News Is Depleted Uranium Really a Problem?

[Arsonade]

http://www.barremore.net/depleted-uranium-kills.html
i would like to know the legitimacy behind these claims if anyone can confirm

im honestly a bit scared

Adam

 

[Davorak]

I can not be sure but those pictures at the end look fake. Meaning that those pictures probably have nothing to do with Depleted Uranium. Yes the American military used Depleted Uranium, because it makes a great bullet or tank shell. I think lead is another option, but it does not work as well and there is also lead poising.

 

[Arsonade]

yeas i think the end pictures are fake, especially seeing as they have not much to do with the symptoms described.

that was what scared me, thanks lol

Adam

 

[russ_watters]

I stopped reading after "nuclear war". DU bullets are just good bullets. They are not nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons go boom because of a nuclear reaction.

 

[Pengwuino]

"Mega billion" really turned me off. Unless of coures our war is in actuality costing us over 1,000,000,000,000,000 dollars or roughly 100 times our annual GDP. And i can't seem to find any professional information on that woman.

 

[SK]

DU is used because it has high density, is cheap ( it´s basically waste you can use ) and it´s capable of adiabatic shear when penetrating, that means the KE rod "sharpens" itself during penetration. That is opposed to Tungsten, which doesn´t have this property. Also, DU is pyrophoric, which means it may disintegrate into combusting dusk inside the target.
DU is an alpha emitter, so radiation isn´t that much of a problem normally. It gets problematic when people inhale DU dust though as then the DU resides directly in the lungs and can cause cancer etc. .
But even non-radioactive heavy metal is highly toxic ( at least most of them AFAIK ), so that alone may suffice to make people ill.

 

[Astronuc]

Depleted uranium is a component of toxic nuclear waste, usually stored at secure sites. Handlers need radiation protection gear.

Uh, NO!

Depeleted U (0.25% U-235) is the remnant of the enrichment process. Yes it is a by-product, but it is NOT 'nuclear' waste. Depleted U is used in armour piercing shells and also highly effective armour (e.g. M1A1 and M1A2 tanks). DU is also used as counter-weights (tail section) in some large commercial aircraft.

Natural U had about 0.71% (by weight) U-235, the balance being U-238. U-235 is fissile in a thermal spectrum, U-238 basically captures neutrons becoming U-239, which then decays to Np-239 and subsequently Pu-239. That process takes months or years.

I and others have worked with tons of "enriched" U, and we did not need special shielding.

SK is correct however. Uranium is a heavy metal and is pyrophoric. It does burn in air. When a U-projectile hits a target or the ground and is volatized, it disperses U-oxides in the form of dust and small particles. This is potentially as hazardous as dispersed lead or any other heavy metal.

So Iraqis and US forces 'may' be at risk in the long term. However, this will take years of follow-up epidemiological study, and this will be complicated by the existence of other factors such as diet/malnutrition, other chemicals, unhealthy activities like smoking, and normal disease.

 

[Antiphon]

The above site in the first post is a nice example the political Left lying, as usual.

 

[Integral]

The last post promted me to move this thread to Political and world affairs, perhaps shoudl be skeptisim and debunking.

Sure is good that the right is never wrong.

 

[Pengwuino]

The last post promted me to move this thread to Political and world affairs, perhaps shoudl be skeptisim and debunking.

Sure is good that the right is never wrong.

How dare you think the right is ever wrong. *turns on mind-warping spinning wheel thing*. Soon you shall vote for Bush even though he's not on the ballot in 2008! muhahaha

 

[misskitty]

I stopped reading the article. Little bit much for me right now :sadface:. How much validity is there to these claims? How much of the information is true and not exaggerated?

 

[SK]

It´s way exaggerated to say the least. There weren´t "millions of DU tank rounds" fired in iraq. Actually, use of DU rounds by US tanks was rather scarce, for there weren´t many targets (if any) that required using this ammo.
Nowadays the US soldier face only "soft targets" (that is, people in military speech), against whose DU ammunition is not effective.
Oh well, and the claims that real nuclear weapons have been used in AFG tell enough about the credibility of that article.
The article is way overdoing it, but there are issues with DU ammo. I guess some googling is good for an overview.

/edit:
This links seems to be pretty reasonable and covers some misconceptions and exaggerations (like "all bombs use DU"):
http://www.afsc.org/pwork/0411/041110.htm
Army investigation into the issue:
http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/
Some more Links:
http://www.nrpb.org/faq/du/du16.htm

 

[russ_watters]

Sure is good that the right is never wrong.

Its not that the right is never wrong, its just different types of conspiracy theories come from different places: if its religous, its probably on the right. If its displaced hippies, its probably on the left.

 

[misskitty]

I guess that kinda easies my mind a little SK.

 

[kyleb]

I'm pretty sure SK is wrong though, from what I understand the M1 Abrams tanks use DU-tipped rounds exclusively. Also, the claim that "DU ammunition is not effective" against "soft targets" comes off as downright absurd to me; I can't think of any reason DU would be less effective the conventional muntions.

 

[Francis M]

I've never seen a more left leaning article in my life. This looks like nothing more than an opinion disguised (loosely) as a bunch of hard to coroberate misquoted "facts". It's an Op Ed piece! I'd have to say off the top of my head that there are other things that are more likely contributing to the health problems of our soldiers and civilians (and those pictures) than DU. IMHO it's a rather badly written article. To call it news or reporting is stretching those two definitions to their limit.

 

[SK]

re kyleb:
Nope, you´re wrong. the Abrams tank uses the M829 series of APFSDS projectiles, that´s Armor Piercing Fin stabilised Discarding Sabot. The projectile itself is a dart made of a "DU rod" with fins and an aerodynamic cap attached. While the tank´s gun has a diameter of 120mm the dart is much smaller, about 20-40 mm in diameter (depending on model). This means it has to be hold in the barrel by sabot petals, which fall off after the projectile leaves the muzzle.
You can see this here:

All APFSDS rounds look like this:

But as I said, this is just one ammo type. The problem with using it against "soft targets" is that you have to hit those directly, as the round completely relies on kinetic energy for destruction. The round might even pass through soft skin vehicles without causing much destruction as it relies on sending chunks of the target´s armor around in the inside as shrapnell to a certain extend. Also, the round has to meet resistance to develop the pyrophoric effect mentioned above.
For this reason a second round is used, the M830 HEAT round. It uses a shaped charge which isn´t reliant on kinetic energy but is a chemical energy round which is triggered by an impact fuze. This round is more effective against light armored vehicles and troops, even though it doesn´t have the punch of a real HE-FRAG(mentation) round.
For this reason again the M830A1 MPAT round was developed. It uses a saboted shell which features a shaped charge and a shrapnel mantlet around it, therefore increasing effectivness and generating a fragmentation pattern. This is the round that should be most common in iraq by now.

As you see it doesn´t make sense to use DU at all in the current situation. DU ammo only makes sense if you face Armored Fighting Vehicles, which is not the case in iraq.

Links:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/m829a1.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/m830a1.htm

 

[Arsonade]

Its not that the right is never wrong, its just different types of conspiracy theories come from different places: if its religous, its probably on the right. If its displaced hippies, its probably on the left.

am i right in the thinking that misinformation is the cause of conspiricy theorys? and that stuburness is the keeper of these theorys?
you can't blame people for starting these theories as it is based on misinformation, stuburness however is the real problem

Adam the Chess

 

[misskitty]

Ok, so now that everyone has said something in this thread, let separate out the facts please.

Is this a real issue? Are these DU rounds really being used in Iraq? Is there ANY reason for me to worry about my boyfriend, who is going to be shipping out to Iraq in the next few months? What is the REAL story on this stuff?

