Is this ‘civilised’ country supplying DU ammunition – a risk to human & environmental health?
Republished from Nuclear Industries
Since the March reports of the UK government’s intention to supply DU ammunition to Ukraine, the media has been silent, merely adding in June that the Biden administration is to equip tanks with to be sent to Ukraine with DU ammunition (Wall Street Journal) , Many were deeply disturbed to read Baroness Goldie’s answer to a parliamentary question:
Alongside our granting of a squadron of Challenger 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine, we will be providing ammunition including armour piercing rounds which contain depleted uranium. Such rounds are highly effective in defeating modern tanks and armoured vehicles.
The government’s own website warns that if DU enters the body, it can potentially cause damage from the inside (internal exposure) either through irradiation or by chemical action. It can enter the body by inhalation (breathing in fine dust), ingestion via the mouth, contamination of an open wound, or, on the battlefield, by the embedding of shrapnel fragments
A paper from the World Health Organization (WHO) reports: “The health effects of natural and depleted uranium are due to chemical effects and not to radiation . . . Potentially depleted uranium has both chemical and radiological toxicity with the two important target organs being the kidneys and the lungs”.
The Institute of Medicine (above) has investigated the implication of preconceptional paternal irradiation as a causal factor in childhood cancer
“. . . the data indicate that there exists a route for transgenerational transmission of factor(s) leading to genomic instability in F1 progeny from DU-exposed fathers”. (Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Health Effects Associated with Exposures During the Gulf War (2010). Though this evidence refers to laboratory research on rats it should not be dismissed; their genetic, biological and behaviour characteristics closely resemble those of humans and many symptoms of human conditions can be replicated in mice and rats. (Live Science.)
The United States, United Kingdom, Israel, and France all opposed a United Nations resolution to document depleted uranium in war – and though the Ministry of Defence disputes the risks of DU, it recommends “ongoing surveillance” for veterans with embedded DU fragments. (Read the comprehensive article in the Harvard International Review by Sydney Young, left)
Instead of resting on the statements that there is no proven causal link between the damage to health, which may be dure to other factors, any truly civilised country would honour the precautionary principle.
“This principle, widely accepted in international law and policy documents, states that you do not have to wait for absolute scientific certainty in order to take action to prevent further deterioration of the situation at hand”
(Wouter Veening, President of the Institute for Environmental Security, The Hague, in the Financial Times)
o
Posted on July 31, 2023, in Bad decisions by government, Environment, Government, Health, Warfare and tagged chemical effects, embedded DU fragments, Ukriane, uranuim, USA, Wouter Veening. Bookmark the permalink. 1 Comment.
Political Concern 
I agree your concerns about DU weapons. I am very surprised to hear they are being supplied to Ukraine. I had believed that DU munitions were obsolete and were scrapped. There is extensive evidence of ill-health caused by the use of DU munitions in Iraq and Bosnia. US veterans were affected and Italian NATO troops serving in the former Yugoslavia made a successful claim for recompense for ill-health effects.
I alerted my MP, Sarah Olney who raised a question in the House of Commons. A junior Minister of Defense answered her question by denying that DU weapons posed a health hazard. He said the harmless consequences were likely to be an inconsequential residue of heavy metal locally, in a small area adjacent to any impact. This is very ancient false reassurance dating from 30 years or more and not revised as evidence and science has demonstrated the hazards associated with use of DU weapons.
In view of the government reassurance contained in the parliamentary reply, Sarah Olney tells me that she doesn’t intend to pursue the issue for two reasons. Her office and staffing is inadequate to follow up on an issue like this, not part of her brief and not directly concerned with issues relevant to the constituents of Richmond Park. The Lib/Dem position is support for arming Ukraine in defence of the country.
You might like to ask Sarah Olney about her question and the official reply. The least she could do would be to refer you to the relevant Hansard entry if you are interested. Do quote me in any correspondence. I am a constituent and followed up investigation of my own after the invasion of Iraq and found enough evidence to satisfy myself that DU dust resulting from impact is breathable and can easily enter the body since aerosol particles are too small to be filtered out by human lungs. Via the body’s circulatory systems the poisonous particles can be distributed around the body and may affect organs and glands. Many particles are likely to be emitted via the urine but not all.