RE: [CPEO-MEF] DU munitions

[loc@icx.net]

I apologize if my previous post sounded "angry" but I'm awfully tired of 
the fear-mongering over issues such as DU.  If you can't support your 
case with science, then you don't have a case.  Anecdotal evidence 
doesn't cut it.

For those of you who are interested in part of the scientific basis for 
my opinions, feel free to have a look at the work done by a panel of 
experts on DU.  The link for the full report is at
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/radprot/ about 2/3 down the page. 

Below I've copied excerpts from the March 2001 press release giving
conclusions of the report.

Best regards as always,
Susan Gawarecki

Depleted uranium: Commission receives scientific experts' opinion
DN: IP/01/315 Date: 06/03/2001

The European Commission today received the opinion of the group of 
independent scientific experts, established according to Article 31 of 
the Euratom Treaty, on the possible radiological health effects of
depleted uranium. On the basis of the information available to date, the 
experts have concluded that radiological exposure to depleted 
uraniumcould not result in a detectable effect on human health. 
...
Having assessed possible exposure to DU, taking into account potential
pathways and realistic scenarios of exposure to man, the experts
concluded that radiological exposure to depleted uranium could not
result in a detectable effect on human health (e.g. cancer). 

As regards leukaemia, the latency period is shorter than for solid
cancers, but uranium accumulates very little in blood forming organs
such as bone marrow. Therefore, the experts concluded that the
calculated risk of leukaemia is far below the risk of solid cancers. 

Exposure to depleted uranium through contamination of the environment or 
the food chain has also been considered. Scenarios included deposition 
of depleted uranium on vegetation, ingestion of contaminated water or 
soil or consumption of contaminated foodstuffs. The experts concluded 
that resulting doses through such means would be extremely low. 

On the basis of the available knowledge about chemical toxicity, one
would expect to observe uranium renal toxicity before any other damage
(including cancer). The possibility of a combined effect of exposure to 
toxic or carcinogenic chemicals and to radiation can not be excluded but 
there is no evidence to support this hypothesis. Under the scenarios the 
experts looked at, exposures to DU give low doses, comparable to natural 
background levels. Therefore there is no reason to believe that 
chemicals may change the magnitude of the potential radiation effects. 
....
--