 

[SK]

Like I said, DU isn´t used in any significant quantities these days (if at all).
Ammo exists for the following weapon systems in theatre:
-Abrams MBT: M829 series of APFSDS ammunition (explained above).
-Bradley IFV: M919 series of 25mm APFSDS ammunition for the M242 Bushmaster gun.
-A-10 Thunderbolt ground attack aircraft, PGU-14 30mm API ammunition for the GAU-8 gun.
-AV-8B Harrier aircraft used by the marines. Pgu-20 25mm API ammunition.

Strafing runs by aircraft are extremely unlikely in iraq these days, so you can rule this out. The usage of DU ammo by armored fighting vehicles also is unlikely as it only makes sense to use against armored vehicles which the opposition doesn´t have right now. To minimize the remaining risk your boyfriend might should refrain from climbing on shot up vehicles from earlier in the war.
My advice is that he should look up as much info from people that were there as possible, IEDs and insurgents is what pose the real threat as opposed to DU. A good site would be http://lightfighter.net ,there you can find lots of tips on equipment, tactics and stuff.

 

[russ_watters]

Is this a real issue? Are these DU rounds really being used in Iraq? Is there ANY reason for me to worry about my boyfriend, who is going to be shipping out to Iraq in the next few months? What is the REAL story on this stuff?

I would say, quite simply, that this is not a real issue. While it is true that they are more unhealthy to be around than lead bullets after being fired, the danger is insignificant compared to the other dangers of warfare.

DU is also used in the 20mm anti-air guns on navy ships. I've handled the rounds (as said, they are jacketed) and been topside when the rounds were fired at towed targets 100 feet above the ship, and was not and am not concerned.

 

[Dayle Record]

One problem with any use of this, is that it becomes a product. Now they are re-opening Uranium mines in Utah, because of the demand, some demand, somewhere for Uranium, in general. Though several people here say there is no danger, other people who are very reputable write of dangers.lt has been reported that what was supposed to be DU was dirty, and had plutonium left overs in it. There are a lot of various reports of birth defects supposedly from that this is from Gulf War Vets. The sides on this issue are in great opposition. I consider that the opinion of the WHO is bought and paid for, and reports of its safety are likely bought and paid for, after all, what a reversal, low level nuclear waste thrown all over Iraq, instead of sent to nuclear waste dumps, for a hight cost solution. Cost is now pure profit. Proliferation, is proliferation low level or not.

Here is a link to one of the sites, I just visited.

http://www.sptimes.com/News/060500/Worldandnation/Medical_mysteries.shtml

Basra, is having a waking nightmare.

 

[russ_watters]

There are a lot of various reports of birth defects supposedly from that this is from Gulf War Vets. The sides on this issue are in great opposition.

But that's just it: there isn't any debate going on in any scientific community. Its all just "various reports" from news organizations looking for a scare-story to sell newspapers and environmentalist groups looking for pictures of birth defects to post on websites. And any study that doesn't paint the right picture is dismissed with the wave of the hand in a conspiracy theory.

 

[Bob Nichols]

Amy Worthington

Amy Worthington is a great Writer and as through researcher.

I am Bob Nichols. I write about these subjects. What we are actually talking about is a purely genocidal weapon that only exists on an American battlefields. It is nanometer length particles of ceramic uranium oxide gas and dust.

Listen to the world's best experts on a Worldwide Radio program. It is on:
http://www.xzone-radio.com/archives.htm

 

[Bob Nichols]

http://www.xzone-radio.com/archives.htm
The world's experts on Uranium Weapons.

*So-called "Depleted uranium" results from a step in the process
of creating enriched uranium for nuclear power plant reactor cores
and thermonuclear bombs, commonly called Hydrogen Bombs and
Neutron Bombs.

The special killer uranium used in bombs and reactor cores at nuclear
power plants is about .711 of one percent of natural uranium, a tiny
amount. Like iodine in salt, except it kills everything.

