View source for Depleted uranium

{{short description|Uranium with lower content of <sup>235</sup>U}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2024}}
[[File:30mm DU slug.jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.2|The DU penetrator of a [[30 mm caliber|30 mm]] round<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/du_balkans/fig1.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070412120641/http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/du_balkans/fig1.htm |archive-date=12 April 2007 |title=Figure 1. DU penetrator from the A-10 30mm round |date=12 April 2007 |access-date=4 September 2013}}</ref>]]
{{Pollution sidebar|Radiation}}

'''Depleted uranium''' ('''DU'''), also referred to in the past as '''Q-metal''', '''depletalloy''', or '''D-38'''<sub>,</sub> is [[uranium]] with a lower content of the [[fissile]] [[isotope]] [[Uranium-235|<sup>235</sup>U]] than natural uranium.<ref name = "McDiarmid 2001 123"/> The less radioactive and non-fissile [[Uranium-238|<sup>238</sup>U]] is the main component of depleted uranium.

Uranium is notable for the extremely high [[density]] of its metallic form: at {{convert|19.1|g/cm3|lk=on}}, uranium is {{percentage|68.4|100|1}} more dense than [[lead]]. Because depleted uranium has nearly the same density as natural uranium but far less radioactivity, it is desirable for applications that demand high mass without added radiation hazards. Civilian uses include counterweights in aircraft, radiation shielding in medical [[radiation therapy]], research and industrial [[radiography]] equipment, and containers for transporting radioactive materials.  Military uses include [[Vehicle armour|armor plating]] and [[Armor-piercing shot and shell|armor-piercing projectiles]].

The use of DU in [[munitions]] is controversial because of concerns about potential long-term health effects.<ref name=Miller/><ref name=Pattison/> Normal functioning of the [[kidney]], [[Human brain|brain]], [[liver]], [[Human heart|heart]], and numerous other systems can be affected by exposure to uranium, a [[Metal toxicity|toxic metal]].<ref name=Craft/> It is only weakly [[radioactive]] because of the long [[half-life|radioactive half-life]] of <sup>238</sup>U (4.468 billion years) and the low amounts of <sup>234</sup>U (half-life about 246,000 years) and <sup>235</sup>U (half-life 700 million years). The [[biological half-life]] (the average time it takes for the human body to eliminate half the amount in the body) for uranium is about 15 days.<ref>{{cite web
 |url= http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/biohalf.html#c2
 |title= Biological Half Lives
 |publisher= Georgia State University, US
}}</ref> The [[aerosol]] or [[spallation]] [[frangible]] powder produced by impact and combustion of depleted uranium munitions (or armour) can potentially contaminate wide areas around the impact sites, leading to possible inhalation by human beings.<ref name=Mitsakou/>

The actual level of [[acute toxicity|acute]] and [[chronic toxicity]] of DU is also controversial. Several studies using [[tissue culture|cultured cells]] and laboratory [[rodents]] suggest the possibility of [[leukemia|leukemogenic]], [[gene]]tic, [[reproduction|reproductive]], and [[neurological]] effects from chronic exposure.<ref name=Miller/> According to [[Al Jazeera Media Network|Al Jazeera]], DU from American artillery is suspected to be one of the major causes of an increase in the general mortality rate in Iraq since 1991.<ref name=jaz1>{{cite news |last1=Jamail |first1=Dahr |title=Iraq's wars, a legacy of cancer |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/03/2013315171951838638.html |access-date=29 November 2018 |publisher=Al Jazeera |date=16 March 2013}}</ref> A 2005 [[epidemiology]] review concluded "In aggregate the human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in offspring of persons exposed to DU."<ref name=Hindin/> A 2021 study concluded that DU from exploding munitions did not lead to [[Gulf War illness]] in American veterans deployed in the [[Gulf War]].<ref name="SciTechDaily 2021"/> A 2011 study found elevated levels of uranium in soil and hair samples from [[Fallujah]], [[Iraq]], but it was from slightly [[enriched uranium]] instead of DU.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Alaani |first1=Samira |last2=Tafash |first2=Muhammed |last3=Busby |first3=Christopher |last4=Hamdan |first4=Malak |last5=Blaurock-Busch |first5=Eleonore |title=Uranium and other contaminants in hair from the parents of children with congenital anomalies in Fallujah, Iraq |journal=Conflict and Health |date=December 2011 |volume=5 |issue=1 |page=15 |doi=10.1186/1752-1505-5-15 |pmid=21888647 |pmc=3177876 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

==Definition==
Natural uranium contains about {{percentage|0.72|100|2}} <sup>235</sup>U. Depleted uranium has lower [[mass fraction (chemistry)|mass fractions]]—up to three times less—of <sup>235</sup>U and [[Uranium-234|<sup>234</sup>U]] than natural uranium. Since <sup>238</sup>U has a much longer [[half-life]] than the lighter isotopes, DU is about 40% less radioactive than natural uranium.<ref name="McDiarmid 2001 123" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sztajnkrycer |first1=Matthew D. |date=March 2004 |title=Chemical and Radiological Toxicity of Depleted Uranium |journal=Military Medicine |volume=169 |issue=3 |pages=212–216 |doi=10.7205/milmed.169.3.212 |pmid=15080241 |quote=By its very nature, DU contains only 50% to 60% of the radioactivity of naturally occurring uranium. |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="USOSD">[http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/du_ii_tabc.htm "Properties and Characteristics of DU"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130218165322/http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/du_ii_tabc.htm|date=18 February 2013}} U.S. Office of the Secretary of Defense</ref> Most of the [[alpha radiation]] comes from <sup>238</sup>U and <sup>234</sup>U<ref group="notes">In natural uranium, about 49% of the radiation comes from <sup>238</sup>U, 49% from <sup>234</sup>U, and 2% from <sup>235</sup>U. In depleted uranium the amounts of <sup>235</sup>U and <sup>234</sup>U are both reduced, but there is still much more radiation from the <sup>234</sup>U than from the <sup>235</sup>U.{{Citation needed|date=November 2024}}</ref> whereas [[beta radiation]] comes from decay products [[Thorium-234|<sup>234</sup>Th]] and [[Protactinium|<sup>234</sup>Pa]] that are formed within a few weeks.{{Clarify|reason=A few weeks of what?|date=November 2024}}{{Citation needed|date=November 2024}}

The United States [[Nuclear Regulatory Commission]] (NRC) defines ''depleted uranium'' as uranium with a percentage of the <sup>235</sup>U isotope that is less than {{percentage|0.711|100|3}} by weight (see [https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part040/part040-0004.html 10 CFR 40.4]). The military specifications designate that the DU used by the [[U.S. Department of Defense]] (DoD) contain less than {{percentage|0.3|100|1}} <sup>235</sup>U.<ref name="Shelton" /> In actuality, DoD uses only DU that contains approximately {{percentage|0.2|100|1}} <sup>235</sup>U.<ref name="Shelton" />

==History==
Enriched uranium was first manufactured in the early 1940s when the [[United States]] and the [[United Kingdom]] began their [[nuclear weapons]] programs. Later in the decade, [[France]] and the [[Soviet Union]] began their [[nuclear weapon]]s and [[nuclear power]] programs. Depleted uranium was originally stored as an unusable waste product ([[uranium hexafluoride]]) in the hope that improved [[uranium enrichment|enrichment processes]] could extract additional quantities of the [[Nuclear fission|fissionable]] <sup>235</sup>U [[isotope]]. This re-enrichment recovery of the residual uranium-235 is now in practice in some parts of the world; e.g. in 1996 over {{convert|6,000|tonne|ST}} were upgraded in a Russian plant.<ref>
{{cite web
 |url= http://www.wise-uranium.org/dhap991.html
 |title= Depleted Uranium: A By-product of the Nuclear Chain
 |author= Diehl, Peter
 |year= 1999
 |publisher= International Network of Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation
 |archive-url= https://archive.today/20130113114319/http://www.wise-uranium.org/dhap991.html
 |archive-date= 13 January 2013 }}</ref>

In the 1970s, [[the Pentagon]] reported that the [[Soviet Armed Forces|Soviet military]] had developed [[armor plating]] for [[Warsaw Pact]] tanks that [[North Atlantic Treaty Organization|NATO]] ammunition could not penetrate.{{Citation needed|date=April 2015}} The Pentagon began searching for material to make denser [[armour-piercing ammunition|armor-piercing projectiles]]. After testing various metals, [[Ordnance ammunition|ordnance]] researchers settled on depleted uranium.{{citation needed|date=January 2022}}

The US and NATO militaries used DU penetrator rounds in the [[1991 Gulf War]], the [[Bosnia war]],<ref>{{cite web
 |url= http://cancerpage.com/cancernews/cancernews2268.htm |title= NATO: 50 Countries See No Depleted Uranium Illness
 |access-date=12 December 2013
|author= Hamilton, Douglas
 |date= 25 January 2001
|publisher= Reuters Health Information
 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20010220235753/http://www.cancerpage.com/cancernews/cancernews2268.htm
 |archive-date = 20 February 2001}}</ref> [[Operation Allied Force|bombing of Serbia]], the [[2003 invasion of Iraq]],<ref>{{cite news
 |url= http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0812-06.htm |title= Is an Armament Sickening U.S. Soldiers?
 |access-date=30 March 2015
|author= Hastings, Deborah
 |date= 12 August 2006
|agency= Associated Press
 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20140703032800/http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0812-06.htm
 |archive-date= 3 July 2014
}}</ref> and [[Operation Tidal Wave II|2015 airstrikes]] on [[Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant|ISIS]] in Syria.<ref name="Oakford2017">{{cite web|last1=Oakford|first1=Samuel|title=The United States Used Depleted Uranium in Syria|url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/14/the-united-states-used-depleted-uranium-in-syria/|website=Foreign Policy|date=14 February 2017|access-date=3 March 2017}}</ref> It is estimated that between {{convert|315|and|350|ST|tonne}} of DU were used in the 1991 Gulf War.<ref>{{cite web|title=History of Depleted Uranium and What It Is Used For|url=http://www.energysolutions.com/depleted-uranium/history/|publisher=Energy Solutions|access-date=7 August 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150721043007/http://www.energysolutions.com/depleted-uranium/history/|archive-date=21 July 2015}}</ref>

==Production==
Most depleted uranium arises as a [[by-product]] of the production of [[enriched uranium]] for use as fuel in [[nuclear reactor]]s and in the manufacture of [[nuclear weapon]]s. Enrichment processes generate uranium with a higher-than-natural concentration of lower-[[atomic mass number|mass-number]] uranium isotopes (in particular <sup>235</sup>U, which is the uranium isotope supporting the [[Nuclear fission|fission]] [[chain reaction]]) with the bulk of the feed ending up as depleted uranium.

