Cover Image

PAPERBACK
$59.00



View/Hide Left Panel

tainties in its validity, because it is the most conservative or protective approach (that is, it yields the highest estimated risk for a given exposure or dose).

In the context of the committee’s work, a key element of the examination of the possibility of adverse health effects of depleted uranium was the presence (or absence) of direct scientific evidence relevant to Gulf War veterans that could support the adoption of a no-threshold model for depleted-uranium cancer risk. The validity of the linear no-threshold model, especially for radiogenic cancer, is of greatest uncertainty at doses below 25 rem, the very range of doses to Gulf War veterans considered here. Thus, although a no-threshold model is used to estimate risk to a population, especially at higher doses, and would imply risk related to any level of depleted-uranium exposure, the committee chose to focus on direct evidence rather than a conservative, theory-driven approach in making its final determinations even while it remained mindful of the issues described here.

REFERENCES

AEPI (Army Environmental Policy Institute). 1995. Health and environmental consequences of depleted uranium use in the U.S. Army. Arlington, VA: U.S. Army Environmental Policy Institute.

ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry). 1999a. Toxicological profile for ionizing radiation. Atlanta, GA: Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

———. 1999b. Toxicological profile for uranium. Atlanta, GA: Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Betti, M. 2003. Civil use of depleted uranium. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 64(2-3):113-119.

Bland, D. J., R. J. Rona, D. Coggon, J. Anderson, N. Greenberg, L. Hull, and S. Wessely. 2007. Urinary isotopic analysis in the UK armed forces: No evidence of depleted uranium absorption in combat and other personnel in Iraq. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 64:834-838.

Bleise, A., P. R. Danesi, and W. Burkart. 2003. Properties, use and health effects of depleted uranium (DU): A general overview. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 64(2-3):93-112.

Bolton, J. P. G., and C. R. M. Foster. 2002. Battlefield use of depleted uranium and the health of veterans. Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps 148(3):221-229.

Burkart, W., P. R. Danesi, and J. H. Hendry. 2005. Properties, use and health effects of depleted uranium. International Congress Series 1276:133-136.

Cantaluppi, C., and S. Degetto. 2000. Civilian and military uses of depleted uranium: Environmental and health problems. Annali di Chimica 90(11-12):665-676.

DOD (Department of Defense). 2000. Environmental exposure report: Depleted uranium in the Gulf (II). Washington, DC: Department of Defense.

———. 2007. Operation Iraqi Freedom depleted uranium bioassay results—sixth semiannual report and request for data submission. Washington, DC: Department of Defense.

Eidson, A. F. 1994. The effect of solubility on inhaled uranium compound clearance: A review. Health Physics 67(1):1-14.

Harley, N. H., E. C. Foulkes, L. H. Hilborne, A. Hudson, and C. R. Anthony. 1999. A review of the scientific literature as it pertains to Gulf War illnesses: Depleted uranium. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). 1975. Report of the task group on reference man. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement