User:Mythphys

The comment "Normal functioning of the kidney, brain, liver, heart, and numerous other systems can be affected by uranium exposure." is misleading in that it does not point out that the effects depend on the quantity internalized. The maximum quantity taken in by troops was extremely small in all military engagements and the internalized DU for post war exposure of civilians is even smaller The Tribunal Service comment needs to be qualified in that they are not a scientific body and are not qualified to assess the depleted uranium issue. The section on reproductive health effects is seriously out of line, including unverified reports and not including careful studies with the opposite conclusions. The citation described as "A 2005 epidemiology review concluded: "In aggregate the human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in offspring of persons exposed to DU." The cited paper is an appalling example of a lack of scientific rigor and neutrality. When I read this report I was in a state of disbelief that this paper went through a peer review. I would be happy to elaborate on my review of the paper if anyone is interested. For the Health considerations section the comment on cultured cells is misleading. Cultured cells do not reveal anything surprising with regard to depleted uranium. The question is not whether depleted uranium exposure can cause health effects, the question is what is the probability of health effects given the amount of depleted uranium internalized, and based on scientific investigations (Royal Society, Sandia Labs, the answer is extremely small. A few highly exposed soldiers (~3) in tanks hit by DU weapons have about a 1% risk of lung cancer (above the average risk for unexposed troops). These troops also were at risk of kidney failure from chemical toxicity;however, the toxic effect is an acute effect and was not observed for the highly exposed individuals. All other effects appear to be entirely negligible. For the section on studies showing negligible effects: for the Sandia study, the comment "... but Marshall did not consider reproductive health effects." is incorrect. The study did, in fact, examine reproductive health effects due to radiation effects from DU exposure. In a later peer reviewed paper "Gulf war depleted uranium effects” (jes 2008) the findings of the Sandia report were presented and updated to include possible chemically-induced reproductive health effects.