[[Natural uranium]] metal contains about {{percentage|0.71|100|2}} <sup>235</sup>U, {{percentage|99.28|100|2}} <sup>238</sup>U, and about {{percentage|0.0054|100|4}} <sup>234</sup>U. The production of enriched uranium using [[isotope separation]] creates ''depleted uranium'' containing only 0.2% to 0.4% <sup>235</sup>U. Because natural uranium begins with such a low percentage of <sup>235</sup>U, enrichment produces large quantities of depleted uranium. For example, producing {{convert|1|kg}} of {{percentage|5|100}} enriched uranium requires {{convert|11.8|kg}} of natural uranium, and leaves about {{convert|10.8|kg}} of depleted uranium having only {{percentage|0.3|100|1}} <sup>235</sup>U.

Depleted uranium is further produced by recycling [[spent nuclear fuel]],<ref>{{Cite web |date=2003-01-24 |title=Depleted Uranium |url=http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/ |access-date=2024-06-04 |series=WHO Fact sheet N°257, Revised |archive-date=24 January 2003 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030124030930/http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/ |url-status=bot: unknown }}</ref> in which case it contains traces of [[neptunium]] and [[plutonium]].<ref>[http://www.nukewatchinfo.org/Quarterly/2007spring/07sprp11.pdf Plutonium in DU Weapons, a Chronology] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130510011456/http://www.nukewatchinfo.org/Quarterly/2007spring/07sprp11.pdf|date=10 May 2013}} Dr. [[Michael Repacholi]], WHO.</ref> These quantities are so small that they are not considered to be of serious radiological significance by the [[ECRR|European Committee on Radiation Risk]].<ref>{{cite web |author=Busby, Chris |date=2010 |title=Uranium and Health: The Health Effects of Exposure to Uranium and Uranium Weapons Fallout |url=http://www.euradcom.org/publications/ecrruraniumrept.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111104145155/http://www.euradcom.org/publications/ecrruraniumrept.pdf |archive-date=4 November 2011 |publisher=The European Committee on Radiation Risk}} Documents of the ECRR 2010 No. 2, Brussels, Belgium, 2010.</ref> DU from [[nuclear reprocessing]] has different isotopic ratios from enrichment-by-product DU, from which it can be distinguished by the presence of [[Uranium-236|<sup>236</sup>U]].<ref>{{cite press release |url=https://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2001/unep81.doc.htm |title=UN Environment Programme Confirms Uranium 236 found in depleted uranium penetrators |date=16 January 2001 |id=UNEP/81 |publisher=United Nations |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20010717004828/https://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2001/unep81.doc.htm |archive-date=17 July 2001 |access-date=28 April 2020}}</ref>

The only known natural source of uranium with a {{chem|235|U}} content significantly different from 0.71% is found in the [[natural nuclear fission reactor]] at [[Oklo|Oklo, Gabon]]. It can be "fingerprinted" as different in origin from manmade depleted uranium by the {{chem|234|U}} content, which is 55 [[parts per million|ppm]] in uranium from the [[Oklo Mine]] as well as all other natural sources, but will be lower in depleted uranium in accordance with the degree of depletion.

==Storage==
[[File:DUF6 storage yard far (cropped).jpg|thumb|right|A typical DUF<sub>6</sub> cylinder storage yard]]

[[File:Corroded DUF6 cylinder.jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.4|DUF<sub>6</sub> cylinders: painted (left) and corroded (right)]]

[[File:DUF6 cylinder leak.gif|thumb|right|[[Uranium hexafluoride]] tank leaking]]

About 95% of the depleted uranium produced until now is stored as [[uranium hexafluoride]], or (D){{chem2|UF6}}, in steel cylinders in open air storage yards close to enrichment plants. Each cylinder typically holds up to {{convert|12.7|tonne|ST}} of {{chem2|UF6}}. In the U.S. {{convert|560000|tonne|ST}} of depleted {{chem2|UF6}} had accumulated by 1993. In 2008, {{convert|686500|tonne|ST}} in 57,122 storage cylinders were located near [[Portsmouth, Ohio|Portsmouth]], Ohio; [[Oak Ridge, Tennessee|Oak Ridge]], Tennessee; and [[Paducah, Kentucky|Paducah]], Kentucky.<ref name="anl.gov FAQ 16">{{cite web |website=Depleted UF<sub>6</sub> Management Information Network |url=https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/storage/faq16.cfm |title=FAQ 16 – How much depleted uranium hexafluoride is stored in the United States? |access-date=22 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211125115409/https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/storage/faq16.cfm |archive-date=25 November 2021 }}</ref><ref name="anl.gov">{{cite web |website=Depleted UF<sub>6</sub> Management Information Network |url=https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/documents/index.cfm |title=Depleted UF<sub>6</sub> Management Program Documents |access-date=22 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211101104259/https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/documents/index.cfm |archive-date=1 November 2021 }}</ref>

The storage of (D){{chem2|UF6}} presents environmental, health, and safety risks because of its chemical instability. When {{chem2|UF6}} is exposed to water vapor in the air, it reacts with the moisture to produce {{Chem2|UO2F2}} (uranyl fluoride), a solid, and {{Chem2|HF}} (hydrogen fluoride), a gas, both of which are highly soluble and toxic. The [[uranyl fluoride]] solid acts to plug the leak, limiting further escape of depleted {{chem2|UF6}}. Release of the [[hydrogen fluoride]] gas to the atmosphere is also slowed by the plug formation.<ref name="anl.gov FAQ 21">{{cite web |website=Depleted UF<sub>6</sub> Management Information Network |url=https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/storage/faq21.cfm |title=What happens if a cylinder of uranium hexafluoride leaks? |access-date=22 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220122055443/https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/storage/faq21.cfm |archive-date=22 January 2022 }}</ref> Like any other uranium compound, it is radioactive, and precautions should be taken. It is also highly toxic. Whether ingested, inhaled, or [[skin absorption|absorbed through the skin]], uranyl fluoride is corrosive and may harm internal organs, potentially resulting in death. Effects of exposure may be delayed.<ref>{{cite report |title=Overview of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Management Program |url=https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/pdf/DUF6MgmtOverviewFS.PDF |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130217104049/http://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/pdf/DUF6MgmtOverviewFS.PDF |archive-date=17 February 2013 |access-date=13 June 2024 |date=Fall 2001 |publisher=[[Department of Energy|U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management]]}}</ref>

The U.S. government has been converting depleted {{chem2|UF6}} to solid [[uranium oxides]] for use or disposal.<ref name="anl.gov FAQ 22">{{cite web |website=Depleted UF<sub>6</sub> Management Information Network |url=https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/storage/faq22.cfm |title=FAQ 22 – What is going to happen to the uranium hexafluoride stored in the United States? |access-date=22 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220122061825/https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/storage/faq22.cfm |archive-date=22 January 2022 }}</ref> Such disposal of the entire D{{chem2|UF6}} inventory could cost anywhere from {{US$|15}} million to {{US$|450}} million.<ref name="anl.gov FAQ 27">{{cite web |website=Depleted UF<sub>6</sub> Management Information Network |url=https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/mgmt/faq27.cfm |title=FAQ 27 – Are there any currently-operating disposal facilities that can accept all of the depleted uranium oxide that would be generated from conversion of DOE's depleted UF6 inventory? |access-date=22 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211101220150/https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/mgmt/faq27.cfm |archive-date=1 November 2021 }}</ref>

The vulnerability of DUF<sub>6</sub> storage cylinders to terrorist attack is also a matter of concern.

{| class="wikitable"
|+ World depleted-uranium inventory<ref>
{{cite web
  |url=http://www.wise-uranium.org/eddat.html
  |title=Depleted Uranium Inventories
  |access-date=26 February 2016
}}</ref>
|-
! Country
! Organization
! Estimated DU stocks<br />[[tonnes]] ([[short tons]])
! Reported
|-
| {{flag|United States}}
| [[United States Department of Energy|DOE]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|480000|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 2002
|-
| {{flag|Russia}}
| [[Rosatom]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|460000|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 1996
|-
| {{flag|France}}
| [[Areva NC]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|190000|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 2001
|-
| {{flag|United Kingdom}}
| [[BNFL]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|30000|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 2001
|-
| {{plainlist|
*{{flag|United Kingdom}}
*{{flag|Germany}}
*{{flag|Netherlands}}
}}
| [[URENCO]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|16000|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 1999
|-
| {{flag|Japan}}
| [[JNFL]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|10000|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 2001
|-
| {{flag|China}}
| [[CNNC]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|2000|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 2000
|-
| {{flag|South Korea}}
| [[KAERI]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|200|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 2002
|-
| {{flag|South Africa}}
| [[NECSA]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|73|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 2001
|-
| {{flag|Singapore}}
| [[DSO National Laboratories]]
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|60|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 2007
|- style="font-weight:bold;"
| colspan=2 | Total
| style="text-align:right;" | {{convert|1188273|tonnes|ST|abbr=values}}
| 2008
|}

==Military applications==
Depleted uranium is very dense; at 19,050&nbsp;kg/m<sup>3</sup>, it is 1.67 times as dense as [[lead]], only slightly less dense than [[tungsten]] and [[gold]], and only 16% less than [[osmium]] or [[iridium]], which are the densest known substances under standard (i.e., Earth-surface) pressures. Consequently, a DU projectile of given mass has a smaller diameter than an equivalent lead projectile with the same [[kinetic energy]], with less [[external ballistics|aerodynamic drag]] and deeper [[terminal ballistics|penetration]] because of a higher pressure at point of impact. DU projectiles are inherently [[incendiary device|incendiary]] because they become [[Pyrophoricity|pyrophoric]] upon impact with the target.<ref name=peacock>{{cite web |last=Peacock |first=H. B. |title=Pyrophoricity of Uranium |url=http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/WSRC-TR-92-106.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/WSRC-TR-92-106.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live |publisher=Westinghouse Savannah River Company |date=March 1992 |page=2 |access-date=3 May 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Primer on Spontaneous Heating and Pyrophoricity |publisher=United States Department of Energy |date=6 January 2015 |access-date=3 May 2015 |url=http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/01/f19/DOE-HDBK-1081-2014.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150904034407/http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/01/f19/DOE-HDBK-1081-2014.pdf |archive-date=4 September 2015 }}</ref>

===Armor plate===
Because of its high density, depleted uranium can also be used in tank armor, sandwiched between sheets of steel armor plate. For instance, some late-production [[M1 Abrams|M1A1 and M1A2 Abrams]] tanks built after 1998 have DU modules integrated into their [[Depleted uranium armor|Chobham armor]], as part of the armor plating in the front of the turret, and there is a program to upgrade older tanks.

===Nuclear weapons===
{{main|Nuclear weapons design}}
Depleted uranium can be used as a [[Tamper (nuclear weapon)|tamper]], or [[neutron reflector]], in [[fission bomb]]s. A high density tamper like DU makes for a longer-lasting, more energetic, and more efficient explosion.

===Ammunition===
Most military use of depleted uranium has been as [[30 mm]] ordnance, primarily the 30&nbsp;mm PGU-14/B armor-piercing incendiary round from the [[GAU-8 Avenger]] cannon of the [[A-10 Thunderbolt II]] used by the [[United States Air Force]]. 25&nbsp;mm DU rounds have been used in the [[M242]] gun mounted on the U.S. Army's [[M2 Bradley|Bradley Fighting Vehicle]] and the [[United States Marine Corps|Marine Corps]]'s [[LAV-25]].

The U.S. Marine Corps uses DU in the 25&nbsp;mm PGU-20 round fired by the [[GAU-12 Equalizer]] cannon of the [[AV-8 Harrier II|AV-8B Harrier]], and in the 20&nbsp;mm [[M197]] gun mounted on [[AH-1 Cobra]] helicopter gunships. The [[United States Navy]]'s [[Phalanx CIWS]]'s [[M61 Vulcan]] [[Gatling gun]] used 20&nbsp;mm armor-piercing penetrator rounds with discarding [[plastic]] sabots and a core made using depleted uranium, however they later changed to using [[tungsten]] penetrators.

[[File:Mark 149 Mod 2 20mm ammunition.jpg|thumb|upright=1|Mark 149 Mod 2 20mm depleted uranium ammunition for the [[Phalanx CIWS]] aboard the battleship [[USS Missouri (BB-63)|USS ''Missouri'']], November 1987.]]

Another use of depleted uranium is in [[kinetic energy penetrator]]s, [[anti-armor]] rounds such as the 120&nbsp;mm [[Sabot (firearms)|sabot rounds]] fired from the British [[Challenger 1]], [[Challenger 2]],<ref>[[Hugh McManners|McManners, Hugh]], ''Gulf War One'' Real Voices From the Front Line, Ebury Publishing, 2010, {{ISBN|9780091935986}}, p. 91.</ref> [[M1 Abrams|M1A1 and M1A2]] Abrams.<ref>{{cite web |author=Fahey, D. |url=http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/pdf/dumyths.pdf |date=12 March 2003 |title=Science or Science Fiction? Facts, Myths and Propaganda In the Debate Over Depleted Uranium Weapons |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050601054749/http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/pdf/dumyths.pdf |archive-date=1 June 2005 |at=Table 1 on p. 13}}</ref> Kinetic energy penetrator rounds consist of a long, relatively thin penetrator surrounded by a discarding sabot. [[Staballoy]]s are metal alloys of depleted uranium with a very small proportion of other metals, usually [[titanium]] or [[molybdenum]]. One formulation has a composition of 99.25% by mass of depleted uranium and 0.75% by mass of [[titanium]]. Staballoys are approximately 1.67 times as dense as lead and are designed for use in kinetic energy penetrator armor-piercing ammunition. The US Army uses DU in an alloy with around 3.5% titanium.

Depleted uranium is favored for the penetrator because it is self-sharpening<ref>{{Cite web |last=Franzen |first=Harald |date=5 March 2001 |title=The Science of the Silver Bullet |url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-science-of-the-silver/ |access-date=2023-04-07 |website=Scientific American |language=en}}</ref> and [[flammable]].<ref name=peacock/> On impact with a hard target, such as an armored vehicle, the tip of the projectile will be "mushroomed",<ref>{{cite journal |author=Bo Wang ID|author2=Yongxiang Dong|author3=Guangyan Huang|title=An Investigation on the Adiabatic Shear Bands in Depleted U-0.75 wt % Ti Alloy under Dynamic Loading|journal=Metals |date=2018 |volume=8 |issue=2 |page=145 |doi=10.3390/met8020145 |doi-access=free }}</ref> while the back of the projectile is still a rigid solid. This leads to adiabatic shearing, and together with the spin of the projectile results in a shedding of the mushroomed plastic phase in such a way that it forms a new sharp tip. This shedding of the mushroomed tip improves penetration properties compared to the complete dispersal that takes place with tungsten penetrators,<ref>{{Cite news |last=Faulconbridge |first=Guy |date=2023-03-24 |title=Explainer: What are depleted uranium weapons – and what are the risks? |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-are-depleted-uranium-weapons-what-are-risks-2023-03-23/ |access-date=2023-04-07 |work=Reuters |language=en}}</ref> therefore DU penetrators are 20% more effective than tungsten rounds.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Depleted uranium tank shells: Why are they used and how do they work? |url=https://www.forces.net/ukraine/ukraine-what-are-uranium-tipped-shells-and-how-do-they-work |access-date=2023-04-07 |website=Forces Network |date=28 March 2023 |language=en}}</ref> The impact and subsequent release of heat energy causes it to [[combustion|ignite]] when in contact with oxygen.<ref name=peacock/> When a DU penetrator reaches the interior of an armored vehicle, it catches fire, often igniting ammunition and fuel and possibly causing the vehicle to explode.<ref name=":0" /> DU is used by the U.S. Army in 120&nbsp;mm or 105&nbsp;mm cannons employed on the [[M1 Abrams]] [[tank]].

The DU content in various ammunition is {{convert|180|g}} in 20&nbsp;mm, {{convert|200|g}} in 25&nbsp;mm, {{convert|280|g}} in 30&nbsp;mm, {{convert|3.5|kg}} in 105&nbsp;mm, and {{convert|4.5|kg}} in 120&nbsp;mm penetrators. DU was used during the mid-1990s in the U.S. to make [[hand grenade]]s, and [[land mine]]s, but those applications have been discontinued, according to [[Alliant Techsystems]].{{Citation needed|date=November 2011}} The US Navy used DU in its 20&nbsp;mm [[Phalanx CIWS]] guns, but switched in the late 1990s to armor-piercing tungsten.

Only the US and the UK have acknowledged using DU weapons.{{As of?|date=March 2023}}<ref>McDonald, Avril; Kleffner, Jann K. and Toebes, Brigit eds. (2003) ''The International Legality of the Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons: A Precautionary Approach''. TMC Asser Press.</ref> The Soviet Union and Russia have used DU weaponry since the 3BM-32 Vant, designed for the [[125 mm smoothbore ammunition|125 mm]] tank cannons.<ref name="TNA">{{Cite web | first=Michael | last=Peck | title=Russia Is Arming Its Tanks with a Controversial New 'Bullet' | work=[[The National Interest]] | url=https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-arming-its-tanks-controversial-new-bullet-39682 | date=24 December 2018 | access-date=22 March 2023}}</ref> In 2018, [[TASS]] reported that Russia was arming some of its [[T-80]] models with 3BM60 Svinets-2 DU rounds.<ref name="TNA"/> 782,414 DU rounds were fired during the 1991 war in Iraq, mostly by US forces.<ref name="Guardian-20140619">{{cite news |last=Edwards |first=Rob |date=19 June 2014 |title=US fired depleted uranium at civilian areas in 2003 Iraq war, report finds |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/19/us-depleted-uranium-weapons-civilian-areas-iraq |work=The Guardian |location=London, England}}</ref> In a three-week period of conflict in Iraq during 2003, it was estimated that between 1,000 and 2,000 tonnes of depleted uranium munitions were used.<ref name="gaurdian2003">{{cite news |first=Paul |last=Brown |date=25 April 2003 |title=Gulf troops face tests for cancer |work=[[The Guardian]] |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/apr/25/internationaleducationnews.armstrade |access-date=29 August 2013}}</ref> More than 300,000 DU rounds were fired during the 2003 war, the vast majority by US troops.<ref name=Guardian-20140619/> The [[International Atomic Energy Agency]] (IAEA) estimates that between 170 and 1,700 tonnes of depleted uranium was dropped in Iraq by the US military since 2003, whereas the UK reported firing 1.9 tonnes of depleted uranium weapons in Iraq<ref>{{cite journal |author=Surdyk |first1=Shelby |last2=Itani |first2=Moustapha |year=2021 |title=Weaponised uranium and adverse health outcomes in Iraq: a systematic review |journal=[[BMJ Global Health]] |volume=6 |issue=2 |article-number=e004166 |doi=10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004166 |pmc=7903104 |pmid=33619039}}</ref>

In March 2023, the UK government confirmed it was sending DU rounds to Ukraine along with its [[Challenger 2]] tanks with its 120mm ammunition during the [[Russian invasion of Ukraine|Russian invasion]].<ref>{{cite news |url= https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/m1a1-abrams-variant-will-be-given-to-ukraine-to-expedite-tank-deliveries |title= M1A1 Abrams Variant Will Be Given To Ukraine To Expedite Tank Deliveries |date= 21 March 2023 |publisher= The Drive |access-date= 21 March 2023 |archive-date= 30 March 2023 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20230330125933/https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/m1a1-abrams-variant-will-be-given-to-ukraine-to-expedite-tank-deliveries }}</ref>

===Legal status in weapons===
In 1996, the [[International Court of Justice]] (ICJ) gave an advisory opinion on the "[[legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons]]".<ref>[http://www.cornnet.nl/~akmalten/unan5a.html Advisory Opinion 1996 8 July 8; General List No. 95 (req: UNGA)] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140522005411/http://www.cornnet.nl/~akmalten/unan5a.html |date=22 May 2014 }}. Cornnet.nl. Retrieved 16 January 2011.</ref> This made it clear, in paragraphs 54–56, that [[international law]] on poisonous weapons—the Second Hague Declaration of 29 July 1899, Hague Convention IV of 18 October 1907 and the Geneva Protocol of 17 June 1925—did not cover nuclear weapons, because their prime or exclusive use was not to poison or asphyxiate. This ICJ opinion was about nuclear weapons, but the sentence "The terms have been understood, in the practice of States, in their ordinary sense as covering weapons whose prime, or even exclusive, effect is to poison or asphyxiate," also removes depleted uranium weaponry from coverage by the same treaties as their primary use is not to poison or asphyxiate, but to destroy [[materiel]] and kill soldiers through [[kinetic energy]].

The [[Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities]] of the [[United Nations Human Rights Commission]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.houstonprogressive.org/hpn/iraq08.html |title=Citizen Inspectors Foiled in Search for DU Weapons |website=HOUSTON PROGRESSIVE |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150901205246/http://www.houstonprogressive.org/hpn/iraq08.html |archive-date=2015-09-01 |access-date=16 January 2011}}</ref> passed two motions<ref>{{Cite web |title=Depleted Uranium UN Resolutions |url=http://www.prop1.org/2000/du/resource/000310un.htm |access-date=2024-06-05 |website=www.prop1.org}}</ref>—the first in 1996<ref>[http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0811fcbd0b9f6bd58025667300306dea/887c730868a70a758025665700548a00 International peace and security as an]. Unhchr.ch. Retrieved 16 January 2011.</ref> and the second in 1997.<ref>{{cite web
 |url= http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/21a4acb0f1b289ed80256633004ce147?
 |title= Opendocument Sub-Commission resolution 1997/36
}}</ref> They listed [[weapons of mass destruction]], or weapons with indiscriminate effect, or of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering and urged all states to curb the production and the spread of such weapons. Included in the list was weaponry containing depleted uranium. The committee authorized a working paper, in the context of [[human rights]] and humanitarian norms, of the weapons.

The requested UN working paper was delivered in 2002<ref>{{cite web |date=27 June 2002 |title=Human rights and weapons of mass destruction, or with indiscriminate effect, or of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering |url=https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G02/141/67/PDF/G0214167.pdf?OpenElement |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170305030034/https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G02/141/67/PDF/G0214167.pdf?OpenElement |archive-date=5 March 2017 |access-date=31 October 2016 |publisher=United Nations Economic and Social Council}}([http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/AllSymbols/22481F4157DE6274C1256C00004C29BB/$File/G0214167.pdf?OpenElement backup]) "In its decision 2001/36 of 16 August 2001, the Sub-Commission, recalling its resolutions 1997/36 and 1997/37 of 28 August 1997, authorized Mr. Y. K. J. Yeung Sik Yuen to prepare, without financial implications, in the context of human rights and humanitarian norms, the working paper originally assigned to Ms. Forero Ucros."</ref> by [[Y. K. J. Yeung Sik Yuen]] in accordance with [[Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights]] resolution 2001/36. He argues that the use of DU in weapons, along with the other weapons listed by the Sub‑Commission, may breach one or more of the following treaties: [[the Universal Declaration of Human Rights]], the [[Charter of the United Nations]], the [[Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide|Genocide Convention]], the [[United Nations Convention Against Torture]], the [[Geneva Conventions]] including [[Protocol I]], the [[Convention on Conventional Weapons]] of 1980, and the [[Chemical Weapons Convention]]. Yeung Sik Yuen writes in Paragraph 133 under the title "''Legal compliance of weapons containing DU as a new weapon''":

{{blockquote|Annex II to the [[Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material]] 1980 (which became operative on 8 February 1997) classifies DU as a category II nuclear material. Storage and transport rules are set down for that category which indicates that DU is considered sufficiently "hot" and dangerous to warrant these protections. But since weapons containing DU are relatively new weapons no treaty exists yet to regulate, limit or prohibit its use. The legality or illegality of DU weapons must therefore be tested by recourse to the general rules governing the use of weapons under humanitarian and human rights law which have already been analysed in Part I of this paper, and more particularly at paragraph 35 which states that parties to [[Protocol I]] to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 have an obligation to ascertain that new weapons do not violate the laws and customs of war or any other international law. As mentioned, the [[International Court of Justice]] considers this rule binding customary humanitarian law.}}

[[Louise Arbour]], chief prosecutor for the [[International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia]] led a committee of staff lawyers to investigate possible treaty prohibitions against the use of DU in weapons. Their findings were that:<ref>Sills, Joe ''et al.'' (April 2002) ''[https://web.archive.org/web/20041015050907/http://www.aepi.army.mil/internet/env-crime-icc-printer.pdf Environmental Crimes in Military Actions and the International Criminal Court (ICC) – United Nations Perspectives]'' (PDF) ([https://web.archive.org/web/20041015050907/http://www.aepi.army.mil/internet/env-crime-icc-printer.pdf HTML]) of American Council for the UN University. p. 28</ref>

{{blockquote|There is no specific treaty ban on the use of DU projectiles. There is a developing scientific debate and concern expressed regarding the impact of the use of such projectiles and it is possible that, in future, there will be a consensus view in international legal circles that use of such projectiles violate general principles of the law applicable to use of weapons in armed conflict. No such consensus exists at present.<ref>{{cite report |title=Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia |section=ii. Use of Depleted Uranium Projectiles |url=https://www.un.org/icty/pressreal/nato061300.htm#IVA2 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090806072638/http://www.un.org/icty/pressreal/nato061300.htm#IVA2 |archive-date=6 August 2009}}</ref>}}According to the [[United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research]], depleted uranium does not meet the legal definitions of nuclear, radiological, toxin, chemical, poison or incendiary weapons, as far as DU ammunition is not designed nor intended to kill or wound by its chemical or radiological effects.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=McDonald|first=Avril|date=October 2008|title=Depleted uranium weapons: the next target for disarmament?|url=https://www.unidir.org/files/publications/pdfs/uranium-weapons-en-328.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.unidir.org/files/publications/pdfs/uranium-weapons-en-328.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|journal=Disarmament Forum|publisher=United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research|volume=3|pages=19–20}}</ref>

===Requests for a moratorium on military use===
A number of anti-war activists specializing in [[international humanitarian law]] have questioned the legality of the continued use of depleted uranium weapons, highlighting that the effects may breach the [[Distinction (law)|principle of distinction]] (between civilians and military personnel).<ref>{{cite journal |last=Gibbons |first=O. T. |date=December 2004 |title=Uses and Effects of Depleted Uranium Munitions: Towards a Moratorium on Use |journal=Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law |volume=7 |pages=191–232 |doi=10.1017/S1389135904001916}}</ref> Some states and the [[International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons]], a coalition of more than 155 [[non-governmental organization]]s, have asked for a ban on the production and military use of depleted uranium weapons.<ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/i/10.html|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20061207174804/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/i/10.html|url-status= usurped|archive-date= 7 December 2006| title=ICBUW's membership includes 85 groups in 22 countries worldwide| date=27 September 2006|publisher=The International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons| access-date=22 March 2007}}</ref>

The [[European Parliament]] has repeatedly passed resolutions requesting an immediate [[Moratorium (law)|moratorium]] on the further use of depleted uranium ammunition,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/pdfs/EUweaponsres12f03.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.eoslifework.co.uk/pdfs/EUweaponsres12f03.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|date=10 February 2003|title=Session Document: European Parliament resolution on the harmful effects of unexploded ordnance (landmines and cluster submunitions) and depleted uranium ammunition|access-date=22 March 2007}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/89.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070928080849/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/89.html|url-status=usurped|archive-date=28 September 2007|publisher=The International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons| access-date=22 March 2007| title=European Parliament Makes Fourth Call for DU Ban| date=22 November 2006}}</ref> but [[France]] and [[United Kingdom|Britain]] – the only [[Europe]]an states that are permanent members of the [[United Nations Security Council]]—have consistently rejected calls for a ban,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/durej.htm|title=DU: Some NATO Countries Reject Moratorium|date=11 January 2001|publisher=UN Wire|access-date=22 March 2007}}</ref> maintaining that its use continues to be legal, and that the health risks are unsubstantiated.<ref name="ukepetition2007">{{cite web|url=http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page11309.asp|date=22 March 2007|title=Depleteduranium – epetition reply|publisher=The Prime Minister's Office|access-date=22 March 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070514012751/http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page11309.asp|archive-date=14 May 2007}}</ref>

