From the article about the featured \"investigator\'s\" reports -
\"All (official UN agencies and others) have ignored them and failed to conduct their own investigations.\"
This article makes no sense. Internally, it uses crossed-up logic and inference. Externally, it doesn\'t jive with my professional understanding of uranium sources, hazards, or effects.
Uranium is ubiquitous in the Earth\'s crust - there is more uranium than lead in surface rocks, for example. It\'s everywhere! It\'s radioactivity is of trivial health concern and it\'s heavy metal toxicity to the kidneys (like lead) is orders of magnitude greater than its hazard from ionizing radiation.
One technical point is that the US government owns thousands of tons of clean depleted uranium - projectile weapons like armor-piercing bullets is one of the few uses for the stuff. The article \"hinted\" that heavier isotopes have been found. These would come from reprocessing nuclear reactor fuel and recycling the uranium from that process into the production of projectiles. This would be a bad practice since the depleted uranium would then have quantities of plutonium, americium, etc which are bad actors, health-wise. Still, there is no incentive for the US to do so since they got a huge storage problem with all the clean depleted uranium laying around and the clean stuff would be cheaper and easier to handle in manufacturing. If they are using reprocessed fuel for weapons, then they should indeed stop that practice. Still, I doubt that they do.
Frankly, this article is the worst form of bunk. Just propaganda.
Red, please read these things CRITICALLY before you post them.
Bookmarks