Depleted Uranium Image Claims
October 9th, 2008
|
| Share |
Warning. The following post contains some graphic images. I have long been offended and disturbed by the graphic images which have been associated with depleted uranium which are clearly not caused by the use of depleted uranium. Recently I’ve tried to source some of the more common images that have been put out with these claims. This is some of what I have found thus far. Any help identifying more would be appreciated:
This image has been cited as being both an Iraqi fetus and the offspring of an American serviceman exposed to depleted uranium. In reality, it is a museum piece which is obvious on closer inspection of the image, which clearly shows that it is in a display case of some type.
This may be one of the specimens from the Kuntskamera Museum in St. Petersberg Russia, which houses a large collection of medical specimens including stillborn infants and fetuses. However, this image also shows up along with others as a collection of images of deformed fetuses in which the background appears to suggest it was taken at a medical institution or similar location.
The image has been floating around for some time on the web and in years past it was commonly used as an example of a stillborn fetus from the atomic bombings of Japan.
This image has also been reported numerous times to be a child who was deformed due to depleted uranium use. It shows a fetus with a very severe case of Eagle-Barrett or “Prune Belly” Syndrome. The condition affects one in 40,000 births, and depending on the severity it can sometimes be corrected by surgery. This fetus appears to have been stillborn. One website on Pathology states that this image was found on a “Saddam Era” website claiming it to be an Iraqi baby, but published before the invasion of the country. The image is suspiciously similar to how the condition is presented in textbooks and closer examination of the photograph shows it to have a color composition common to textbook publication. If anyone knows the source it would be greatly appreciated.
There are also numerous images which have been posted claiming to show fetuses or babies which have been poisoned by depleted uranium, but in reality these images show cases of harlequin. I’ve managed to track down a number of these images to pathology books or medical sources. Harlequin fetuses seem to be one of the most populat for claims of depleted uranium contamination. I’m not going to post them here, because the results of this condition are extremely graphic. It involves skin that is not properly formed. It’s a known condition that is not associated with heavy metal poisoning in any way. It is very visually dramatic.
The above image appears to have come from the late 1950’s or early 1960’s. It shows the effects of the drug Thalidomide, which was marketed in the US from 1957 to 1962 and taken off the market after being associated with severe birth defects when used by pregnant women. The original source of the image is not known but it has appeared on several websites where it is noted as being of a thalidomide baby suffering from phocomelia, one of the common effects of the drug.
The image is commonly cited as a child from Iraq or Afghanistan and occasionally as the child of a veteran. The deformed limbs are claimed to be associated with depleted uranium.
Many images are posted and claimed to be recent images from the ongoing occupation of Iraq. However, these same images have shown up on pages dating to 2002 or earlier and are cited as being from the first Gulf War or the war in Afghanistan. Clearly they have been reused and their descriptions are not accurate, however the original source remains in question.
Many of the same images are reused across different websites. You can find a collection of some of the more common images claimed to be the effects of depleted uranium here, here and here.
A large number of photos are accredited to Dr. Siegwart Horst-Gunther. I believe Gunther may have indeed provided these images, which may have originally come from a pathology textbook or medical journal. I’m continuing to try to track them down.
This entry was posted on Thursday, October 9th, 2008 at 6:58 pm and is filed under Bad Science, Depleted Cranium, Enviornment, Politics, Quackery. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions
October 9th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
It’s about time this particularly vile aspect of this fraud was exposed for what it is. These horrific images are being used to attempt to shut down the viewer’s capacity to think critically, and few have the stomach to vet them, as you are for their true sources.
Quote Comment
October 9th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
DV82XL said:
To be perfectly honest, I only did a few of them because it’s really quite disturbing to track these down. I looked at pathology sites and medical school sites etc which have photos from text books or collections of various syndromes for aid in identifying them. I attempted to figure out what general condition the individual suffered from and then did a lot of googling to track down the images. Sometimes just googling things like “Birth Defect Short Arms” or something.
If this is poorly cited or incomplete it’s because it’s a gut wrenching chore to find these things. I mean seriously, I don’t have a weak stomach or any oversensitivity but really… the stuff you see dealing with this.
Quote Comment
October 9th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
This website: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/DU-Baby2003.htm
Seems to contain photos which have come exlusively from the web from sites on natal deformations. These look like refrence photos but i’ve only tracked down about one third of them.
They include images of:
Encephalocele
Myelomeningocele
Crouzon syndrome
omphalocele
and there are several images of anencephaly which are used frequently. This is a birth defect (usually resulting in stillbirth) where the skull is not completely formed and the brain is exposed. It’s very visually dramatic and disturbing.