In 2007, France, Britain, the Netherlands, and the Czech Republic voted against a [[United Nations General Assembly]] resolution to hold a debate in 2009 about the effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium. All other European Union nations voted in favour or abstained.<ref name="A-62-PV.61">{{UN document |docid=A-62-PV.61 |body=General Assembly |type=Verbotim Report |session=62 |meeting=61 |page=14 |anchor=pg014-bk01 |date=5 December 2007 |speakername=The Acting President |accessdate=21 August 2008}}</ref> The ambassador from the Netherlands explained his negative vote as being due to the reference in the preamble to the resolution "to potential harmful effects of the use of depleted uranium munitions on human health and the environment [which] cannot, in our view, be supported by conclusive scientific studies conducted by relevant international organizations."<ref>{{ UN document |docid=A-62-PV.61 |body=General Assembly |type=Verbotim Report |session=62 |meeting=61 |page=25 |anchor=pg025-bk02 |date=5 December 2007 |speakername=Mr. De Klerk|speakernation=Netherlands |accessdate=21 August 2008}}</ref> None of the other permanent members of the United Nations Security Council supported the resolution as China was absent for the vote, Russia abstained and the United States voted against the resolution.<ref name="A-62-PV.61"/>

In September 2008, and in response to the 2007 General Assembly resolution, the [[UN Secretary General]] published the views of 15 states alongside those of the [[International Atomic Energy Agency]] (IAEA) and [[World Health Organization]] (WHO). The IAEA and WHO evidence differed little from previous statements on the issue.<ref name="ICBUW">Staff. {{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20090116014809/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/188.html UN Secretary General Publishes Report on Uranium Weapons]}}, {{usurped|1=[https://archive.today/20120719151325/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/i/57.html ICBUW]}}, 17 September 2008.</ref> The report was largely split between states concerned about depleted uranium's use, such as [[Finland]], [[Cuba]], [[Japan]], [[Serbia]], [[Argentina]], and predominantly [[NATO]] members, who do not consider the use of depleted uranium munitions problematic.<ref name=ICBUW/>

In December 2008, 141 states supported a resolution requesting that three UN agencies: [[United Nations Environment Programme]] (UNEP), WHO and IAEA update their research on the impact of uranium munitions by late 2010—to coincide with the General Assembly's 65th Session, four voted against, 34 abstained and 13 were absent.<ref name="ga10792">{{cite press release |date=2 December 2008 |url=https://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2008/ga10792.doc.htm |title=UN Department of Public Information: Effects of the use of Armaments and Ammunitions Containing Depleted Uranium (A/C.1/63/L.26) |id=GA/10792 |publisher=UN}} See draft XIV and Annex XIII.</ref> As before Britain and France voted against the resolution. All other European Union nations voted in favour or abstained: the Netherlands, which voted against a resolution in 2007, voted in favour, as did Finland and [[Norway]], both of which had abstained in 2007, while the Czech Republic, which voted against the resolution in 2007, abstained. The two other states that voted against the resolution were [[Israel]] and the United States (both of which voted against in 2007), while as before [[China]] was absent for the vote, and Russia abstained.<ref name=ga10792/>

In June 2009, [[Belgium]] became the first country in the world to ban: "inert ammunition and armour that contains depleted uranium or any other industrially manufactured uranium."<ref>{{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20160303190211/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/274.html UK Uranium Weapons Network launched as Belgium becomes first country to ban depleted uranium weapons]}}. Bandepleteduranium.org (22 June 2009). Retrieved 16 January 2011.</ref> The move followed a unanimous parliamentary vote on the issue on 22 March 2007. The text of the 2007 law allowed for two years to pass until it came into force.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/docs/69.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110719091019/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/docs/69.pdf |archive-date=2011-07-19 |url-status=usurped |title=English translation of Belgian text banning uranium weapons and armour |access-date=4 September 2013}}</ref> In April 2009, the Belgian Senate voted unanimously to restrict investments by Belgian banks into the manufacturers of depleted uranium weapons.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dekamer.be/FLWB/PDF/52/1935/52K1935001.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.dekamer.be/FLWB/PDF/52/1935/52K1935001.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live |title=Belgian Senate votes to ban investments by Belgian financial institutions into uranium weapon manufacturers |access-date=4 September 2013}}</ref>

In September 2009, the [[Latin American Parliament]] passed a resolution calling for a regional moratorium on the use, production and procurement of uranium weapons. It also called on the Parlatino's members to work towards an international uranium weapons treaty.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/docs/110.pdf |title=Resolución Latinoamericana de la Comision de Derechos Humanos, Justicia y Politicas Carcelarias: Prohibición de las armas de uranio |access-date=4 September 2013 |archive-date=1 March 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120301113809/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/docs/110.pdf |url-status=usurped }}</ref>

In November 2010 the Irish Senate passed a bill seeking to outlaw depleted uranium weapons,<ref>{{cite web|author=ICBUW |url=http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/361.html |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120127152805/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/361.html |archive-date=27 January 2012 |title=Irish depleted uranium ban bill sails through Senate with cross party support |publisher=Bandepleteduranium.org |access-date=4 September 2013}}{{cbignore}}</ref> but it lapsed before approval by the [[Dáil Éireann|Dáil]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/bills28/bills/2009/4809/document1.htm |title=Oireachtas Web site: Prohibition of Depleted Uranium Weapons Bill 2009 |publisher=Oireachtas.ie |date=2 July 2009 |access-date=4 September 2013 |archive-date=8 May 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130508105716/http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/bills28/bills/2009/4809/document1.htm }}</ref>

In December 2010, 148 states supported a United Nations' General Assembly resolution calling for the states that use depleted uranium weapons in conflict to reveal where the weapons have been fired when asked to do so by the country upon whose territory they have been used.

In April 2011, the Congress of Costa Rica passed a law prohibiting uranium weapons in its territories, becoming the second country in the world to do so.<ref>{{cite web |author=ICBUW |url=http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/407.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110501131940/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/407.html |url-status=usurped |archive-date=1 May 2011 |title=Costa Rica bans depleted uranium weapons |publisher=Bandepleteduranium.org |access-date=4 September 2013}}</ref>

In December 2012, 155 states supported a United Nations' General Assembly resolution that recalled that, because of the ongoing uncertainties over the long-term environmental impacts of depleted uranium identified by the United Nations Environment Programme, states should adopt a precautionary approach to its use.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/67/36|title=UNGA (2012) A/RES/67/36 Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 3 December 2012, Effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium}}</ref>

In December 2014, 150 states supported a United Nations' General Assembly resolution encouraging states to provide assistance to states affected by the use of depleted uranium weapons, in particular in identifying and managing contaminated sites and material.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/69/57|title=UNGA (2014) A/RES/69/57 Effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium.}}</ref> In contrast to the previous biennial resolutions, Germany moved to an abstention from supporting to the resolutions.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/the-politics-behind-the-2014-du-vote|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141203131152/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/the-politics-behind-the-2014-du-vote|url-status=usurped|archive-date=3 December 2014|title=ICBUW (2014) The politics behind the vote on 2014's UN depleted uranium resolution}}</ref> Prior to the vote, in a report to the United Nations Secretary General requested by 2012's resolution published in June 2014, Iraq had called for a global treaty ban on depleted uranium weapons.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/69/151|title=UNGA (2014) Effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium. Report of the Secretary-General.}}</ref>

==Civilian applications==
Depleted uranium has a very high density and is primarily used as shielding material for other radioactive material, and as [[Sailing ballast|ballast]]. Examples include sailboat [[keel]]s, as [[counterweight]]s and as shielding in industrial [[radiography]] cameras.

===Energy===
Most civilian [[nuclear reactor]]s, as well as all [[Nuclear marine propulsion|naval reactors]], require fuel containing concentrated <sup>235</sup>U, and production of that fuel generates depleted uranium as residue. Some power-generating reactors design are able to use unenriched fuel, for example the [[pressurized heavy-water reactor]]s such as the [[CANDU reactor|CANDU]] design. However, as of 2013, about 10% of those built use that technology.<ref>{{cite book |title=Proceedings of American Nuclear Society 2013 Wilmington, North Carolina |date=2013 |publisher=ANS American Nuclear Society |oclc=864923078}}</ref> [[Travelling wave reactor]]s are a proposed type of reactor which can use depleted uranium as fuel.