Processing natural uranium removes about half of the bomb making
material. It is then called "depleted uranium" by the powers that be,
because it can no longer be used to make H-Bombs; but, it is used
to make uranium bullets, shells, and bombs instead.

The so-called "depleted uranium" is fully 88% as radioactive in total
radiation as the original uranium. There are an estimated 1.5 billion
pounds of "depleted uranium" at U.S. Nuclear Weapons Labs and
related facilities (H-bomb factories) in the US.

The word depleted does not mean the uranium is safe or OK to use,
it means it has been processed, that's all.

Perhaps a less deceptive name would be "12% depleted uranium;"
but, the term "Uranium Munitions" better describes what we are
currently using widely and continuously in Iraq, Afghanistan and
in other war zones and have been for about 15 years.
[End]

 

[faust9]

http://www.xzone-radio.com/archives.htm
The world's experts on Uranium Weapons.

*So-called "Depleted uranium" results from a step in the process
of creating enriched uranium for nuclear power plant reactor cores
and thermonuclear bombs, commonly called Hydrogen Bombs and
Neutron Bombs.

The special killer uranium used in bombs and reactor cores at nuclear
power plants is about .711 of one percent of natural uranium, a tiny
amount. Like iodine in salt, except it kills everything.

Processing natural uranium removes about half of the bomb making
material. It is then called "depleted uranium" by the powers that be,
because it can no longer be used to make H-Bombs; but, it is used
to make uranium bullets, shells, and bombs instead.

The so-called "depleted uranium" is fully 88% as radioactive in total
radiation as the original uranium. There are an estimated 1.5 billion
pounds of "depleted uranium" at U.S. Nuclear Weapons Labs and
related facilities (H-bomb factories) in the US.

The word depleted does not mean the uranium is safe or OK to use,
it means it has been processed, that's all.

Perhaps a less deceptive name would be "12% depleted uranium;"
but, the term "Uranium Munitions" better describes what we are
currently using widely and continuously in Iraq, Afghanistan and
in other war zones and have been for about 15 years.
[End]

Bzzt! You are about 94.324% wrong my poor poor misguided friend.I would much rather hug DU than to stand within 3 feet of enriched U(greater than 90% is the mark BTW--military enrichment is much much greater).

DU means the useful part of the uranium has been extracted thus leaving a depleted mass of U-238. U-238 is not the devil. Now, 235 or some p-239 or even some Co-60(pretty mean stuff) now your talking. Oh, gosh darn it you know that blue coloring in plates and paintins. It's called cobolt blue. It's made with cobolt which as fate would have it also contains Co-60. A blue supper plate will set off a counter like nobodys business--why no comment on that?

Anyway, enjoy your evening. Good luck with your DU misadventures.

 

[Bob Nichols]

Thank you for your comment, Faust9.

We can quibble over percentages. Actuall there are more than 200 different "mixtures" for nuker power plants; but, that is most certainly not the point.

Your discussion had nothing to do with ceramic uranium oxide gas and dust. So, let's focus for just a minute and talk about what is actually sickening and killing Troopers right now on the battlefields of Iraq.

No, it does not exist anywhere else except on a battlefield or a test range. Yes, it is respirable and very deadly.

BTW, the so-called "depleted" U is 75 to 88% as radioactive as the feedstock ore.

Try it again!

 

[kyleb]

Bzzt! You are about 94.324% wrong my poor poor misguided friend.

Heh, he can't be wrong as he didn't make any claims in that post, but rather qouted someone else. ;)

I would much rather hug DU than to stand within 3 feet of enriched U(greater than 90% is the mark BTW--military enrichment is much much greater).

I'd agree, and I imagine the person who Bob Nichols quoted would agree too, but it is hard to say as he never brought up enriched uranium.

Btw, about my previous comment that the Abrams only fires DU rounds, I managed to dig up my source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/2860759.stm

The information appears to be gained from a US defence department briefing, but I suppose the reporter may have missunderstood.

 

[Bob Nichols]

Hug it - Try SNORTING uranium oxide gas & dust

Quote:
Originally Posted by faust9
I would much rather hug DU than to stand within 3 feet of enriched U(greater than 90% is the mark BTW--military enrichment is much much greater).

I'd agree, and I imagine the person who Bob Nichols quoted would agree too, but it is hard to say as he never brought up enriched uranium.

I think I see the observational difficulty you good folks are having. May I suggest the parallel to standing (and dying) next to a 16 foot long 3/4 inch wide fuel rod or a 7 Kilogram Enriched 235U (97%) Pit for a Thermonuclear weapon is snorting one gram of ceramic uranium oxide gas and dust.

Once inside your body, it cannot be removed, it cannot be treated, it cannot be cured.

You are now one of those American Troopers who went to Iraq and came back with your very own internal personal radiation source.

To the woman above who was concerned about a family member about to go. 518,000 of the Troopers who've served in Iraq are now on Medical Disability. That is a staggering 56%. Do everything you can to try to keep him or her out of Iraq or Afghanistan. Be creative! Don't be timid.

Here is a recent Archived World Wide InterNet Radio Program with myself and my colleagues talking about uranium oxide dust.

Major Doug Rokke USA, Ret., Ph.D. is first. He was the Pentagon's Director of the Depleted Uranium Project from 1992 to 1995. The US Military used 375 Tons of weaponized poisonous uranium oxide gas in the First Gulf War.

Here's the radio archive. Click on the "Play Now" on the right of the Uranium Weapons Show paragraph.
http://www.xzone-radio.com/archives.htm

Learn everything you can about this. I'll be here part of tomorrow to respond to comments and questions. Good Day.

 

[hitssquad]

"Mega billion" really turned me off. Unless of coures our war is in actuality costing us over 1,000,000,000,000,000 dollars

--
1 : HUGE : VAST <a mega electronics store>
--

(M-W Unabridged 3.0.)

 

[russ_watters]

To the woman above who was concerned about a family member about to go. 518,000 of the Troopers who've served in Iraq are now on Medical Disability. That is a staggering 56%. Do everything you can to try to keep him or her out of Iraq or Afghanistan. Be creative! Don't be timid.

Source? And are you claiming that all of them are sickened with radiation or heavy metal poisoning?

Major Doug Rokke USA, Ret., Ph.D. is first. He was the Pentagon's Director of the Depleted Uranium Project from 1992 to 1995. The US Military used 375 Tons of weaponized poisonous uranium oxide gas in the First Gulf War.

So you're saying all DU used is vaporized? And "Depleted Uranium Project"? Source?

Bob, a great deal of what you are saying sounds like nonsense - the rest sounds like emotional rhetoric.

 

[Bob Nichols]

Russ Watters,

The numbers are sourced through the VA and include just Medically Disabled Vets rotated through Iraq and Afghanistan. Only 10% of Vets were Medically Disabled in Viet Nam and 5% in the other wars of the 20th Century.

The uranium in bombs is certainly vaporized and up to 80% of that in other ordnance. Maj Rokke worked for the Pentagon and Gen Schwarzkopf.

Again, what we are not coming to grips with here is now a common battlefield product. It is ceramic uranium oxide gas and dust. The US Military has successfully completed a long term project first started in 1943 at the Manhattan Project. That was to weaponize deadly uranium gas.

That is what we are using in Iraq. Here's the radio archive. Click on the "Play Now" on the right of the Uranium Weapons Show.
http://www.xzone-radio.com/archives.htm

 

[russ_watters]

Russ Watters,

The numbers are sourced through the VA and include just Medically Disabled Vets rotated through Iraq and Afghanistan. Only 10% of Vets were Medically Disabled in Viet Nam and 5% in the other wars of the 20th Century.