I can’t keep doing this. I’d really like to definitively debunk this and I’m sure a large portion are just reference images that are totally unrelated but it’s really very disturbing stuff.
Quote Comment
October 9th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
I have seen a couple of the images on depleted uranium sites before being used in anti-abortion campaigns. One of the images on one of the sites you link to says that it is an iraqi without eyes and fully formed skin. I swear I saw that same picture described as a late term abortion some years ago. They recycled the dead baby/stilborn image. It might be an aborted late term fetus or maybe both are lying. Who knows?
Quote Comment
October 9th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Topolac said:
They are both lying for sure. Human fetal development has all the parts present and in the right place by the end of the first trimester. But it doesn’t matter what the truth is, these images are the visual equivalent of skunk-spray, they serve to shut down any other process than the desire to make it go away. No one is going to stop and analyse them so intense is the repulsion.
I so wish there was some legal mechanism where by these lying scaremongers could be brought to court and made to prove their statements on pain of serious punishment. I know, I know, the risks to free speech would be too great, but I still wish that somehow they could be held responsible for what they say.
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 12:21 am
It is entirely possible that there are some of these photos that are from Iraq. That doesn’t prove anything other than there are birth defects and health problems in Iraq, just like the rest of the world. Iraq or Afghanistan probably do have more than most of the world. That is what happens in a country with a substandard health care system and nutrition.
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 1:53 am
There are quite a few youtube videos promoting myths about DU using these images. There is also this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-8PlJVhogs
with “Dr. Rokke” who claims to be an expert in this. I found some stuff out there that this guy might not have even been in the service as he claims or hold a doctorate. He’s a fraud I’d definitely like to see exposed.
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 2:20 am
Sweet Sagan’s Name. It was very difficult to look at these, and looking up Harlequin foeti was even harder.
I can understand totally why people drop out of sentient mode on looking at these.
Which just makes me despise people who use these images to convey lies all the more.
Think of the children, you ****pigs. The real children whose maladies you’re leveraging to drive your own anti-science agendas. You utter, malfeasant bastards.
I need a drink.
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 2:59 am
drbuzz0 said:
And yet the page source claims “2003 photos: Dr. Jenan Hassan” on every image in the alt tag, as well as at the top of the page. Hello, blatant and willful violation of international copyright law.
drbuzz0, if you can stand to actually source the images, it’s worth letting the original owner know that their work is being infringed upon. Medical journals will actually sue people for infringement, and even someone who doesn’t have the resources to sue can still issue a DMCA takedown notice.
(There’s a lot to complain about with respect to copyright law and especially the DMCA, but IMO, using it to shut down people who are lying through their teeth about what an image actually represents is totally reasonable.)
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 3:33 am
There is one image on the page afore mentioned as being from 2003 which I have seen in a lot of places of a kid with a very large bump on his head and a swollen eye. It appears to be too old for it to be natal related. I’m trying to find the source of that. i can assure you it’s not from 2003 because I have been able to find it on pages that I was able to web archive back to 2001 or earlier. It appears the child is Caucasian – does not look Arabic at all.
There are a couple books I know are full of these pictures and I strongly suspect may be the source:
1983 “A Colour Atlas of Clinical Genetics”
1984 “Color Atlas of Newborn Development”
Then some other websites that I’ve been able to find some of the photos on, although I do not know the original source are pathguy.com and the-fetus.com
Some of them I need to find the source for but I know the general context. One is of a child with short arms and legs. This image first came out in the early 60’s as an image showing birth defects from mediucation. I don’t know the context. It may have been a magazine. It’s been cited numerous times as that. It looks like it’s from around then, because of the yellowing tint to the image and the print style and everything.
Some of them it’s possible to get a good idea the source but hard to be sure. The fetuses floating in formaldehyde are from one of three or four museums. I found a couple of them were from a Russian museum.
One with a hole in the back is a classic case of very severe spina bifida that looks very much like it was taken in a medical context for documentary reasons. That would be the primary reason for laying out such a case and photographing it like that.
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 3:55 am
That is quite a collection of upsetting images. One of them is listed as a child with severe facial deformations. I believe I have seen that picture before. It rings a bell, you might say. The child does not have a deformed face. He or she suffers from a severe cleft lip and pallet and has underdeveloped nasal structure. This is correctable, and I believe that the photo was from some information about the condition.
You may want to try smiletrain.org. I think it may have come from that campaign or something similar.