===Radiation shielding===
Depleted uranium is the best radiation shielding by weight, due to the high atomic weight of the uranium atoms; materials are more able to block radioactivity the higher their atomic weight, and uranium is one of the heaviest natural elements. [[Lead]], the heaviest stable element, is the most common low-cost alternative, but a lead shield needs to be about three times as thick as a DU shield to provide the equivalent protection. Uranium also has by far a higher melting point {{Convert|2070|F|C}}, and its tensile strength is similar to that of steel.<ref>{{Cite web |author=Vaziri |first=Kamran |title=Radiation Basics – Radiation Shielding |url=http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q8929.html |access-date=2023-01-26 |website=Health Physics Society}}</ref>

[[Industrial radiography]] cameras include a very high activity [[gamma radiation]] source (typically [[Iridium-192#Iridium-192|Ir-192]] with an activity above 10 TBq). Depleted uranium is often used in the cameras as a shield to protect individuals from the gamma source. Typically, the uranium shield is supported and enclosed in [[polyurethane]] foam for thermal, mechanical and oxidation protection.<ref>{{cite web
 |url=http://www.ir100.com/PROD01.html
 |title=The INC IR-100 Gamma Ray Camera
 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070930093916/http://www.ir100.com/PROD01.html
 |archive-date=30 September 2007
}}</ref>

===Coloring in consumer products===
Consumer product uses have included incorporation into [[dental porcelain]], used for [[false teeth]] to simulate the fluorescence of natural teeth, and uranium-bearing reagents used in chemistry laboratories (e.g. [[uranyl acetate]], used in [[analytical chemistry]] and as a [[staining|stain]] in [[electron microscopy]]). Uranium (both depleted uranium and natural uranium) was widely used as a coloring matter for [[Fiestaware|porcelain]] and [[Uranium glass|glass]] in the 19th and early-to-mid-20th century. The practice was largely discontinued in the late 20th century. In 1999, concentrations of 10% depleted uranium were being used in "jaune no.17" a yellow [[Vitreous enamel|enamel]] powder that was being produced in [[France]] by Cristallerie de Saint-Paul, a manufacturer of enamel [[pigment]]s. The depleted uranium used in the powder was sold by [[Cogéma]]'s Pierrelatte facility. In February 2000, Cogema discontinued the sale of depleted uranium to producers of enamel and glass.<ref>{{cite web
 |url= http://www.wise-uranium.org/dviss.html#ENAMELF
 |title= Depleted Uranium found as Coloring Matter in Enamel (France)}}</ref>

===Trim weights in aircraft===
Aircraft that contain depleted uranium trim weights for stabilizing wings and control surfaces (such as the [[Boeing 747|Boeing 747–100]]) may contain between {{convert|652|and|1059|lb}} of DU.<ref>{{Cite web |author=Gallacher |first=Thomas |date=8 September 1994 |title=Boeing Use of Depleted Uranium Counterweights in Aircraft |url=https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0321/ML032180089.pdf |access-date=27 June 2023 |work=nrc.gov}}</ref> This application is controversial because the DU might enter the environment if the aircraft crashes. The metal can also [[oxidation|oxidize]] to a fine powder in a fire. Its use has been phased out in many newer aircraft. [[Boeing]] and [[McDonnell-Douglas]] discontinued using DU counterweights in the 1980s. Depleted uranium was released during the crash of [[El Al Flight 1862]] on 4 October 1992, in which {{convert|152|kg}} was lost, but a [[case study]] concluded that there was no evidence to link depleted uranium from the plane to any health problems.<ref name="Uijt">{{cite journal |author=Uijt de Haag |first1=P. A. |last2=Smetsers |first2=R. C. |last3=Witlox |first3=H. W. |last4=Krus |first4=H. W. |last5=Eisenga |first5=A. H. |year=2000 |title=Evaluating the risk from depleted uranium after the Boeing 747-258F crash in Amsterdam, 1992 |journal=Journal of Hazardous Materials |volume=76 |issue=1 |pages=39–58 |doi=10.1016/S0304-3894(00)00183-7 |pmid=10863013|bibcode=2000JHzM...76...39U }}</ref> DU counterweights manufactured with [[cadmium plating]] are considered non-hazardous as long as the plating is intact.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC20-123.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC20-123.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=AC20-123 Avoiding or Minimizing Encounters with Aircraft Equipped with Depleted Uranium Balance Weights during Accident Investigations}}</ref>

===US NRC general license===
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations at [https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part040/part040-0025.html 10 CFR 40.25] establish a general license for the use of depleted uranium contained in industrial products or devices for mass-volume applications. This general license allows anyone to possess or use depleted uranium for authorized purposes. Generally, a registration form is required, along with a commitment to not abandon the material. Agreement states may have similar, or more stringent, regulations.

===Sailboat keel===
[[Pen Duick|''Pen Duick VI'']], a boat designed by {{ill|André Mauric|fr}} and used for racing, was equipped with a [[keel]] of depleted uranium.<ref>"Pen Duick heading for Bass Strait" ''The Sydney Morning Herald'', 4 December 1973, [https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1301&dat=19731204&id=0rIpAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EeUDAAAAIBAJ&pg=755,1709736 p. 17].</ref> The benefit is that, because of the very high density of uranium, the keel could be thinner for a given weight, and so have less resistance than a normal keel. It was later replaced by a standard lead keel.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.volvooceanrace.com/en/news/7245_Roaring-Forties-chapter-22-Frances-inspiration.html |title=Roaring Forties, chapter 22: France's inspiration |date=19 August 2013 |work=[[Volvo Ocean Race]] |access-date=26 February 2016 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130819125034/http://www.volvooceanrace.com/en/news/7245_Roaring-Forties-chapter-22-Frances-inspiration.html |archive-date=19 August 2013}}</ref>

===Sampling calorimeters for detectors in high-energy particle physics===
Depleted uranium has been used in a number of [[calorimeter (particle physics)#Homogeneous versus sampling|sampling calorimeters]] (such as in the D0<ref>{{cite report | last=Pifer | first=B. | title=An Experiment at D0 to Study anti-Proton – Proton Collisions at 2-TeV: Design Report | publisher=Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) | date=1983| doi=10.2172/1131090 | page=}}</ref> and ZEUS<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www-zeus.desy.de/bluebook/ch05/chapter2_4.html|title=The ZEUS detector: Status Report 1993}}</ref> detectors) because of its high density and natural radioactivity.{{Citation needed|date=November 2024}}

==Health considerations==
Normal functioning of the [[kidney]], [[Human brain|brain]], [[liver]], [[Human heart|heart]], and numerous other systems can be affected by uranium exposure because uranium is a [[toxic metal]],<ref name=Craft/> although less [[toxicity|toxic]] than other [[heavy metals]], such as [[arsenic]] and [[mercury (element)|mercury]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/cercla/07list.html |title=2007 CERCLA Priority List of Hazardous Substances |publisher=Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110904082730/http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/cercla/07list.html |archive-date=4 September 2011 }}</ref> It is weakly radioactive and is 'persistently' so because of its very long [[half-life]]. The [[Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry]] states that: "to be exposed to radiation from uranium, you have to eat, drink, or breathe it, or get it on your skin."<ref>{{cite web
 |url= http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp150.html
 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20010718214439/http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp150.html
 |archive-date= 18 July 2001
 |title= Toxicological profile for uranium
 |author= Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
 |year= 1999
 |location= Washington, DC |publisher= US Public Health Service
|author-link= Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
 }}</ref> If DU particles do enter an individual, the type of danger presented—toxic vs. radiological—and the organ most likely to be affected depend on the solubility of the particles.<ref name = "RSDUWG 2002a 1">{{Harvnb|RSDUWG|2002|p=1}}. Briefly, inhaled and insoluble means that the DU particles will stick around in the lungs and attendant lymph nodes, presenting a radiological risk; highly soluble means those particles are off to the kidneys, where toxicity is the issue.</ref>

In military conflicts involving DU munitions, the major concern is inhalation of DU particles in aerosols arising from the impacts of DU-enhanced projectiles with their targets.<ref name = "RSDUWG 2002a 1"/> When depleted uranium munitions penetrate armor or burn, they create depleted [[uranium oxide]]s in the form of dust that can be inhaled or contaminate wounds. The Institute of Nuclear Technology-Radiation Protection of [[Attiki]], [[Greece]], has noted that "the aerosol produced during impact and combustion of depleted uranium munitions can potentially contaminate wide areas around the impact sites or can be inhaled by civilians and military personnel".<ref name=Mitsakou/> The use of DU in incendiary ammunition is controversial because of potential adverse health effects and its release into the environment.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.seattlepi.com/national/95178_du12.shtml |title=Iraqi cancers, birth defects blamed on U.S. depleted uranium. |newspaper=Seattle Post-Intelligencer |author=Johnson, Larry |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081120013734/http://www.seattlepi.com/national/95178_du12.shtml |archive-date=20 November 2008 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news
|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/362484.stm
|title=Depleted uranium: the lingering poison
|publisher=BBC
|author=Kirby, Alex
|date=7 June 1999}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |author=Richardson |first=J. J. |date=23 June 1999 |title=Depleted Uranium: The Invisible Threat |url=https://www.motherjones.com/news/special_reports/total_coverage/kosovo/reality_check/du.html |magazine=Mother Jones}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://nucnews.net/2000/du/99du/990730rt.htm
|title=Panel says depleted uranium shells leave birth defects, death
|publisher=Reuters
|author=O'Callaghan, John
|date=30 July 1999
|access-date=7 November 2007
|archive-date=7 March 2008
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080307100915/http://nucnews.net/2000/du/99du/990730rt.htm
}}</ref><ref name=r1>{{cite web
|url =http://www.sptimes.com/2003/05/25/Columns/How_harmful_is_deplet.shtml
|title=How harmful is depleted uranium?
|newspaper=The St. Petersburg Times|author=Taylor Martin, Susan |date=25 May 2003}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
 |url=http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0929-11.htm
 |title=The War's Littlest Victim
 |publisher=N.Y. Daily News
 |author=Gonzalez, Juan
 |date=29 September 2004
 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070712222352/http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0929-11.htm
 |archive-date=12 July 2007
}}</ref>

The [[U.S. Department of Defense]] claims that no human [[cancer]] of any type has been seen as a result of exposure to either natural or depleted uranium.<ref name="Health Effects of Uranium">{{cite book
 |url= http://fhp.osd.mil/du/healthEffects.jsp
 |title= Toxicological profile for uranium
 |chapter= Health Effects of Uranium
 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20071123082540/http://fhp.osd.mil/du/healthEffects.jsp
 |archive-date= 23 November 2007 }}</ref> Militaries have long had risk-reduction procedures for their troops to follow,<ref name=Zwijnenburg/> and studies are in consistent agreement that veterans who used DU-enhanced munitions have not suffered, so far, from an increased risk of cancer (see the Gulf War and Balkans sections below). The effects of DU on civilian populations are, however, a topic of intense and ongoing controversy.

