1) WAR IS
HARMFUL TO HEALTH!
(like humans didn't know that since the stone ages...)
There is a lot of noise upon the weapons used in Bosnia and
Kosovo
lately because of what appears to be an increased incidence of
leucemia among
soldiers.
Was it really for the bombs that caused all this? First of all,
the
problem seams to be quite more complex than just radioactivity
emmited by the
bomb rests (remember? it should be DEPLETED uranium)... During
the NATO
meeting on this subject an imbecile hanged arround with a piece
of ammunition
in the pocket trying to prove that there was no danger: WRONG!
The problem
-if there is one- consists in the powder emmited after the
explosion that can
be easily inhalated or absorbed by water and soil and turn back
to humans
by eating and drinking water, therefore allowing radioactive
and/or toxic
material to get tight contacts with tissues and physiological
proccesses like
blood leucocytes. However, one should expect more neuropathy
episodes than
cancer due to depleted uranium, which is a heavy metal
(neurotoxic as all
others, e.g.: lead) and with a quite low emmitence of
radioactivity. Voices
refer on traces of plutonium in the upon reffered bombs and that
could explain
in part the mystery (if the percentadge is high enough). Another
thought (and
this one seams to be at least scientifically based) shows towards
the pluri-
vaccins soldiers receive before going there. That is, a set of
10-12 vaccins
all at once against diseases endemic at the place they go... This
in turn
generates high levels of stimulation for the immune system
(leucocytes mainly)
and could destabilize the fine equilibrium and lead to cancer of
this
particular system (leucemia) in predisposed subjects (with family
history of
cancer etc.).
A serious epidemiologic research should be carried out before
saying
anything more upon the causes of these leucemic episodes. At
least some of
the factors to be taken in consideration should be:
1) distance of soldiers' site of action from bombing site(s)
2) quantity of uranium in the bombing site calculated as an index
that should
consider amount of bombs and different types used to describe the
total amount
of uranium released in air as powder (not the radioactivity
measured now as a
great quantity maybe alrady absorbed by soil water and humans).
3)the time interval between bombing and soldiers arriving.
4)time of permanance of the soldiers
5)how many and what vaccins they received before arriving
6)other habits like diet etc.
7)personal risk factors (use of specific drugs, family history
etc.)
8)appropriate control groups (trying to keep most factoras equal
so to judge
only upon one or two at a time).
It's obvious this is a complex and time-spending problem... My
opinion? Don't
use stuff you don't know how it works and what it does... so ban
the God-
damned uranium bombs 'till further notice! But in any case, let's
not
drammatize excessively: war is noxious even if it's done with
stones... People
WILL get hurt and they are NOT going to be only the
"bad" guys. Remember? This
is real life, not a movie!
