Iraqi children infected with disfiguring skin disease: UN

[Praxius]

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/02/14/skin-diseaseiraqi.html

At least 275 children in southern Iraq have been infected with a disfiguring skin disease, an outbreak some health officials are blaming on the war's devastating effect on the public health system.

Eeewww... Gro'dy.

According to the United Nations — citing reports from Iraq's southern province of Qadissiyah — 275 children have been struck with leishmaniasis, which is spread by sand flies. Most have a form that causes skin sores, but others have a type that strikes internal organs and can be fatal.

"This is a killer disease and we are trying to stop its spread," said Dr. Omer Mekki, an epidemiologist at the World Health Organization's Iraq office.

Two types of leishmaniasis have been found in southern Iraq, according to Mekki: 212 cases of cutaneous leishmaniasis, also known as Baghdad boil disease, and 63 cases of visceral leishmaniasis, or kala azar, which is Hindi for black fever.

Cutaneous leishmaniasis is not fatal but can cause facial lesions and crater-shaped sores, leaving patients disfigured. Kala azar can kill, and causes fever, weight loss, anemia, and swelling of the spleen and liver.

Children are particularly at risk because they typically have weaker immune systems than adults. A single sand fly bite can transmit the disease.

Outbreaks once rare

Though the disease was first identified in Iraq more than a century ago, outbreaks were rare during Saddam Hussein's regime. But since the conflict began, experts say the destroyed health system has opened the way for diseases lurking in the environment.

"The war has exacerbated the problems in Iraq that are one or two decades old," said Claire Hajaj, a spokeswoman for UNICEF's Iraq office. "Their health system has been undermined by violence, insecurity and sabotage."

Mekki said WHO is working with the Iraqi government to conduct spraying campaigns to kill sand flies. He added that cases of leishmaniasis have dropped substantially since 2004, but progress eliminating the disease has been slow.

The incubation period can be up to six months, and some suspect the reported number of cases may be an underestimate. Patients are treated with a course of injections, which costs about $40.

Since the conflict began, hundreds of U.S. soldiers have also been infected and scarred by leishmaniasis.

Leishmaniasis also surged in Afghanistan after decades of civil war and the 2001 U.S.-led invasion. Though data about the historical number of cases are sketchy, experts say Afghanistan now has about 200,000 cases per year.

In Iraq, WHO officials estimate there are nearly 3,000 leishmaniasis cases per year. But in neighbouring Jordan, there are only about 300 cases annually.

Yay! One more thing to blame the West for.

 

[MikeyDB]

Oh relax! It's perfectly OK ...just ask an American. It's perfectly acceptable that generations of Iraqis hate America for reducing their nation to rubble.... The latest game is to blame the "terrorists" for destroying Iraq....nothing to do with the terrorism and mass slaughter undertaken by the United States of America...

Maybe next time a "terrorist" will target a school or a gathering of children....oh wait ...never mind...Americans are doing that to themselves....

 

[darkbeaver]

Genocide, when will this be addressed, when will we discuss what we've been doing, so many years of ignorance and denial, we are a sick culture, not fit to inhabit this planet. Iraqis are being systematicly exterminated in every way possible. Contemplation of thier fate educates about our eventual fate.

 

[Zzarchov]

the Genocide was addresed.

When the invasion occured and the Kurds were finally free from chemical weapon attacks and mass graves.

Or are only some genocides worthy of doing anything about?

You seem to be implying it was OK to kill the kurd's DB.

 

[darkbeaver]

the Genocide was addresed.

When the invasion occured and the Kurds were finally free from chemical weapon attacks and mass graves.

Or are only some genocides worthy of doing anything about?

You seem to be implying it was OK to kill the kurd's DB.

You seem to be reading words that aren't in my post Zzjackchov.

 

[EagleSmack]

the Genocide was addresed.

When the invasion occured and the Kurds were finally free from chemical weapon attacks and mass graves.

Or are only some genocides worthy of doing anything about?

You seem to be implying it was OK to kill the kurd's DB.

