Depleted Uranium
http://www.caduceus.info/articles/denver.htm
The horror of Depleted Uranium is not limited to Iraq - it may well
be at our doorsteps. The information which some governments
are concealing is presented here.
By James Denver
'I'm horrified. The people out there - the Iraqis, the media and the
troops - risk the most appalling ill health. And the radiation from depleted
uranium can travel literally anywhere. It's going to destroy the lives of
thousands of children, all over the world. We all know how far radiation can
travel. Radiation from Chernobyl reached Wales and in Britain you sometimes
get red dust from the Sahara on your car.'
The speaker is not some alarmist doom-sayer. He is Dr Chris Busby, the
British radiation expert, Fellow of the University of Liverpool in the
Faculty of Medicine and UK representative on the European Committee on
Radiation Risk, talking about the best kept secret of this war: the fact
that, by illegally using hundreds of tons of depleted uranium (DU) against
Iraq, Britain and America have gravely endangered not only the Iraqis but
the whole world. For these weapons have released deadly, carcinogenic and
mutagenic, radioactive particles in such abundance that - whipped up by
sandstorms and carried on trade winds - there is no corner of the globe they
cannot penetrate - including Britain. For the wind has no boundaries and
time is on their side: the radioactivity persists for over 4,500,000,000
years and can cause cancer, leukaemia, brain damage, kidney failure, and
extreme birth defects - killing millions of every age for centuries to come.
A crime against humanity which may, in the eyes of historians, rank with the
worst atrocities of all time.
Yet, officially, no crime has been committed. For this story is a dirty
story in which the facts have been concealed from those who needed them
most. It is also a story we need to know if the people of Iraq are to get
the medical care they desperately need, and if our troops, returning from
Iraq, are not to suffer as terribly as the veterans of other conflicts in
which depleted uranium was used.
A dirty Tyson
'Depleted' uranium is in many ways a misnomer. For 'depleted' sounds weak.
The only weak thing about depleted uranium is its price. It is dirt cheap,
toxic, waste from nuclear power plants and bomb production. However, uranium
is one of earth's heaviest elements and DU packs a Tyson's punch, smashing
through tanks, buildings and bunkers with equal ease, spontaneously catching
fire as it does so, and burning people alive. 'Crispy critters' is what US
servicemen call those unfortunate enough to be close. And, when John Pilger
encountered children killed at a greater distance he wrote: 'The children's
skin had folded back, like parchment, revealing veins and burnt flesh that
seeped blood, while the eyes, intact, stared straight ahead. I vomited.' (Daily Mirror)
The millions of radioactive uranium oxide particles released when it burns
can kill just as surely, but far more terribly. They can even be so tiny
they pass through a gas mask, making protection against them impossible.
Yet, small is not beautiful. For these invisible killers indiscriminately
attack men, women, children and even babies in the womb - and do the gravest
harm of all to children and unborn babies.
A terrible legacy
Doctors in Iraq have estimated that birth defects have increased by 2-6
times, and 3-12 times as many children have developed cancer and leukaemia
since 1991. Moreover, a report published in The Lancet in 1998 said that as
many as 500 children a day are dying from these sequels to war and sanctions
and that the death rate for Iraqi children under 5 years of age increased
from 23 per 1000 in 1989 to 166 per thousand in 1993. Overall, cases of
lymphoblastic leukemia more than quadrupled with other cancers also
increasing 'at an alarming rate'. In men, lung, bladder, bronchus, skin, and
stomach cancers showed the highest increase. In women, the highest increases
were in breast and bladder cancer, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.1
On hearing that DU had been used in the Gulf in 1991, the UK Atomic Energy
Authority sent the Ministry of Defence a special report on the potential
damage to health and the environment. It said that it could cause half a
million additional cancer deaths in Iraq over 10 years. In that war the
authorities only admitted to using 320 tons of DU - although the Dutch
charity LAKA estimates the true figure is closer to 800 tons. Many times
that may have been spread across Iraq by this year's war. The devastating
damage all this DU will do to the health and fertility of the people of Iraq
now, and for generations to come, is beyond imagining.
We must also count the numberless thousands of miscarried babies. Nobody
knows how many Iraqis have died in the womb since DU contaminated their
world. But it is suggested that troops who were only exposed to DU for the
brief period of the war were still excreting uranium in their semen 8 years
later and some had 100 times the so called 'safe limit' of uranium in their
urine. The lack of government interest in the plight of veterans of the 1991
war is reflected in a lack of academic research on the impact of DU but
informal research has found a high incidence of birth defects in their
children and that the wives of men who served in Iraq have three times more
miscarriages than the wives of servicemen who did not go there.
Since DU darkened the land Iraq has seen birth defects which would break a
heart of stone: babies with terribly foreshortened limbs, with their
intestines outside their bodies, with huge bulging tumours where their eyes
should be, or with a single eye - like Cyclops, or without eyes, or without
limbs, and even without heads. Significantly, some of the defects are almost
unknown outside textbooks showing the babies born near A-bomb test sites in
the Pacific. Doctors report that many women no longer say 'Is it a girl or a
boy?' but simply, 'Is it normal, doctor?' Moreover this terrible legacy will
not end. The genes of their parents may have been damaged for ever, and the
damaging DU dust is ever-present.
Blue on blue
What the governments of America and Britain have done to the people of Iraq
they have also done to their own soldiers, in both wars. And they have done
it knowingly. For the battlefields have been thick with DU and soldiers have
had to enter areas heavily contaminated by bombing. Moreover, their bodies
have not only been assaulted by DU but also by a vaccination regime which
violated normal protocols, experimental vaccines, nerve agent pills, and
organophosphate pesticides in their tents. Yet, though the hazards of DU
were known, British and American troops were not warned of its dangers. Nor
were they given thorough medical checks on their return - even though
identifying it quickly might have made it possible to remove some of it from
their body. Then, when a growing number became seriously ill, and should
have been sent to top experts in radiation damage and neurotoxins, many were
sent to a psychiatrist.
Over 200,000 US troops who returned from the 1991 war are now invalided out
with ailments officially attributed to service in Iraq - that's 1 in 3. In
contrast, the British government's failure to fully assess the health of
returning troops, or to monitor their health, means no one even knows how
many have died or become gravely ill since their return. However, Gulf
veterans' associations say that, of 40,000 or so fighting fit men and women
who saw active service, at least 572 have died prematurely since coming home
and 5000 may be ill. An alarming number are thought to have taken their own
lives, unable to bear the torment of the innumerable ailments which have
combined to take away their career, their sexuality, their ability to have
normal children, and even their ability to breathe or walk normally. As one
veteran puts it, they are 'on DU death row, waiting to die'.
Whatever other factors there may be, some of their illnesses are strikingly
similar to those of Iraqis exposed to DU dust. For example, soldiers have
also fathered children without eyes. And, in a group of eight servicemen
whose babies lack eyes seven are known to have been directly exposed to DU
dust. They too have fathered children with stunted arms, and rare
abnormalities classically associated with radiation damage. They too seem
prone to cancer and leukaemia. Tellingly, so are EU soldiers who served as
peacekeepers in the Balkans, where DU was also used. Indeed their leukaemia
rate has been so high that several EU governments have protested at the use
of DU.
The vital evidence
Despite all that evidence of the harm done by DU, governments on both sides
of the Atlantic have repeatedly claimed that as it emits only 'low level'
radiation DU is harmless. Award winning scientist, Dr Rosalie Bertell who
has led UN medical commissions, has studied 'low level' radiation for 30
years.2 She has found that uranium oxide particles have more than enough
power to harm cells, and describes their pulses of radiation as hitting
surrounding cells 'like flashes of lightning' again and again in a single
second.2 Like many scientists worldwide who have studied this type of
radiation, she has found that such 'lightning strikes' can damage DNA and
cause cell mutations which lead to cancer. Moreover, these particles can be
taken up by body fluids and travel through the body, damaging more than one
organ. To compound all that Dr Bertell has found that this particular type
of radiation can cause the body's communication systems to break down,
leading to malfunctions in many vital organs of the body and to many medical
problems. A striking fact, since many veterans of the first Gulf war suffer
from innumerable, seemingly unrelated, ailments.
In addition, recent research by Eric Wright, Professor of Experimental
Haematology at Dundee University, and others, have shown two ways in which
such radiation can do far more damage than has been thought. The first is
that a cell which seems unharmed by radiation can produce cells with diverse
mutations several cell generations later. (And mutations are at the root of
cancer and birth defects.) This 'radiation induced genomic instability' is
compounded by 'the bystander effect' by which cells mutate in unison with
others which have been damaged by radiation - rather as birds swoop and turn
in unison. Put together, these two mechanisms can greatly increase the
damage done by a single source of radiation, such as a DU particle.
Moreover, it is now clear that there are marked genetic differences in the
way individuals respond to radiation - with some being far more likely to
develop cancer than others. So the fact that some veterans of the first Gulf
war seem relatively unharmed by their exposure to DU in no way proves that
DU did not damage others.
The price of truth
That the evidence from Iraq and from our troops, and the research findings
of such experts, have been ignored may be no accident. A US report, leaked
in late 1995, allegedly says, 'The potential for health effects from DU
exposure is real; however it must be viewed in perspective... the financial
implications of long-term disability payments and healthcare costs would be
excessive.'3
Clearly, with hundreds of thousands gravely ill in Iraq and at least a
quarter of a million UK and US troops seriously ill, huge disability claims
might be made not only against the governments of Britain and America if the
harm done by DU were acknowledged. There might also be huge claims against
companies making DU weapons and some of their directors are said to be
extremely close to the White House. How close they are to Downing Street is
a matter for speculation, but arms sales makes a considerable contribution
to British trade. So the massive whitewashing of DU over
the past 12 years, and the way that governments have failed to test
returning troops, seemed to disbelieve them, and washed their hands of them,
may be purely to save money.
The possibility that financial considerations have led the governments of
Britain and America to cynically avoid taking responsibility for the harm
they have done not only to the people of Iraq but to their own troops may
seem outlandish. Yet DU weapons weren't used by the other side and no other
explanation fits the evidence. For, in the days before Britain and America
first used DU in war its hazards were no secret.4 One American study in 1990
said DU was 'linked to cancer when exposures are internal, [and to] chemical
toxicity - causing kidney damage'. While another openly warned that exposure
to these particles under battlefield conditions could lead to cancers of the
lung and bone, kidney damage, non-malignant lung disease, neuro-cognitive
disorders, chromosomal damage and birth defects.5
A culture of denial
In 1996 and 1997 UN Human Rights Tribunals condemned DU weapons for
illegally breaking the Geneva Convention and classed them as 'weapons of
mass destruction' 'incompatible with international humanitarian and human
rights law'. Since then, following leukaemia in European peacekeeping troops
in the Balkans and Afghanistan (where DU was also used), the EU has twice
called for DU weapons to be banned.
Yet, far from banning DU, America and Britain stepped up their denials of
the harm from this radioactive dust as more and more troops from the first
Gulf war and from action and peacekeeping in the Balkan and Afghanistan have
become seriously ill. This is no coincidence. In 1997, while citing
experiments, by others, in which 84 percent of dogs exposed to inhaled
uranium died of cancer of the lungs, Dr Asaf Durakovic, then Professor of
Radiology and Nuclear Medicine at Georgetown University in Washington was
quoted as saying, 'The [US government's] Veteran Administration asked me to
lie about the risks of incorporating depleted uranium in the human body.' He
concluded, 'uranium. does cause cancer, uranium does cause mutation, and
uranium does kill. If we continue with the irresponsible contamination of
the biosphere, and denial of the fact that human life is endangered by the
deadly isotope uranium, then we are doing disservice to ourselves,
disservice to the truth, disservice to God and to all generations who
follow.' Not what the authorities wanted to hear and his research was
suddenly blocked.
During 12 years of ever-growing British whitewash the authorities have
abolished military hospitals, where there could have been specialized
research on the effects of DU and where expertise in treating DU victims
could have built up. And, not content with the insult of suggesting the
gravely disabling symptoms of Gulf veterans are imaginary they have refused
full pensions to many. For, despite all the evidence to the contrary, the
current House of Commons briefing paper on DU hazards says 'it is judged
that any radiation effects from.possible exposures are extremely unlikely to
be a contributory factor to the illnesses currently being experienced by
some Gulf war veterans.' Note how over a quarter of a million sick and dying
US and UK vets are called 'some'.
The way ahead
Britain and America not only used DU in this year's Iraq war, they
dramatically increased its use - from a minimum of 320 tons in the previous
war to at minimum of 1500 tons in this one. And this time the use of DU wasn't
limited to anti-tank weapons - as it had largely been in the previous Gulf
war - but was extended to the guided missiles, large bunker busters and big
2000 pound bombs used in Iraq's cities. This means that Iraq's cities have
been blanketed in lethal particles - any one of which can cause cancer or
deform a child. In addition, the use of DU in huge bombs which throw the
deadly particles higher and wider in huge plumes of smoke means that
billions of deadly particles have been carried high into the air - again and
again and again as the bombs rained down - ready to be swept worldwide by
the winds.
The Royal Society has suggested the solution is massive decontamination in
Iraq. That could only scratch the surface. For decontamination is hugely
expensive and, though it may reduce the risks in some of the worst areas, it
cannot fully remove them. For DU is too widespread on land and water. How do
you clean up every nook and cranny of a city the size of Baghdad? How can
they decontaminate a whole country in which microscopic particles, which
cannot be detected with a normal geiger counter, are spread from border to
border? And how can they clean up all the countries downwind of Iraq - and,
indeed, the world?
So there are only two things we can do to mitigate this crime against
humanity. The first is to provide the best possible medical care for the
people of Iraq, for our returning troops and for those who served in the
last Gulf war and, through that, minimize their suffering. The second is to
relegate war, and the production and sale of weapons, to the scrap heap of
history - along with slavery and genocide. Then, and only then, will this
crime against humanity be expunged, and the tragic deaths from this war
truly bring freedom to the people of Iraq, and of the world.
Read the full article in issue 60 of Caduceus...
References
1. The Lancet volume 351, issue 9103, 28 February 1998.
2. Rosalie Bertell's book Planet Earth the Latest Weapon of War was reviewed
in Caduceus issue 51, page 28.
3.
www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/du_ii_tabl1. htm#TAB L_Research Report
Summaries
4.
www.wagingpeace.org/articles/02.01/020117moret.htm The secret official
memorandum to Brigadier General L.R.Groves from Drs Conant, Compton and Urey
of War Department Manhattan district dated October 1943 is available at the
website
www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/Leuren-Moret-Gen-Groves21feb03.htm
5.
www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_iitab11.htm#tab L_research report summaries
Further information
The Low Level Radiation Campaign hopes to be able to arrange a limited
number of private urine tests for those returning from the latest Gulf war.
It can be contacted at: The Knoll, Montpelier Park, Llandrindod Wells, LD1
5LW. 01597 824771. Web: www.llrc.org
James Denver writes and broadcasts internationally on science and
technology.
? Caduceus, 2003.
|