wrote:

DU does not atomize. Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.




http://www.firethistime.org/extremedeformities.htm

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 03:56:21 GMT, m II wrote:

wrote:

DU does not atomize. Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.




http://www.firethistime.org/extremedeformities.htm

How about something from a website that is based on something other
than BS?

(Hint: compare the NIOSH safety information for DU and note those
pictures do not match the known human health effects of DU.)

Well, I guess that there are fools everywhere who are fooled by
politically-motivated BS and a picture.




--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.

David wrote:
wrote:
Carter-K8VT wrote:
Also not true. The latest studies *have* found significant amounts of DU
retained in humans.

I'm interested in qualified scientific studies in this area. Have you
any citations?

http://www.thefourreasons.org/duresources.htm

You'll have to be a LOT more specific than a pointer to a hippie commune.
The first two articles I looked through had zero evidence of any such
thing, only stating that fine particles of uranium in the environment
are hazardous without showing that any fine particles are actually put
in the environment from DU ammunition use.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

David wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
I'm interested in qualified scientific studies in this area. Have you
any citations?

http://www.thefourreasons.org/duresources.htm

I'm afraid I was looking for recent studies from peer-reviewed medical
journals or conferences, or at least from research centers that
published the detailed experiements. This seems to be a bibliography at
a partisan site.

Here you go. Peer review to your heart's content:

http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiatio.../en/index.html

More of the same. DU will hurt you IF YOU CAN MANAGE TO GET ANY IN YOU.
We knew that.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

m II wrote:
http://www.firethistime.org/extremedeformities.htm

What an extreme waste of time this is chasing shadows! I didn't have to
be a doctor to see *immediately* that this bozo was talking about
nutritional deficiencies; folate is not a component of DU.

"My own opinion is that DU is a catalyst, magnifying the problems brought
about by poor nutrition."

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

You ever breathed welding fumes for a considerable lenght of time
before? Breathing atomized particles of depleted uranium is much,much
worse.
cuhulin

"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:

In article , David
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 10:14:40 -0500, "Howard C. Berkowitz"
wrote:

In article , Carter-K8VT
wrote:

wrote:

DU does not atomize.

That was the original thinking. Studies have since shown that DU
particles become small enough to become wind borne and have been found
up to 25 miles from the impact site.

Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.

Also not true. The latest studies *have* found significant amounts of DU
retained in humans.

I'm interested in qualified scientific studies in this area. Have you
any citations?
http://www.thefourreasons.org/duresources.htm

I'm afraid I was looking for recent studies from peer-reviewed medical
journals or conferences, or at least from research centers that
published the detailed experiements. This seems to be a bibliography at
a partisan site.

Here goes with the publications:

1. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol. 2005 Sep;56(3):227-32.
2. Health Phys. 2005 Sep;89(3):267-73
3. Appl Radiat Isot. 2005 Sep;63(3):381-99
4.Mil Med. 2005 Apr;170(4):277-84
5. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2005;32(1):58-60

I could list a total of about 146 papers but I'd prefer not to do so.

JB

John Barnard wrote:

"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:

In article , David
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 10:14:40 -0500, "Howard C. Berkowitz"
wrote:

In article , Carter-K8VT
wrote:

wrote:

DU does not atomize.

That was the original thinking. Studies have since shown that DU
particles become small enough to become wind borne and have been found
up to 25 miles from the impact site.

Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.

Also not true. The latest studies *have* found significant amounts of DU
retained in humans.

I'm interested in qualified scientific studies in this area. Have you
any citations?
http://www.thefourreasons.org/duresources.htm

I'm afraid I was looking for recent studies from peer-reviewed medical
journals or conferences, or at least from research centers that
published the detailed experiements. This seems to be a bibliography at
a partisan site.

Here goes with the publications:

1. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol. 2005 Sep;56(3):227-32.
2. Health Phys. 2005 Sep;89(3):267-73
3. Appl Radiat Isot. 2005 Sep;63(3):381-99
4.Mil Med. 2005 Apr;170(4):277-84
5. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2005;32(1):58-60

I could list a total of about 146 papers but I'd prefer not to do so.

Speaking of papers, is there a particular brand you prefer for your weed?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

John Barnard wrote:

"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:

In article , David
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 10:14:40 -0500, "Howard C. Berkowitz"
wrote:

In article , Carter-K8VT
wrote:

wrote:

DU does not atomize.

That was the original thinking. Studies have since shown that DU
particles become small enough to become wind borne and have been found
up to 25 miles from the impact site.

Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.

Also not true. The latest studies *have* found significant amounts of DU
retained in humans.

I'm interested in qualified scientific studies in this area. Have you
any citations?
http://www.thefourreasons.org/duresources.htm

I'm afraid I was looking for recent studies from peer-reviewed medical
journals or conferences, or at least from research centers that
published the detailed experiements. This seems to be a bibliography at
a partisan site.

Here goes with the publications:

1. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol. 2005 Sep;56(3):227-32.
2. Health Phys. 2005 Sep;89(3):267-73
3. Appl Radiat Isot. 2005 Sep;63(3):381-99
4.Mil Med. 2005 Apr;170(4):277-84
5. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2005;32(1):58-60

I could list a total of about 146 papers but I'd prefer not to do so.

I think there are many here who would prefer that you didn't as well.

LMAO at Dr. CanaDork.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

wrote:

Carter-K8VT wrote:
wrote:

DU does not atomize.

That was the original thinking. Studies have since shown that DU
particles become small enough to become wind borne and have been found
up to 25 miles from the impact site.

Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.

Also not true. The latest studies *have* found significant amounts of DU
retained in humans.

This is someting I've been trying to follow. Can you offer a poiner to
a study or a sory about it?

Failing that, do you know how long between exposure and measuring the
DU in the system?

This may help with what you want:

Biokinetic modeling of uranium in man after injection and ingestion
Radiat Environ Biophys. 2005 May;44(1):29-40. Epub 2005 Apr 14

JB