Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Afghans' uranium levels spark alert
BBC News ^ | 5/22/2003 | Alex Kirby

Posted on 05/22/2003 8:51:39 PM PDT by TheConservator

A small sample of Afghan civilians have shown "astonishing" levels of uranium in their urine, an independent scientist says.

Critics suspect new weapons were used in Afghanistan He said they had the same symptoms as some veterans of the 1991 Gulf war.

But he found no trace of the depleted uranium (DU) some scientists believe is implicated in Gulf War syndrome.

Other researchers suggest new types of radioactive weapons may have been used in Afghanistan.

The scientist is Dr Asaf Durakovic, of the Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC) based in Washington DC.

Dr Durakovic, a former US army colonel who is now a professor of medicine, said in 2000 he had found "significant" DU levels in two-thirds of the 17 Gulf veterans he had tested.

In May 2002 he sent a team to Afghanistan to interview and examine civilians there.

The UMRC says: "Independent monitoring of the weapon types and delivery systems indicate that radioactive, toxic uranium alloys and hard-target uranium warheads were being used by the coalition forces."

Shock results

It says Nangarhar province was a strategic target zone during the Afghan conflict for the deployment of a new generation of deep-penetrating "cave-busting" and seismic shock warheads.

The UMRC says its team identified several hundred people suffering from illnesses and conditions similar to those of Gulf veterans, probably because they had inhaled uranium dust.

Bomb damage was widespread

To test its hypothesis that some form of uranium weapon had been used, the UMRC sent urine specimens from 17 Afghans for analysis at an independent UK laboratory.

It says: "Without exception, every person donating urine specimens tested positive for uranium internal contamination.

"The results were astounding: the donors presented concentrations of toxic and radioactive uranium isotopes between 100 and 400 times greater than in the Gulf veterans tested in 1999.

"If UMRC's Nangarhar findings are corroborated in other communities across Afghanistan, the country faces a severe public health disaster... Every subsequent generation is at risk."

It says troops who fought in Afghanistan and the staff of aid agencies based in Afghanistan are also at risk.

Scientific acceptance

Dr Durakovic's team used as a control group three Afghans who showed no signs of contamination. They averaged 9.4 nanograms of uranium per litre of urine.

The average for his 17 "randomly-selected" patients was 315.5 nanograms, he said. Some were from Jalalabad, and others from Kabul, Tora Bora, and Mazar-e-Sharif. A 12-year-old boy living near Kabul had 2,031 nanograms.

Troops and aid workers could be at risk

The maximum permissible level for members of the public in the US is 12 nanograms per litre, Dr Durakovic said.

A second UMRC visit to Afghanistan in September 2002 found "a potentially much broader area and larger population of contamination". It collected 25 more urine samples, which bore out the findings from the earlier group.

Dr Durakovic said he was "stunned" by the results he had found, which are to be published shortly in several scientific journals.

Identical outcome

He told BBC News Online: "In Afghanistan there were no oil fires, no pesticides, nobody had been vaccinated - all explanations suggested for the Gulf veterans' condition.

"But people had exactly the same symptoms. I'm certainly not saying Afghanistan was a vast experiment with new uranium weapons. But use your common sense."

The UK Defence Ministry says it used no DU weapons in Afghanistan, nor any others containing uranium in any form.

A spokesman for the US Department of Defense told BBC News Online the US had not used DU weapons there.

He could not comment on Dr Durakovic's findings of elevated uranium levels in Afghan civilians.


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; asafdurakovic; durakovic; kandahar; nutjob; umrc; uranium; uraniummine; uraniummines; uraniummining
I hadn't seen this elsewhere.

Speculation as to the source?

1 posted on 05/22/2003 8:51:39 PM PDT by TheConservator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TheConservator
Disaffected uranium mine workers looking for a union representative.
2 posted on 05/22/2003 9:04:02 PM PDT by Wolverine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheConservator
3 problems with this:
1. We did not use depleted uranium rounds widely in Afganistan. Why? Because they didn't have tanks (duh).
2. Heavy metal contamination is common in many parts of the world that use unfiltered ground water supplies (duh, again)
3. Anybody ask the Russians about weapons they used? They used poison gas there... Uranium has a long half life.
DUH!!!!!
More crap from people that don't really understand what goes on unless it suits their perfect little picture. IE. USA bad, USA evil, USA has money... the Russians don't, so why blame them or try and make them accountable.
3 posted on 05/22/2003 9:07:56 PM PDT by cavtrooper21 ("..he's not heavy, sir. He's my brother...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheConservator
The Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation is running an on-going anti-american disinformation campaign:

The slanders against the US account of Private Lynch's rescue

Exaggeration of Iraqi "chaos"

Claims of US "war crimes" in Iraq

The "massacre" at Mazar i-Sharif (sp)

Dusting of old, rancid "war crimes" and DU claims from the 1991 war

Lastly, Durkovic is a Serb with a well established Euro DU hysteria axe to grind against the US

4 posted on 05/22/2003 9:11:58 PM PDT by pierrem15
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheConservator
Good Questions:

Is uranium naturally-occurring in Afghanistan?

Did Al-Queda spill some of its "dirty bomb" materials?

Which way does the wind blow from Pakistani nuclear test sites?

Did the Soviets have some nuclear material in Afghanistan?

And, of course, did the US use (almost) depleted uranium weapons?

5 posted on 05/22/2003 9:14:19 PM PDT by cookcounty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: TheConservator
Probably comes from the standing orders to "nuke 'em til they glow, then shoot 'em in the dark".
7 posted on 05/22/2003 9:41:22 PM PDT by ALASKA ("..with some fava beans and a nice chianti.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
"...In January 1984 a report was published by the chief engineer of the Afghan Geological Survey Department of Soviet uranium mining in Afghanistan. It revealed that uranium production was begun in the mountains of Khawaja Rawash north of Kabul after the discovery of deposits in 1983. Soviet engineers were also said to be mining uranium at Koh Mir Daoud, between Herat and Shindand, and also in the Khakriz area of Qandahar province. The uranium projects were restricted to Soviet personnel in order to maintain secrecy and security. All production was sent to the Soviet Union..."

http://www.gl.iit.edu/govdocs/afghanistan/Industry.html
8 posted on 05/22/2003 9:47:17 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
You've surfaced the best suspect: "Which way does the wind blow from Pakistani nuclear test sites?"

Two possibilities (and they could both be in operation): 1) the Pakistani tests 'delivered' a significant contamination toward Afghanistan or a Taliban coop program allowed Paki testing undergorund in Afghanistan; 2) Pakistan provided Uranium and or a bomb for testing to the al Qaeda goons in the Afghan mountains, and our conventional bombing of those mountains released some of the contaminates.

9 posted on 05/22/2003 9:53:13 PM PDT by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
When I WAG, I WAG good, huh!
WAG, for you non-milspec types is Wild a$$#D guess.
10 posted on 05/23/2003 2:48:18 PM PDT by cavtrooper21 ("..he's not heavy, sir. He's my brother...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson