現在地 HOME > 掲示板
> Ψ空耳の丘Ψ33 > 879.html
★阿修羅♪
|
現在地 HOME > 掲示板
> Ψ空耳の丘Ψ33 > 879.html
★阿修羅♪
|
|
| Tweet |
「WHOの研究などによっても劣化ウラン弾が健康に影響を及ぼすことは認めら
れておりません」と川口が何回でも胸を張って？答弁していることはご存じの通
り。
ところがそのWHO、内部の核医学の専門家の、DUは人体に非常に有害であると
いうレポートの公表を禁じたというのである。以下の記事で、まさしくそのレポー
トを書いた（それは今sunday herald紙が入手している）Keith Baverstock博士
自身が証言。
もちろんWHOは抑圧を否定しているが、２００１年にかかれたこの研究が今日
まで公表されていないのは事実だ。川口も頭を丸めてお詫びしないといけない。
重要なのは、Baverstock博士によると、DUの害は放射性物質と化学物質の複合
（カクテル現象というらしい）で引き起こされる。自衛隊は放射線の害しか考慮
していない。また国連の別の専門家は、DU汚染の建物や土が「再建」工事で再利
用される際の幸治は非常に危険と指摘。自衛隊はノーマークだ。
−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
sunday herald online 22 February 2004
WHO ‘suppressed’ scientific study into depleted uranium cancer fears
in Iraq
http://www.sundayherald.com/40096
Radiation experts warn in unpublished report that DU weapons used by
Allies in Gulf war pose long-term health risk
By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor
An expert report warning that the long-term health of Iraq’s civilian
population would be endangered by British and US depleted uranium (DU)
weapons has been kept secret.
The study by three leading radiation scientists cautioned that children
and adults could contract cancer after breathing in dust containing DU,
which is radioactive and chemically toxic. But it was blocked from
publication by the World Health Organisation (WHO), which employed the
main author, Dr Keith Baverstock, as a senior radiation advisor. He
alleges that it was deliberately suppressed, though this is denied by
WHO.
Baverstock also believes that if the study had been published when it
was completed in 2001, there would have been more pressure on the US and
UK to limit their use of DU weapons in last year’s war, and to clean up
afterwards.
Hundreds of thousands of DU shells were fired by coalition tanks and
planes during the conflict, and there has been no comprehensive
decontamination. Experts from the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP) have so far not been allowed into Iraq to assess the pollution.
“Our study suggests that the widespread use of depleted uranium weapons
in Iraq could pose a unique health hazard to the civilian population,”
Baverstock told the Sunday Herald.
“There is increasing scientific evidence the radio activity and the
chemical toxicity of DU could cause more damage to human cells than is
assumed.”
Baverstock was the WHO’s top expert on radiation and health for 11
years until he retired in May last year. He now works with the
Department of Environmental Sciences at the University of Kuopio in
Finland, and was recently appointed to the UK government’s newly formed
Committee on Radio active Waste Management.
While he was a member of staff, WHO refused to give him permission to
publish the study, which was co-authored by Professor Carmel Mothersill
from McMaster University in Canada and Dr Mike Thorne, a radiation
consultant . Baverstock suspects that WHO was leaned on by a more
powerful pro-nuclear UN body, the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA).
“I believe our study was censored and suppressed by the WHO because
they didn’t like its conclusions. Previous experience suggests that WHO
officials were bowing to pressure from the IAEA, whose remit is to
promote nuclear power,” he said. “That is more than unfortunate, as
publishing the study would have helped forewarn the authorities of the
risks of using DU weapons in Iraq.”
These allegations, however, are dismissed as “totally unfounded” by
WHO. “The IAEA role was very minor,” said Dr Mike Repacholi, the WHO
coordinator of radiation and environmental health in Geneva. “The
article was not approved for publication because parts of it did not
reflect accurately what a WHO-convened group of inter national experts
considered the best science in the area of depleted uranium,” he added.
Baverstock’s study, which has now been passed to the Sunday Herald,
pointed out that Iraq’s arid climate meant that tiny particles of DU
were likely to be blown around and inhaled by civilians for years to
come. It warned that, when inside the body, their radiation and toxicity
could trigger the growth of malignant tumours.
The study suggested that the low-level radiation from DU could harm
cells adjacent to those that are directly irradiated, a phenomenon known
as “the bystander effect”. This undermines the stability of the body’
s genetic system, and is thought by many scientists to be linked to
cancers and possibly other illnesses.
In addition, the DU in Iraq, like that used in the Balkan conflict,
could turn out to be contaminated with plutonium and other radioactive
waste . That would make it more radioactive and hence more dangerous,
Baverstock argued.
“The radiation and the chemical toxicity of DU could also act together
to create a ‘cocktail effect’ that further increases the risk of
cancer. These are all worrying possibilities that urgently require more
investigation,” he said.
Baverstock’s anxiety about the health effects of DU in Iraq is shared
by Pekka Haavisto, the chairman of the UN Environment Programme’s
Post-Conflict Assessment Unit in Geneva. “It is certainly a concern in
Iraq, there is no doubt about that,” he said.
UNEP, which surveyed DU contamination in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2002,
is keen to get into Iraq to monitor the situation as soon as possible.
It has been told by the British government that about 1.9 tonnes of DU
was fired from tanks around Basra, but has no information from US forces,
which are bound to have used a lot more.
Haavisto’s greatest worry is when buildings hit by DU shells have been
repaired and reoccupied without having been properly cleaned up.
Photographic evidence suggests that this is exactly what has happened to
the ministry of planning building in Baghdad.
He also highlighted evidence that DU from weapons had been collected and
recycled as scrap in Iraq. “It could end up in a fork or a knife,” he
warned.
“It is ridiculous to leave the material lying around and not to clear
it up where adults are working and children are playing. If DU is not
taken care of, instead of decreasing the risk you are increasing it. It
is absolutely wrong.”
http://groups.yahoo.co.jp/group/nomorewar/message/12063
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。