Reflection Final Post - Risk perception of uranium used for military purposes: S. Crawford Continued... It is understandable that society likes to be caution when it comes to health effects in connection with possible radiation and/or chemical toxicity of uranium. Studies are needed to improve our understanding of the extent, reversibility , and possibility of threshold levels for kidney and other target organ damage. Toxicity will be a function of route of exposure, particle solubility, contact time, and rate of elimination. WHO (2001 ) has set a tolerable daily intake (T DI) of 0.5 µg/kg BW/d for soluble U (more toxic) and 5 µg/kg BW/d for insoluble (less toxic), with an inhalation limit of 1 µg/m3 (either U solubility ). As discussed in class, background exposure may also be important in assessing the estimated exposure to a contaminant and should be considered. Background exposure of DU to civilians include use of DU in counterweights of aircrafts, industrial radiography equipment, radiation shielding in medical radiation therapy , and containers used to transport radioactive materials (Bleise et al. 2003). One of the uncertainties in the population studies of veterans in the Gulf war includes pre- war exposure of DU and overall health assessments. Better characterisation of exposure before, during and after use in conflict will allow countries to better assess the risk associated with DU use for military purposes. However, a bias might exist in countries that put more weight on the benefit of DU use in their militaries, while others are concerned with the potential but unproven long- term health effects of DU. Overall, the risk of DU is a controversial topic with many viewpoints, some of which should be considered with caution. Visit the Toxicology website page usask.ca/toxicology/student/create-hera/index.php for references, and the complete reflection. Thank you to S.Crawford.
Posted on: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 14:42:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015