Could I have the source itself, please. I want to read it myself.

The uranium in bombs is certainly vaporized and up to 80% of that in other ordnance.

Uranium in bombs? What bombs and how much uranium are we talking about? (answer: we're talking about a specific variant of a bomb used for penetration. it is not widely used).

Maj Rokke worked for the Pentagon and Gen Schwarzkopf.

So did everyone else in theater at the time. That alone is utterly meaningless.

Again, what we are not coming to grips with here is now a common battlefield product. It is ceramic uranium oxide gas and dust. The US Military has successfully completed a long term project first started in 1943 at the Manhattan Project. That was to weaponize deadly uranium gas.

You're saying that the use of DU to destroy tanks is actually a cover for a chemical weapons program designed to spread uranium oxide? Ok, I think I need to just back out of this one...

 

[hitssquad]

Uranium in bombs? What bombs and how much uranium are we talking about? (answer: we're talking about a specific variant of a bomb used for penetration.

There is a conventional bomb with uranium in it? What bomb are you talking about, Russ?

 

[LunchBox]

Wow Bob, that's interesting... but you know there's something even more pervasive that the military has been using even longer - dihydrogen monoxide.

I mean, this stuff is everywhere! The government has been giving this to our troops for a long time. This stuff is shown to cause frequent urination and in certain circumstances, an overdose can lead to death! This stuff is used in almost all nuclear reactors and variations are used in fusion bombs (the H-bomb!). This stuff is so abundant that it is even showing up in baby food and now makes up a measurable proportion of our atmosphere! We really need to get the word out and get the government to stop exposing out troops to this horrible stuff...

 

[kyleb]

But while I'm sure you would feel perfectly safe chuging down a glass of dihydrogen monoxide, I doubt you be willing to suck down the gas created in the vaporization of a DU round. Eh, LunchBox?

 

[russ_watters]

There is a conventional bomb with uranium in it? What bomb are you talking about, Russ?

Ok, correction: at this point, it is just suspected, as it is classified (though I'm willing to concede it is probable that the GBU-28 does use it): http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/pdfs/DU2102A3b.pdf

 

[hitssquad]

Interesting. Thanks for the info, Russ.

 

[FredGarvin]

To the woman above who was concerned about a family member about to go. 518,000 of the Troopers who've served in Iraq are now on Medical Disability. That is a staggering 56%. Do everything you can to try to keep him or her out of Iraq or Afghanistan. Be creative! Don't be timid.

The US Military used 375 Tons of weaponized poisonous uranium oxide gas in the First Gulf War.

GW1 (which I was part of) the US had a little over 500,000 TROOPS (please stop saying "troopers"). You're saying that between GW1 and 2 that the equivilent of the entire US contingent in GW1 is on disability. Until I see hard fact numbers, I call B.S.

Also...I found this little tid-bit:

The World Health Organization was nonetheless able to assess the health risks of Depleted Uranium in a post-combat environment thanks to a 2001 mission to Kosovo. A 2001 WHO fact sheet on depleted uranium concludes: "because DU is only weakly radioactive, very large amounts of dust (on the order of grams) would have to be inhaled for the additional risk of lung cancer to be detectable in an exposed group. Risks for other radiation-induced cancers, including leukaemia, are considered to be very much lower than for lung cancer." In addition, "no reproductive or developmental effects have been reported in humans" as a result of DU exposure.

source: http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/env/du/en/

 

[LunchBox]

But while I'm sure you would feel perfectly safe chuging down a glass of dihydrogen monoxide, I doubt you be willing to suck down the gas created in the vaporization of a DU round.

Thank you for picking up on the sarcasm... I was wondering if I laid it on thick enough. And thank you for helping to prove my point. The only time a DU round vaporizes is when it... you know... slams into something at high speed. Considering anyone in the vehicle when it is hit is going to die a pretty quick death, I doubt they have time to get cancer. The uranium in a DU round is completely encased in a sheath (sabot) that makes up the outside of the munition. Even if you abrade the outside of a DU round, you will not generate any uranium laced dust or gas.