There’s the possibility that the photo I’m talking about is a case of Trisomy 13, but it’s impossible to tell from the one picture.
You might want to contact Custom Medical Stock Photo Incorporated.
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 4:16 am
Sick just sick. I’m sure most of the idiots who post this stuff believe it and have just coppied it from one websdite to another to another to another and believe it’s depleted uranium because they’re too stupid to do any research. Somebody had to fake it to begin with though. Sick that someone would do that.
I need a drink.
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 8:03 am
I don’t think most of the people who post such images are stupid – more likely they just couldn’t give a **** whether the images were real or fake…
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Really some very unsettling images, especially when you consider that the source, whether Iraqi, Russian, American etc is a real child that was born deformed or stillborn and had all the pain and suffering imposed on the family. Good luck finding the real sources of the images, but I don’t think it will change much. These kind have been rooted out as being dishonest before and it’s never stopped them.
Quote Comment
October 10th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
I think I’ll not follow any of the links here.
Quote Comment
October 11th, 2008 at 7:17 am
Jason said:
I have posted a lot about Doctor Rokke – his PhD is in Vocational Education and he is a retired Major in the Army Reserve. He is not anywhere near what he claims to be and certainly no medical expert. He did used to be pretty good at first aid though.
Go to the Yahoo Group DUStory and then to the Files Section – there is another group of people, attendees at an anti-war rally in Salina Kansas are being indoctrinated by Wesley Rehberg who did the video “Contaminated Forever” that extolls “doctor Rokke” as being some sort of whistleblowing hero. I have posted Rokke’s records and also found that he was featured speaker at The Barnes Review/American Free Press Neo Nazi convention in DC that is bragged about at this website – http://www.chairmanofnordwave.blogspot.com .
Roger
Quote Comment
April 14th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
THIS IS MESSED UP
THIS MADE MY HEAD HURT!
Quote Comment
May 30th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Who ever does not believe that depleted uranium is not the cause of these birth defects of these poor innocent children is a BIG FAT HEAD IDIOT!!!!!! You big dumb penis head tricks. HERES PLAIN PROOF!!Take your dirty self to iraq come back and start a family. If one of your kids comes out looking like that you will know why. Thats the only way to make you insubordinate unprestigous rats learn!!
Quote Comment
May 30th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
do’minique said:
Yes, l the power of your logic is overwhelming.
By the way, beyond your obviously brilliant grasp of English prose, do you have any proof from valid sources to back up your claim, or are you just basing your conclusions on these photographs, most of which it would seem do not come from Iraq, or show patients exposed to DU, but come from pathology textbooks and other similar sources far predating the conflict in question.
Quote Comment
May 31st, 2009 at 3:26 am
do’minique said:
No. Depleted uranium does not cause any birth defects and even if it did, these pictures have been clearly found to be fraudulent. One is from a Thalidomide baby, which happened a lot in the late 1950’s and just looking at it you can see it’s got the yellowish color you’d see in a vintage 40 year old image. Another is from a museum.
Anyway, your vulgar language makes you look all the worse when you consider the subject is a falsable scientific one that you clearly do not understand.
There is a wealth of information on this website if you actually want to find out the truth about things.
Oh by the way: I have three friends who served in Iraq and while none have yet had children they are perfectly healthy.
If you knew the first thing about Depleted Uranium you’d know that it is not used very much in general purpose weapons and is chiefly used in armor piercing kinetic energy rounds. Most munitions don’t have it. It is used in armor piercing rounds because it works fantastically in that role.
You know where you can find lots of depleted uranium? Go to a flea market or a tag sale and look for vintage 1950’s-early 1980’s dinnerware in the color bright orange. It’s coated in depleted uranium oxide glaze. Yes, people ate off of it and still do!
Quote Comment
November 20th, 2009 at 12:14 am
Jason said:
Jason,
Rokke is a fraud, but not quite in the way that you mention. He has a PhD, but it is in Vocational Education and he did serve in the Gulf War in a unit responsible for food and water sanitation, not one on the front lines – his base was Riyadh and he was a First Lieutenant Army Reservist who was activated as a “filler” for the 12th Medical Detachment (Preventive Medicine) of Beloit, Wisconsin. After the war, since Rokke had a BS in Phsyics, he was attached to the group that was assessing the level of radioactive contamination of the Bradley Fighting Vehicles and a couple of M1A1 Abrams Tanks that were hit by DU projectile friendly fire. He also got to render first aid, cleaning wounds of contamination and applying BandAids and SteriStrips to cuts acquired by soldiers fighting a fire in a tank that was being towed home from Iraq. That “front line” service was three months after the war ended. When you hear Rokke in person or on video, though, he claims to have been there with the “warriors”. He wasn’t. I am writing an unoffical biography of Rokke and his pals like Asaf Durakovic and Leuren Moret by obtaining their public records. Write me for more information DUStory-owner@yahoogroups.com .
Quote Comment
November 20th, 2009 at 5:08 am
Q said:
Indeed. I disagree with our host on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but when I read rumours of Israel using depleted uranium in Gaza, my immediate thought was “Why? Has Hamas managed to get hold of some tanks from somewhere?”
Quote Comment
November 20th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
George Carty said:
I will say what I have on this subject in the past: Depleted uranium really does not matter as the material because the hazards are no greater (and possibly less than) other munitions made of lead or tungsten or anything else.
Therefore, whether or not the conflict or action was justified is independent of the use of depleted uranium.
If a peaceful nation fires depleted uranium munitions in order to repel an act of aggression against their security and safety, then they are justified in doing so. They would be no more or less justified if they fired tungsten or lead or anything else. If munitions are fired in an otherwise unjustified act of aggression, then it is just as wrong whether they are depleted uranium or not.
There is nothing about depleted uranium that makes it especially harmful to civilians or presents any significant enviornmental risk. It is simply a good material to make anti-armor rounds out of.
You can oppose a conflict in which depleted uranium is used without believing that depleted uranium is harmful as a material or even relevant to the issue.
Quote Comment
November 21st, 2009 at 12:26 am
The link below will take you to the very comprehensive report of the UN Environment Programme detailed on-site research and subsequent laboratory analysis of 32 sites where Hezbollah supporters (including Chris Busby, Doug Rokke and Leuren Moret) claimed that DU-tipped bunker busting bombs had been used during the 2006 war – The UNEP team went looking for DU and found none – that’s about how sound the claims that started with Norwegian physician Mads Gilbert in his Palestinian cause spokesperson role are about DU being used in Gaza – then the French group followed with “proof” that tons of DU were used – I haven’t seen any real proof, just a lot of smoke and mirrors and hype –
Recently, charges by Norwegian physician Mads Gilbert, a long time active
Palestinian propagandist, that Israel used DU in Gaza have resurfaced with the
claim of
a 33 page report by the French anti-nuclear group ACDN, including the completely
unsupportable claim that Israel had used no less than 75 tons of DU in Gaza.
http://acdn.france.free.fr/spip/breve.php3?id_breve=887&lang=en
The UN Environment Programme Postconflict Branch investigated similar claims of
Israeli DU use in Lebanon in 2006. Their report is at
http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/UNEP_Lebanon.pdf
Pages 6,7 in Foreword discuss that 32 sites were examined and that no DU was
found
Pages 10, 36-38 (Sampling & Measurement equipment and techniques) and 145-153
(Weapons team findings) and 164 are germane to whether or not DU or any other
“uranium weapon” as Chris Busby and his adherents like to call them, had been
used. Bunker busters are specifically discussed and the negative results of
smears of the walls of destroyed underground facilities are specifically mentioned. No
Uranium was found.
All DUStory messages are public and I periodically post links in them to scientific reports – the last time I did a list was over a year ago, but there are more links in the Links section that anyone can access by using the guest user name and password and signing in – they are in Message 87, which also refers you to the Files Section where original documents from Rokke, Moret, Durakovic’s records also may be found – I have also started posting some of these to the Internet Archive at http://www.archive.org since those are much easier to access.
Quote Comment
November 21st, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Roger said:
The fact that they didn’t use DU is immaterial to me. I doubt that they would have, just because it’s not generally used when you’re not taking on armor. However, I could see circumstances where depleted uranium rounds might be used in general combat if they were what a given military unit had on hand or if they were avaliable at the time. For example, if an A-10 pilot spots a target of opportunity that is not heavily armored, but the aircraft is loaded with the DU armor penetrating rounds, or if munitions with depleted uranium are loaded because of the off chance of encountering armored opposition. I could see how a naval unit might use them, given that the weaponry they have is limited to what is on board in the stores of the ship.
The only real issue with that is that it is wasteful because depleted uranium rounds tend to be more expensive due to the issues with alloying and machining the stuff. So it would be better to conserve it for targets that actually need it.
In any case, I just don’t see how it matters. Using a weapon made of tungsten versus depleted uranium really doesn’t change anything.
Quote Comment