Uranio impoverito: rapporto degli "esperti"

[Paola Lucchesi <paola.lucchesi@mail.inet.it>]

Non ho parole.

Sembra solo a me una presa in giro?

Chi e' che fa una verifica sui siti EU di chi sono questi "esperti
scientifici indipendenti"?

paola


http://www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/eb6a990699ff
485cc1256a08005aa1b3?OpenDocument

Source: European Union
Date: 6 Mar 2001

Depleted uranium: Commission receives scientific experts' opinion

IP/01/315

Brussels, 6 March 2001 - The European Commission today received the
opinion of the group of independent scientific experts, established
according to Article 31 of the Euratom Treaty, on the possible
radiological health effects of depleted uranium. On the basis of the
information available to date, the experts have concluded that
radiological exposure to depleted uranium could not result in a
detectable effect on human health. Although the possibility of a
combined effect of exposure to toxic and carcinogenic chemicals and to
radiation could not be excluded the experts concluded that there was no
evidence to support this hypothesis. Receiving the opinion, Environment
Commissioner Margot Wallström said: "I am grateful for the speedy work
of the experts in producing this opinion. My Commission colleagues and I
will take it into account when discussing the need for further action
with regard to the health and environmental situation in the Balkans. I
also look forward to seeing the results of work carried out by other
bodies competent in this field, such as the United Nations Environment
Programme whose report will soon be issued."
    The group of scientific experts has considered available information
on depleted uranium (DU). It has studied the characteristics, properties
and uses of uranium and DU, direct pathways of exposure to man as well
as exposure due to contamination of the environment, the behaviour of
uranium in the body and scientifically agreed predicted health effects
per unit of exposure. The experts were asked to take note of the
chemical toxicity of uranium, but the opinion relates only to the
radiological health consequences.

Opinion of the experts

 -  Having assessed possible exposure to DU, taking into account
potential pathways and realistic scenarios(1) of exposure to man, the
experts concluded that radiological exposure to depleted uranium could
not result in a detectable effect on human health (e.g. cancer).
 -  As regards leukaemia, the latency period is shorter than for solid
cancers, but uranium accumulates very little in blood forming organs
such as bone marrow. Therefore, the experts concluded that the
calculated risk of leukaemia is far below the risk of solid cancers.
 -  Exposure to depleted uranium through contamination of the
environment or the food chain has also been considered. Scenarios
included deposition of depleted uranium on vegetation, ingestion of
contaminated water or soil or consumption of contaminated foodstuffs.
The experts concluded that resulting doses through such means would be
extremely low.
 -  On the basis of the available knowledge about chemical toxicity, one
would expect to observe uranium renal toxicity before any other damage
(including cancer). The possibility of a combined effect of exposure to
toxic or carcinogenic chemicals and to radiation can not be excluded but
there is no evidence to support this hypothesis. Under the scenarios the
experts looked at, exposures to DU give low doses, comparable to natural
background levels. Therefore there is no reason to believe that
chemicals may change the magnitude of the potential radiation effects.
 -  The experts feel that they could not provide guidance with regard to
the need for monitoring individuals that have been in contact with DU
without knowing the specific exposure situation. The conclusion is that
in general it would be more appropriate to monitor the environment (e.g.
drinking water supplies) rather than individuals.
 -  The experts also felt that they were not in a position to provide
guidance on the need for clean-up measures. Any intervention should take
into account the specific situation in question. General protective
measures should be considered on the basis of a common-sense approach to
prevent easily avoidable exposures. Where appropriate, specific
protection against exposure to depleted uranium should be proposed (e.g.
warning signs to prevent the public from picking up DU metal pieces).
 -  The experts see no need to derogate DU from any provision of the
Basic safety standards (BSS) for the protection of workers and the
public from the dangers of ionising radiation: neither do they see a
need to introduce stricter requirements in the BSS for specific uses of
DU.

Background: Involvement of the European Commission in the DU issue

The European Commission is fully conscious of the concerns which have
been expressed relating to the health effects of exposure to depleted
uranium. This followed reports of cases of cancer in soldiers who had
served in the Kosovo region. A link with DU, which has been used in
ammunition to improve its armour penetrating capacity, has been claimed.
The use of DU in the Balkans has been confirmed by NATO.
    It is against this background, and the fact that EU civilians have
worked and visited the region for prolonged periods, that the Commission
felt it would be helpful to obtain a scientific opinion on the potential
radiological health effects of DU.
    The Community has certain responsibilities under the Euratom Treaty
in relation to dangers arising from ionising radiation. For this purpose
the Commission relies on independent scientific opinions. The experts
who provide these opinions are also well placed to advise on the
possible health effects of DU on humans as well as effects on the
environment.
    The Commission therefore convened a working party of the group of
independent scientific experts established according to Article 31 of
the Euratom Treaty with a view to providing such an opinion. The group
met on 30 to 31 of January and on 19 February. The group's competence,
according to the Treaty, is to advise on the protection of the health of
workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising
radiation. The opinion is of general application both for civil and
military applications of DU. Nevertheless, it is important to
acknowledge that the advice was sought in the context of the discussions
on the Balkans.
    As well as requesting the Article 31 experts to study the available
information and to produce this opinion, the Commission has exchanged
information and collaborated with other international organisations
which are also working in this area, namely the IAEA, UNEP, WHO and
NATO.
    More information is being collected and analysed by the responsible
authorities on location of deployment of personnel, proximity of the
local population to attacks involving DU, and precise composition of the
DU.
    In addition, more information is expected relating to the incidence
of diseases in different categories of affected populations. It is noted
that UNEP will report in March on the results of samples taken in
Kosovo. Member Nations of NATO, including Member States of the EU, are
also conducting monitoring campaigns on the environment and on personnel
sent to the region.

(1) Realistic scenario of exposure means set assumptions based on real
behaviour of man (e.g. breathing and drinking patterns).