No, it doesn't matter. All genocides are either directly or indirectly the fault of the US. :roll: Just another day at CanCon

 

[MikeyDB]

If you can table the numbers of non-Americans killed by America in covert actions where oppressive dictatorships were supported militarily and financially by the United States, and compare that table to one created illustrating the numbers of non-Americans killed in covert actions where oppressive regimes funded by nations other than America must bear responsbility for those events, then we have a place to start.

 

[Zzarchov]

First off, I'd need you to define America.

The american government or the American people if its the second one it rather impossible, being a free nation it means almost every conflict has recieved funding from the US on all sides (the exception being conflicts where the Soviets funded the other side)

Second, to DarkBeaver:

1.) Thats the best insult you can come up with? If your going to use insults, use clever ones at least.
2.) That is the nature of languages, alot of communication is what is implied, not said. You have a very strong implication in your posts that are obviously (due to a pattern) not unintentional. I am not alone in picking up on it.

 

[darkbeaver]

First off, I'd need you to define America.

The american government or the American people if its the second one it rather impossible, being a free nation it means almost every conflict has recieved funding from the US on all sides (the exception being conflicts where the Soviets funded the other side)

Second, to DarkBeaver:

1.) Thats the best insult you can come up with? If your going to use insults, use clever ones at least.
2.) That is the nature of languages, alot of communication is what is implied, not said. You have a very strong implication in your posts that are obviously (due to a pattern) not unintentional. I am not alone in picking up on it.

Well it had to happen eventually Zzarchov, I should have hidden my pattern better, but after eight thousand posts I guess I just got sloppy enough for you to pickup on my game. Must be nice to know you're not alone though. Don't flatter yourself, clever would be wasted on you.
You communicate through implications that are obviously patterned on some brainwashing or a lesion in your frontal lobe perhaps. Hard to say without disection or cat scan.:lol:

 

[Zzarchov]

8,000 posts and nothing of merit to say, quite a feat.

 

[wallyj]

Read the first line. The operative word is SOME. This area of the world is rich in cash,but dirt poor in basic services . They were like this before the war(wars) and will be after the wars,if they ever end.

 

[#juan]

Why are we surprised? Close to a thousand tons of depleted uranium was sprayed over that country. A few hundred cases of disfigurement is nothing compared with what will show up over the next few years. DU tears tanks to shreds but it is also a poison for anyone, including children who breath in the dust of this vile crap.

 

[gopher]

``Yay! One more thing to blame the West for.``

You forgot to say 'BLAME CLINTON!';-)

 

[Zzarchov]

Why are we surprised? Close to a thousand tons of depleted uranium was sprayed over that country. A few hundred cases of disfigurement is nothing compared with what will show up over the next few years. DU tears tanks to shreds but it is also a poison for anyone, including children who breath in the dust of this vile crap.

DU gas is still less poisonous than the alternatives for tank shells. Hell, small arms fire (from both sides) is more of a toxic threat than all hte DU fired.

Compared to other munitions, DU is relatively harmless, and thats been shown every time you post about it. Just because it has the word Uranium doesn't make it some doomsday weapon that will cause Godzilla to form.

 

[darkbeaver]

8,000 posts and nothing of merit to say, quite a feat.

How dare you insult me! You talking piece of dog poo. I have recieved numerous international awards for my work, here are just a few. 1999 The Golden Cabbage for my exposee of sexual slavery among teenage tubers, 2002 The Italian Writers Guide Award for my international beastseller History of The Lost Roman Parsnip Legion, and my Lumpy Silver Diaper Award for my childrens series Fun With Pareing Knives and Blenders subtitled bandaids and stiches as early childhood learning tools.

 

[Outta here]

:lol::lol:

lol DBeaver!

 

[#juan]

DU gas is still less poisonous than the alternatives for tank shells. Hell, small arms fire (from both sides) is more of a toxic threat than all hte DU fired.

Compared to other munitions, DU is relatively harmless, and thats been shown every time you post about it. Just because it has the word Uranium doesn't make it some doomsday weapon that will cause Godzilla to form.

