WHO ‘suppressed’ scientific study into depleted uranium cancer fears in Iraq

[Guest guest]

http://www.sundayherald.com/40096

 

WHO ‘suppressed’ scientific study into depleted

uranium cancer fears in Iraq

 

Radiation experts warn in unpublished report that DU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.”

 

22 February 2004