source, is publishing utter B*.

29th April 2004, 08:21 AM	#26
Richard G Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 940	I looked at his link briefly. It references a study of mortality rates. Most of the men with Gulf War syndrom aren't dying, they just suffer from debilitating nerological problems. I would post some references, but with all those chemical agent names in one posting...on the internet...I'd have the FBI knocking on my door in no time. The Germans invented nerve agent in WW1, that will get you started. All the nasty stuff out there today is pretty much the same as it was then.
Richard G Muse Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 940

29th April 2004, 09:15 AM	#27
Virgil Muse Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 682	Quote: Originally posted by Richard G I looked at his link briefly. It references a study of mortality rates. Most of the men with Gulf War syndrom aren't dying, they just suffer from debilitating nerological problems. I would post some references, but with all those chemical agent names in one posting...on the internet...I'd have the FBI knocking on my door in no time. The Germans invented nerve agent in WW1, that will get you started. All the nasty stuff out there today is pretty much the same as it was then. The Germans had blister agents and outright toxics but I don't think they had modern nerve agents...if I recall corectly the British (did most of the sarin and cyclosarin research ca. 1950-60). please correct me if I'm having a senior moment. most of the nerve agents are easy to make, just check the patents or the journals.... Virgil
Virgil Muse Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 682

29th April 2004, 09:20 AM	#28
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759	Quote: Originally posted by Richard G I looked at his link briefly. It references a study of mortality rates. Most of the men with Gulf War syndrom aren't dying, they just suffer from debilitating nerological problems. I had a better link to a VA study when this came up a long time ago. Unfortunately, the topic seems to have been lost in the pruning, and I don't remember the link. However, think about what you are saying. A debilitating syndrome that doesn't raise the mortality rate?
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759

29th April 2004, 09:27 AM	#29
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759	Another link. Quote: The new studies report No excess deaths among Gulf War veterans as compared to other veterans (study funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs); and No excess in hospitalizations among Gulf War veterans as compared to other veterans (study funded by the Department of Defense). As reported in the The New England Journal of Medicine (November 14, 1996).
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759

29th April 2004, 09:34 AM	#30
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759	A CDC report. From page 6: Quote: Published epidemiological studies of mortality rates, rates of hospitalizations, and rates of birth defects after the Gulf War have not found consistent, statistically significant differences between active-duty U.S. military personnel who were deployed to the Gulf War compared with active duty personnel who were not deployed to the Gulf, except for a higher rate of mortality from unintentional injuries (such as automobile accidents). Further epidemiological research efforts are ongoing to track mortality, hospitalization, and reproductive outcome among groups of Gulf deployed veterans and non-deployed veterans of the same era.
Luke T. Guest Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 14,759

29th April 2004, 09:50 AM	#31
_Q_ Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Florida Big Bend region Posts: 276	Quote: Originally posted by Virgil The Germans had blister agents and outright toxics but I don't think they had modern nerve agents...if I recall corectly the British (did most of the sarin and cyclosarin research ca. 1950-60). please correct me if I'm having a senior moment. I think that Tabun and Sarin were known to Germany in the late 1930s (came out of pesticide research). The British came up with VX in the 1950s.