As early as 1997, [[Royal Army Medical Corps|British Army doctors]] warned the [[Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom)|Ministry of Defence]] that exposure to depleted uranium increased the risk of developing lung, lymph and brain cancer, and recommended a series of safety precautions.<ref name="guardian">{{cite news |last=Norton-Taylor |first=Richard |date=11 January 2001 |title=MoD knew shells were cancer risk |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/jan/11/armstrade.world?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487 |access-date=29 August 2013 |work=[[The Guardian]] |location=London, England}}</ref> According to a report issued summarizing the advice of the doctors, "Inhalation of insoluble [[uranium dioxide]] dust will lead to accumulation in the lungs with very slow clearance—if any. ... Although chemical toxicity is low, there may be localised radiation damage of the lung leading to cancer." The report warns that "All personnel ... should be aware that uranium dust inhalation carries a long-term risk ... [the dust] has been shown to increase the risks of developing lung, lymph and brain cancers."<ref name="guardian" />

In 2003, the [[Royal Society]] called, again, for urgent attention to be paid to the possible health and environmental impact of depleted uranium, and added its backing to the [[United Nations Environment Programme]]'s call for a scientific assessment of sites struck with depleted uranium.<ref group=notes name = "Moszynski 2003 a">{{Harvnb|Moszynski|2003}}. The article quotes Professor Brian Spratt of the Royal Society's DU working group: "It is highly unsatisfactory to deploy a large amount of material that is weakly radioactive and chemically toxic without knowing how much soldiers and civilians have been exposed to."</ref> In early 2004, the UK Pensions Appeal Tribunal Service attributed [[birth defect]] claims from a February 1991 [[Gulf War]] combat veteran to depleted uranium [[poison]]ing.<ref name="vitw.org">Williams, M. (9 February 2004) [http://vitw.org/archives/405 "First Award for Depleted Uranium Poisoning Claim,"] ''The Herald Online,'' (Edinburgh, Scotland: Herald Newspapers, Limited).</ref><ref name="cadu.org.uk">Campaign Against Depleted Uranium (Spring 2004) [http://www.cadu.org.uk/news/17.htm#icbuw "MoD Forced to Pay Pension for DU Contamination,"] ''CADU News 17.''</ref> A 2005 [[epidemiology]] review concluded: "In aggregate the human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in offspring of persons exposed to DU."<ref name=Hindin/> Studies using cultured cells and laboratory rodents continue to suggest the possibility of [[leukemia|leukemogenic]], [[gene]]tic, [[reproduction|reproductive]], and [[neurological]] effects from chronic exposure.<ref name=Miller/>

===Chemical toxicity===
The chemical toxicity of depleted uranium is identical to that of natural uranium and about a million times greater ''in vivo'' than DU's radiological hazard,<ref name=Miller2/> with the kidney considered to be the main target organ.<ref name = "RSDUWG 2002a 2">{{Harvnb|RSDUWG|2002|p=2}}.</ref> Health effects of DU are determined by factors such as the extent of exposure and whether it was internal or external. Three main pathways exist by which internalization of uranium may occur: [[inhalation]], [[ingestion]], and embedded fragments or [[Fragmentation (weaponry)|shrapnel]] contamination.<ref name=Livengood/><ref>{{Harvnb|RSDUWG|2002|p=19}}.</ref> Properties such as phase (e.g. particulate or gaseous), oxidation state (e.g. metallic or ceramic), and the solubility of uranium and its compounds influence their absorption, [[Distribution (pharmacology)|distribution]], translocation, [[Clearance (medicine)|elimination]] and the resulting toxicity. For example, metallic uranium is less toxic compared to hexavalent uranium(VI) [[uranyl]] compounds such as [[uranium trioxide]] ({{Chem2|UO3}}).<ref>Gmelin Handbuch der anorganischen Chemie» 8th edition, English translation, ''Gmelin Handbook of Inorganic Chemistry,'' vol. U-A7 (1982) pp. 300–322.</ref><ref>{{Cite book |author1=Harley, Naomi H. |author2=Foulkes, Earnest C. |author3=Hilborne, Lee H. |author4=Hudson, Arlene |author5=Anthony, C. Ross |title=A Review of the Scientific Literature as it Pertains to Gulf War Illnesses, Vol. 7 – Depleted Uranium |url=https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/2005/MR1018.7.pdf|location= Washington, DC |publisher= National Defense Research Institute, RAND|year=1999|pages =1–12|id=MR-1018/7-OSD|isbn=978-0-8330-2681-1}}</ref>

{|class=wikitable
|-
!colspan=4|Compilation of 2004 review<ref name=Craft/> information regarding uranium toxicity
|-
!Body system
!Human studies
!Animal studies
!''In vitro''
|-
|Renal
|Elevated levels of protein excretion, urinary catalase and diuresis
|Damage to proximal convoluted tubules, necrotic cells cast from tubular epithelium, glomerular changes
|No studies
|-
|Brain/CNS
|Decreased performance on neurocognitive tests
|Acute cholinergic toxicity; Dose-dependent accumulation in cortex, midbrain, and vermis; Electrophysiological changes in hippocampus
|No studies
|-
|DNA
|Increased reports of cancers
|Increased DNA adducts, single strand breaks, and mutagenisis via uranium binding to DNA, with the increased potential for tumor formation
|Binucleated cells with micronuclei, Inhibition of cell cycle kinetics and proliferation; Sister chromatid induction, tumorigenic phenotype
|-
|Bone/muscle
|No studies
|Inhibition of periodontal bone formation; and alveolar wound healing
|No studies
|-
|Reproductive
|Uranium miners have more first born female children
|Moderate to severe focal tubular atrophy; vacuolization of Leydig cells
|No studies
|-
|Lungs/respiratory
|No adverse health effects reported
|Severe nasal congestion and hemorrhage, lung lesions and fibrosis, edema and swelling, lung cancer
|No studies
|-
|Gastrointestinal
|Vomiting, diarrhea, albuminuria
|No Studies
|N/A
|-
|Liver
|No effects seen at exposure dose
|Fatty livers, focal necrosis
|No studies
|-
|Skin
|No exposure assessment data available
|Swollen vacuolated epidermal cells, damage to hair follicles and sebaceous glands
|No studies
|-
|Tissues surrounding embedded DU fragments
|Elevated uranium urine concentrations
|Elevated uranium urine concentrations, perturbations in biochemical and neuropsychological testing
|No studies
|-
|Immune system
|Chronic fatigue, rash, ear and eye infections, hair and weight loss, cough. May be due to combined chemical exposure rather than DU alone
|No studies
|No studies
|-
|Eyes
|No studies
|Conjunctivitis, irritation inflammation, edema, ulceration of conjunctival sacs
|No studies
|-
|Blood
|No studies
|Decrease in RBC count and hemoglobin concentration
|No studies
|-
|Cardiovascular
|Myocarditis resulting from the uranium ingestion, which ended 6 months after ingestion
|No effects
|No studies
|}

Uranium is pyrophoric when finely divided.<ref>Chapter: {{cite web |title=PYROPHORIC METALS: Uranium |url=http://hss.energy.gov/NuclearSafety/techstds/standard/hdbk1081/hbk1081e.html#ZZ30 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080307051256/http://hss.energy.gov/NuclearSafety/techstds/standard/hdbk1081/hbk1081e.html |archive-date=7 March 2008 }} in {{cite book |publisher=US Dept. of Energy |series=DOE Handbook |url=http://hss.energy.gov/NuclearSafety/techstds/standard/hdbk1081/hbk1081.html |title=Primer on Spontaneous Heating and Pyrophoricity |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080503084529/http://hss.energy.gov/NuclearSafety/techstds/standard/hdbk1081/hbk1081.html |archive-date=2008-05-03 }}</ref> It will corrode under the influence of air and water producing insoluble uranium(IV) and soluble uranium(VI) salts. Soluble uranium salts are toxic. Uranium slowly accumulates in several organs, such as the [[liver]], [[spleen]], and kidneys. The [[World Health Organization]] has established a daily "tolerated intake" of soluble uranium salts for the general public of {{convert|0.5|μg/kg}} body weight, or {{convert|35|μg}} for a {{convert|70|kg}} adult.

