UK, US munitions damage births in Iraq

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-08-2011
UK, US munitions damage births in Iraq
3
Fri, 10-26-2012 - 4:23pm

War always hurt ordinary people.

Quote, "UK, US munitions damage births in Iraq

Sunday Oct 14, 2012

A study has found that US and UK weapons ammunition were linked to local babies suffering heart defects, brain dysfunctions and de-formed limbs.

The study published by the Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology on October 14, revealed a shocking rise in birth defects among children in Iraq after the US and Britain invaded the country in 2003, Russia's English-language news channel RT reported.

The report showed a connection between military activities in the Middle Eastern country and the rising number of miscarriage and deformity of babies being born.

The study documented 56 families in the city of Fallujah, which was invaded by US troops in 2004. It also examined births in Basrah in southern Iraq that was attacked by British forces in 2003.

Between 2007 and 2010 in Fullujah, over half of all the surveyed babies were born with birth defects. Before the US-led invasion of Iraq, the figure was one in 10.

In Basrah’s Maternity Hospital, over 20 babies out of 1000 were born with defects in 2003, which makes the figure 17 times higher than it was in the previous decade.

The UK government has refused to take the survey seriously regarding birth defects in Iraq as a government spokesman said there was no "reliable scientific or medical evidence to confirm a link between conventional ammunition and birth defects in Basrah.”

BGH/SSM/HE

 

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/10/14/266687/uk-us-munitions-damage-births-in-iraq/

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-08-2011
Thu, 11-08-2012 - 8:54pm

deenasdad wrote:
<p>If there was a direct correlation, wouldn't we see the same statistical increase in birth defects in Afghanistan, Kosovo, the Falklands and/or any other engagement where US/UK munitions were used?  And why didn't we see this increase in Iraq after the Gulf War?</p>

That's not the right reason. US used atomic bomb only in Japan. Will you say that because in other countries no radiation report, so you can't accuse of US?

Here is a news report that probably tells the truth.

Army shells pose cancer risk in Iraq

Depleted uranium causing high radioactivity levels

Depleted uranium shells used by British forces in southern Iraqi battlefields are putting civilians at risk from 'alarmingly high' levels of radioactivity.
 

Experts are calling for the water and milk being used by locals in Basra to be monitored after analysis of biological and soil samples from battle zones found 'the highest number, highest levels and highest concentrations of radioactive source points' in the Basra suburb of Abu Khasib - the centre of the fiercest battles between UK forces and Saddam loyalists.

Readings taken from destroyed Iraqi tanks in Basra reveal radiation levels 2,500 times higher than normal. In the surrounding area researchers recorded radioactivity levels 20 times higher than normal.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/14/iraq.military

Avatar for xxxs
Community Leader
Registered: 01-25-2010
Thu, 11-01-2012 - 4:20pm

  There are too many variables to say what caused birth defects.  It stands to reason that multiple problems may have been involved.

dragowoman

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012
Sat, 10-27-2012 - 2:40am

If there was a direct correlation, wouldn't we see the same statistical increase in birth defects in Afghanistan, Kosovo, the Falklands and/or any other engagement where US/UK munitions were used?  And why didn't we see this increase in Iraq after the Gulf War?