Conflict in Lebanon and our Environment

A friend gave me this link.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14138687/from/RS.2/

Apparently an Israeli plane bombed a coastal power plant in Lebanon which spilled 110,000 barrels of oil into the Mediterranean Sea, endangering the marine life in the area, including endangered species of turtle.

I encourage everyone to spread the word on the atrocity and encourage our politicians to put pressure on our government to stop sending aid to Isreal.

 

"War is not good for children and other living things"

 

"War is not healthy for children and other living things"

 

I just find it extremely disgusting that people aren't caring more about this issue. It's not even on television (big surprise)...and the clean up can't even go in there until the conflict stops...which is not going to be any time soon. This is going to affect more than just Lebanon soon...it's going to affect the whole Mediterranean region.

 

I think that people are more concerned with the dead and injured people than the wars ecological effect on the Mediteranian. I think there is also a certain fatigue about the war. People know that its bad and are tired of hearing that its worse than they thought.
What is probably the most frustraing for everyone is that nothing that we (I mean you and me type "we" not USA "we") can do will decrease the death in Lebanon. All we can do is tell each other how bad things are and discuss which bad news is worse than the other bad news.

 

I don't doubt that this whole conflict in general is terrible...however...I think the ecological damage will have greater consequences in the future than the casualties. I know that probably sounds really insensitive, but I think it is true.

 

War is probably the most enviornmentally destructive act.

 

I wasn't disagreeing with you or the priority of your concerns. My point is that the inability to do anything leads to people who basicly agree with each other (THE WAR MUST STOP) arguing about silly minor points ("You don't care enough about the seacoast" "You don't care enough about the people").
In the long term, you are probably right, ecological damage has a way of turning up in odd places.
BTW, there is an increase in birth defects in Iraq that is being attributed to the use of depleated Uranium in this Iraq war. The current war has passed the previous Iraq war as the cause of Iraqi birth defects.

 

DU Claims of health defects are fairly dubious. DU is somewhat toxic, so it can pose a danger if it is inhaled or strongly in water supplies. It is not strongly radioactive


That's not to say it isn't possible, if it was it would be due to increased exposure to toxic compounds of DU, which is more likely to cause sickness or weakness.

It's hard to say because healthcare is so limited there because it's crazy. The attacks there are not only horrific and prevelant, but the state of war has devistated the health care community so much that it's difficult for doctors to diagnose things like health effects related from envionrmental factors.

It also means people are also more likely to die from not only war related causes, but also causes which you wouldn't immediatly think of (general health issues that aren't able to be addresed to to the strain on heathcare)

 

i just copied the message to my myspace bulletin

 

i've had discussions about this before. no one who believes du to be safe will actually put any in their mouth. if its not safe enough to do this then a seriously big question mark needs to come after the words DU.
would you put some in your mouth?

 

Read much, Guy? You understand the difference between radioactive and toxic, don't you?

No I would not put a toxic metal in my mouth, nor did I imply eating or inhaling it was safe at all.

 

1 st post by lodui:"DU Claims of health defects are fairly dubious. DU is somewhat toxic, so it can pose a danger if it is inhaled or strongly in water supplies. It is not strongly radioactive"

2nd post by lodui now says: "No I would not put a toxic metal in my mouth, nor did I imply eating or inhaling it was safe at all.

guy says : looking at your two statements their is a problem, either the health effects are dubious OR you ARE implying that it is safe

2nd post"Read much, Guy? You understand the difference between radioactive and toxic, don't you?"

guy's post - "i've had discussions about this before. no one who believes du to be safe will actually put any in their mouth. if its not safe enough to do this then a seriously big question mark needs to come after the words DU.
would you put some in your mouth?"

guy says: actually, you've stuffed yourself, i've not mentioned anything about toxic and radioactive in this post, it is you that has decided that i have said this. (du is radioactive by the way, it is also as you said a heavy metal).

to conclude: you can't decide whether the claims are dubious or whether it is safe. you talk about dubious "health defects" yet go on to say that du is "mildly" radioactive, toxic etc etc...

(stop trying to win the debate!!!!!!!!! for the sake of winning. do some research, open your mind a bit. i do. when someone comes up with a point i think about it AND i will say i was WRONG. my feeling is that hippyland is somewhere you can learn. look for the truth. break the mold. i have to go through this stuff everytime. maybe i need to learn from this ... )

 

We can do something, don't ever fall into the trap that politicians want you to believe "that we can't do anything, so don't talk about it". That's what they want. Talk with your friends and relatives make them aware. Awareness and knowledge is the only way to combat media hype or non-hype. Funny that what Mel Gibson had to say is eath shaking news, but knowledge that the mediterrean sea is being polluted is of no consequence. Don't buy the spin, speak out wherever and whenever you can!

 

This topic deserves more discussion than "bird flu", which will only line the pockets those that bought stock in Gilead. I say speak out and speak out loudly.

 

Guy I'm hardly arguing. I'm just trying to educate you. You asked me if I would put a toxic metal in my mouth, which I would not.

Radioactive means exposure to the subtance will mutate cells, which is very unlikely, and never supported by research into the isssue. DU is radioactive. Not strongly enough to cause any radioactive damage to cells.

It is toxic, meaning if it were ingested by a very large amount seeping into a well, or if you were in a vehicle that got hit by an artillery shell you could inhale large amounts of dust, you would be damaged by the poison. It's about as poisonous as lead.

The idea that there are large amounts of birth defects due to DU use is very dubious, as I've never seen it supported by any credible data.

 

as far as i'm aware most elements have isotopes of that element, that is they are chemically identical but have differing numbers of neutrons. it is these neutron numbers within the nucleus that cause the nucleus to have a freak out. when the nucleus has its freak out it releases things such as helium, electrons and gamma rays. we call these things alpha, beta and gamma radiation respectively. these things come rocketing out of the nucleus they are called ionising radiations because they have the ability to knock electrons off atoms and thus making them ions - atoms lacking an electron or having too many electrons. for us this means that the cells of or body absorb this radiation if we get too near it, aren't protected from it or ingest it - when this happens it is most likely that a corruption of the dna occurs and hence the result being cancer/birth defects.
background radiation is the level of naturally occurring ionising radiation. when du is used more ionising radiation sources are brought into a local area. some of it may stay there, whilst some of it will be blown away as part of a radioactive cloud. either way this garbage thus dumped enters the food chain, ionising living cells in its path. despite the numerous nuclear accidents and detonations that have occurred since the nuclear age, it is obvious that enough radiation is never enough. any reasonable, informed , sane and knowledgable person would find the notion of using radioactive waste worrying.
statistics are only as good as the references that they apply them to. logic will always win the day.
depleted uranium is either "DU Claims of health defects are fairly dubious" or "DU is somewhat toxic" you can't say both. its either safe or dangerous.
i wish you well on your travels

 

You have a basic understanding of what radiation is, alpha decay (alpha particles) do not usually have enough energy to escape the nucleus.

Alpha radiation does escape the nucleus through quantum tunneling.
http://www.physicspost.com/articles.php?articleId=173

Alpha Radiation cannot go for more then a few centimeters through the air, and alpha radiation particles cannot penetrate the skin of living things. Radioactive damage could happen if an alpha radiation emiting particle were ingested or inhaled.

Depleted Uranium emits Alpha Radiation. Because of this it is safe to come in contact with, and is commonly used in sail boats, and radiation sheilding (Because alpha particles are very effective at deflecting other forms of radiation)

If DU were radiactive enough to make humans sick, we'd have thousands of boating enthusiasts and industrial workers for anyalasis.You're right logic will win the day.

IS DU very dangerous in the enviornment? No. Is it safe to ingest? No.

DU is about as dangerous as lead. Is warfare good for the enviornment? Not at all.

 

du when used by military turns into fine dust that is inhaled, alphaemitter lodges in lung - lung cancer death. put some of this stuff in your mouth and then tell me your opinion of this stuff. you say

"IS DU very dangerous in the enviornment? No.
Is it safe to ingest? No.

has it occurred to YOU that you are the environment??

despite it not being "very" dangerous ,you being the environment are still unwilling to put it in your mouth. i will be very interested to see your case for not being part of the environment. perhaps your house and person is somehow removed form the earth???

you can't have it both ways, you say its dangerous to ingest then you tell me its not "very" dangerous in the environment.

regards

 

Isn't that how it always works? It's sad that people care more about Mel Gibson being thrown in the slammer than our ENVIRONMENT... I guess that's what kind of society we live in, though.

And I agree, it's important to speak out!