Zzarchov.....You are simply wrong.

http://www.ericblumrich.com/pl_lo.html

 

[Zzarchov]

Zzarchov.....You are simply wrong.

http://www.ericblumrich.com/pl_lo.html

A nice media show but its full of lies.

1.) A few of those pictures I recognized, they were from Chernobyl babies (We covered that in high school and those aren't images you forget), or were they cloned and born in Iraq again, with the same deformities?

2.) German music aside, DU is not nuclear waste. Long before any nuclear process is formed it is seperated.

Its lower radioactivity than naturally occuring Uranium, and even desert sand can be more radioactive than it.

3.) Yes it is toxic, its a heavy metal. That being said, far more than 420 odd tonnes of lead and arsenic were fired from conventional weapons in those conflicts.

You wanna see real messed up birth defects and health issues, look at what lead does to babies.

All in all, the video was full of blatant lies and very obvious emotional appeals based on lack of substance.

If the choice is between lead and DU aerosol being thrown around my backyard, I'd pick DU.



So Sorry Juan, you are just plain wrong.

 

[#juan]

A nice media show but its full of lies.

1.) A few of those pictures I recognized, they were from Chernobyl babies (We covered that in high school and those aren't images you forget), or were they cloned and born in Iraq again, with the same deformities?

2.) German music aside, DU is not nuclear waste. Long before any nuclear process is formed it is seperated.

Its lower radioactivity than naturally occuring Uranium, and even desert sand can be more radioactive than it.

3.) Yes it is toxic, its a heavy metal. That being said, far more than 420 odd tonnes of lead and arsenic were fired from conventional weapons in those conflicts.

You wanna see real messed up birth defects and health issues, look at what lead does to babies.

All in all, the video was full of blatant lies and very obvious emotional appeals based on lack of substance.

If the choice is between lead and DU aerosol being thrown around my backyard, I'd pick DU.

There are only a few things worse than uneducated ignorance, and one would be proud ignorance in defiance of all the evidence.

http://www.countercurrents.org/hall230306.htm

http://www.mediamonitors.net/heller4.html

 

[Zzarchov]

Well, 5 seconds into the first "Source"

I found a lie "Nuclear weapons, such as depleted uranium (D.U.), were unimaginable before World War II. They attack the body with invisible radioactive energy that,"

There is no nuclear reactions with DU, nor could their be. Seriously, do you know what DU is?

Obviously not.


The second link talks about a soldier suffering from DU poisoning.

I can't find a single neutral source talking about this. All the ones I find are from area's such as "Bushstole04.com" "StopNATrg" and "ThePeaceTrain".

Perhaps you could find something a little credible.



For the record:


DU is not a nuclear weapon, it is used as a radiation shield, due to its density and low natural radiation.

Everything radioactive that can be squeezed out of DU has been, thats the nature of it.

Natural Uranium is about 0.7% U235(The stuff used in reactors and weapons) and 99.3% U-238(DU). Taking just 2/3rds that 0.7 % of U235 out lowers the radiation level of Natrual Uranium (which you can handle with your bare hands) into DU (which is 60% of what natural Uranium is)

You can play with DU all day long if you want.


Now breathing in vapourized DU is dangerous, but not from Radiation, hell your body has Uranium in it naturally.

Its dangerous because you are breathing in vapourized heavy metals, vapourized lead is just as bad for you.

These are weapons made to kill people and like any weapon ARE DANGEROUS.

If this was about firing DU shells or not firing any shells then fine. But the alternative is shells with high levels of arsenic and mercury which are far worse than DU.

The WTO has shown with testing that DU is only dangerous airborne for a short period of time, it quickly settles and does not signifigantly impact the soil in any meaningful way (in comparison to other munitions)


Its fear mongering based on the word Uranium and images of radioactivity that don't apply.

If you ever see the word "Nuclear weapon" in response to DU then the person doesn't know what they are talking about, discount it as bullplop.

You would have an easier time getting lead to turn to gold than getting DU fissile.