Cheers...

 

[kyleb]

I'm sorry, I didn't clarify my point; the stuff isn't water by any means. Obviously inhaling the gas directly off a vaporized DU round is a serious health risk; so when you vaporize enough of it into the air over the landscape and eventually an unhealthily dose of the stuff is bound to wind up inside peoples bodies. The dangers of water are far cry from those of radioactive heavy metals.

 

[hitssquad]

inhaling the gas directly off a vaporized DU round is a serious health risk; so when you vaporize enough of it into the air over the landscape [...] eventually an unhealthily dose of the stuff is bound to wind up inside peoples bodies.

The latter does not follow from the former.

 

[hitssquad]

Alternate routes of DU aerosol exposure

The only time a DU round vaporizes is when it [...] slams into something at high speed.

Another route of aerosol exposure is the manual clearing of jams in automatic cannons that fire DU rounds.

And yet another route of exposure is the incidental burning of DU ordnance depots. There was such a fire during GW1 at a DU ammo depot in Doha.
http://www.google.com/search?q=DU+fire+doha

Here is a report of another DU fire, this time in 1999:
http://www.cadu.org.uk/info/nuclear/3_4.htm

 

[SK]

Another route of aerosol exposure is the manual clearing of jams in automatic cannons that fire DU rounds.

Pretty much impossible, DU is used in penetrators who don´t come into contact with the barrel of guns but are saboted (M829 and M919) or contained in the bullet as a smaller diameter core (PGU-13).
The only way for aerosol exposure at the gun firing DU ammo would be a fatal barrel burst and the like, but that´s pretty rare and will have several more ill effects on the firing platform.

/edit: As for the "Journalist" Bob Nichols:

This story is about American weapons built with depleted uranium components for the business end of things. Just about all American bullets, tank shells, missiles, dumb bombs, smart bombs, 500 and 2,000-pound bombs, cruise missiles, and anything else engineered to help our side in the war of us against them has depleted uranium in it. Lots of depleted uranium.

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/071304Nichols/071304nichols.html
It never ceases to amaze me how supposed "Journalists" can write down crap like this which is fundamentally wrong (as everyone googling for 3 mins can find out).

 

[russ_watters]

It never ceases to amaze me how supposed "Journalists" can write down crap like this which is fundamentally wrong (as everyone googling for 3 mins can find out).

Speaking of crap, did you read the BBC article posted on the last page? It contains The Most Ironic Thing Ever Written.

A 1995 report from the US Army Environmental Policy Institute, for example, said: "If DU enters the body, it has the potential to generate significant medical consequences."

You don't say?!

 

[kyleb]

I don't see the irony there Russ, could you elaborate?

The latter does not follow from the former.

I don't see how you can argue that. The logic holds true for fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides and the like; what makes DU exempt?

 

[russ_watters]

I don't see the irony there Russ, could you elaborate?

Its irony via unintentional, self-evident understatement: 'a bullet in the chest might be harmful - especially if it tears a big hole in your heart.'

 

[kyleb]

That is more like irony via avioding the intent; the report was obviously referring to less forcefull ways in which the substance might enter the body, such as though inhalation or ingestion

 

[russ_watters]

That is more like irony via avioding the intent; the report was obviously referring to less forcefull ways in which the substance might enter the body, such as though inhalation or ingestion

(well, the meaning isn't clear - there are a fair number of people with more or less permanent shrapnel wounds. But...) Yes, I know: that's why it was unintentional. That's what makes it so funny! You have heard of "irony", haven't you? Definition:

-The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning.
-An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.

 

[kyleb]

Yeah, its like rain on your wedding day; right?

Seriously though, the apparent and intended meaning are the same unless in this situation unless one makes a contious effort to avoid that meaning.