[[epidemiology|Epidemiological studies]] and [[toxicology|toxicological tests]] on laboratory animals point to it as being [[immunotoxin|immunotoxic]],<ref name=Wan/> [[teratogenesis|teratogenic]],<ref name=Arfsten/><ref name=Domingo/> [[neurotoxic]],<ref name=Briner/> with [[carcinogen]]ic and [[leukaemia|leukemogenic]] potential.<ref>{{Cite book |url=http://www.afrri.usuhs.mil/www/outreach/pdf/miller_NATO_2005.pdf |title=Radiation- and Depleted Uranium-Induced Carcinogenesis Studies: Characterization of the Carcinogenic Process and Development of Medical Countermeasures |author1=Miller, A. C. |author2=Beltran, D. |author3=Rivas, R. |author4=Stewart, M. |author5=Merlot, R. J. |author6=Lison, P. B. |publisher=Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute |date=June 2005 |id=NATO RTG-099 2005 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120207021914/http://www.afrri.usuhs.mil/www/outreach/pdf/miller_NATO_2005.pdf |archive-date=7 February 2012 }}</ref> A 2005 report by epidemiologists concluded: "the human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of [[birth defect]]s in offspring of persons exposed to DU."<ref name=Hindin/>

Early studies of depleted uranium aerosol exposure assumed that uranium combustion product particles would quickly settle out of the air<ref>{{cite report |last=Rostker |first=B. |year=2000 |section=Research Report Summaries |title=Depleted Uranium in the Gulf (II) |series=Environmental Exposure Reports |id=No. 2000179-2 |url=http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/du_ii/du_ii_tabl1.htm |publisher=Office of the Special Assistant for Gulf War Illnesses, Department of Defense |type=Technical Report |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060614010814/http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/du_ii/du_ii_tabl1.htm |archive-date=14 June 2006 }}</ref> and thus could not affect populations more than a few kilometers from target areas,<ref name=Mitsakou/> and that such particles, if inhaled, would remain undissolved in the lung for a great length of time and thus could be detected in urine.<ref name=Horan/> Violently burning uranium droplets produce a gaseous vapor comprising about half of the uranium in their original mass.<ref name=Carter/> [[Uranyl]] ion contamination in uranium oxides has been detected in the residue of DU munitions fires.<ref name=Salbu/><ref>{{cite report |last=Rostker |first=B. |year=2000 |title=Depleted Uranium in the Gulf (II) |series=Environmental Exposure Reports |id=No. 2000179-2 |author-link=Bernard D. Rostker |url=http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/du_ii/du_ii_refs/n52en017/mr1018_7_chap1.html |publisher=Office of the Special Assistant for Gulf War Illnesses, Department of Defense |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070412122229/http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/du_ii/du_ii_refs/n52en017/mr1018_7_chap1.html |archive-date=12 April 2007 |type=Technical Report}}</ref>

Approximately {{convert|90|μg}} of natural uranium, on average, exist in the human body as a result of normal intake of water, food and air. Most is in the [[skeleton]]. The [[biochemistry]] of depleted uranium is the same as natural uranium.

===Radiological hazards===
Available evidence suggests that the radiation risk is small relative to the chemical hazard.<ref name=Miller2/> The primary radiation from pure depleted uranium is due to [[alpha particle]]s, which do not travel far through air and do not penetrate clothing and skin. However, as [[uranium-238]] decays into its daughter nuclei from its [[decay series]], pure depleted uranium will generate [[thorium-234]] (half-life of ~24 days) followed by [[protactinium-234]] (half life of ~7 hours), which emit more penetrating [[beta particle]]s at almost the same rate as the uranium emits alpha particles. Total activity then settles to a plateau as the more stable isotope [[uranium-234]] accumulates. A quasi-steady state of roughly 3 times the initial activity is reached within months.<ref group=notes>The amounts of both thorium-234 and protactinium-234 after the first days and for millions of years thereafter will be approximately proportional to 1–2<sup> −t / (24 days)</sup>. See {{cite book|author1=Krane, Kenneth S. |title=Introductory Nuclear Physics|date=1988|publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-0-471-80553-3}}</ref> Once an equilibrium level of uranium-234 (and its 11 shorter-lived daughter nuclei) has built up after about a million years there will be another radiation plateau at about 14 times the initial activity, finally reaching levels comparable to natural uranium.<ref name="d563">{{cite web | title=Uranium Radiation Properties | website=WISE Uranium Project | date=2024-01-26 | url=https://www.wise-uranium.org/rup.html | access-date=2024-06-20}}</ref>

According to the [[World Health Organization]], [[Ionizing radiation|radiation]] [[Dose (biochemistry)|dose]] from DU would be about 60% of that from purified natural uranium with the same mass; the [[radiological]] dangers are lower due to its longer half-life and the removal of the more radioactive isotopes.

Surveying the veteran-related evidence pertaining to the Gulf War, a 2001 editorial in the ''[[BMJ]]'' concluded that it was not possible to justify claims of radiation-induced lung cancer and leukaemia in veterans of that conflict.<ref name = "McDiarmid 2001 123"/> While agreeing with the editorial's conclusion, a reply noted that its finding in the negative was guaranteed, given that "global dose estimates or results of mathematical modelling are too inaccurate to be used as dose values for an individual veteran", and that, as of April 2001, no practical method of measuring the expected small doses that each individual veteran would receive had been suggested.<ref group=notes name = "Mould 2001">{{Harvnb|Mould|2001}}. Mould's suggestion was [[electron paramagnetic resonance]] [[dosimetry]] using tooth enamel. He also wrote that the US [[National Institute of Standards and Technology]] was able, using this method, to measure doses as low as 20&nbsp;mSv, and that, if it were asked to, the NIST would be able to get involved, meaning at least one centre could help undertake a screening programme for veterans.</ref> The author of the reply, a radiation scientist, went on to suggest a method that had been used several times before, including after the 1986 Chernobyl accident.<ref group=notes name = "Mould 2001"/> Despite the widespread use of DU in the [[Iraq War]], at least a year after the conflict began, testing of UK troops was still only in the discussion phase.<ref group=notes name = "GIUHW 2004">{{Harvnb|Greenberg|Iversen|Unwin|Hull|2004}}, which found that perhaps a quarter of all UK troops would have been interested in undergoing DU-related monitoring, although "the desire for DU screening is more closely linked to current health status rather than plausible exposure to DU."<p>Confusingly, {{Harvnb|Moszynski|2003}} reports that "testing is now available to all troops that served in Iraq", and does not say if this is testing à la Mould.</p></ref>

The Royal Society Working Group on the Health Hazards of Depleted Uranium Munitions (RSDUWG) concluded in 2002 that there were "very low" health risks associated with the use of depleted uranium, though it also ventured that, "[i]n extreme conditions and under worst-case assumptions" lung and kidney damage could occur, and that in "worst-case scenarios high local levels of uranium could occur in food or water that could have adverse effects on the kidney".<ref name=Patel/><ref name=Murphy2009/> In 2003, the Royal Society issued another urgent call to investigate the actual health and environmental impact of depleted uranium.<ref group=notes name = "Moszynski 2003 a"/> The same year, a [[cohort study]] of Gulf War veterans found no elevated risks of cancer generally, nor of any specific cancers in particular, though recommended follow up studies.<ref name=Macfarlane/>

===Studies indicating negligible effects===
Studies in 2005 and earlier have concluded that DU ammunition has no measurable detrimental health effects.

A 1999 [[literature review]] conducted by the [[Rand Corporation]] stated: "No evidence is documented in the literature of cancer or any other negative health effect related to the radiation received from exposure to depleted or natural uranium, whether inhaled or ingested, even at very high doses,"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/library/randrep/du/cover.html|title="A Review of the Scientific Literature as it Pertains to Gulf War Illnesses," Rand Report, 1999.|publisher=osd.mil|access-date=30 October 2007|archive-date=13 October 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071013230242/http://gulflink.osd.mil/library/randrep/du/cover.html}}</ref> and a RAND report authored by the U.S. Defense department undersecretary charged with evaluating DU hazards considered the debate to be more political than scientific.<ref>[[Bernard D. Rostker]], [https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P8066/ Depleted Uranium, A Case Study of Good and Evil]. RAND Corporation.</ref>

A 2001 [[oncology]] study concluded that "the present scientific consensus is that DU exposure to humans, in locations where DU ammunition was deployed, is very unlikely to give rise to [[cancer induction]]".<ref>{{cite journal
|title = Depleted Uranium – A Health, Environmental or Societal Issue?
|author1 = Mc Laughin, James P.
|author2 = Waligorski, Michael P. R.
|journal = Archive of Oncology
|year = 2001
|volume = 9
|issue = 4
|page = 213
|url = http://www.onk.ns.ac.rs/archive/Vol9/PDFVol9/V9n4p213.pdf
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120320193122/http://www.onk.ns.ac.rs/archive/Vol9/PDFVol9/V9n4p213.pdf
|archive-date = 20 March 2012}}</ref> Former [[NATO Secretary General]] [[George Robertson, Baron Robertson of Port Ellen|Lord Robertson]] stated in 2001 that "the existing medical consensus is clear. The hazard from depleted uranium is both very limited, and limited to very specific circumstances".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2001/s010110a.htm |title=NATO Press Conference on Depleted Uranium |publisher=Nato.int |access-date=4 September 2013}}</ref>

A 2002 study from the [[Australia]]n defense ministry concluded that "there has been no established increase in mortality or morbidity in workers exposed to uranium in uranium processing industries... studies of Gulf War veterans show that, in those who have retained fragments of depleted uranium following combat related injury, it has been possible to detect elevated urinary uranium levels, but no kidney toxicity or other adverse health effects related to depleted uranium after a decade of follow-up."<ref>[http://www.defence.gov.au/DPE/DHS/infocentre/publications/journals/NoIDs/adfhealth_sept02/ADFHealth_3_2_50-57.pdf Military medical aspects of depleted uranium munitions] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150719231030/http://www.defence.gov.au/DPE/DHS/infocentre/publications/journals/NoIDs/adfhealth_sept02/ADFHealth_3_2_50-57.pdf|date=19 July 2015}}.</ref> Pier Roberto Danesi, then-director of the [[International Atomic Energy Agency]] (IAEA) Seibersdorf +Laboratory, stated in 2002 that "There is a consensus now that DU does not represent a health threat".<ref name=Stone/>

The [[IAEA]] reported in 2003 that, "based on credible scientific evidence, there is no proven link between DU exposure and increases in human cancers or other significant health or environmental impacts," although "Like other [[heavy metals]], DU is potentially poisonous. In sufficient amounts, if DU is ingested or inhaled it can be harmful because of its chemical toxicity. High concentration could cause kidney damage." The IAEA concluded that, while depleted uranium is a potential [[carcinogen]], there is no evidence that it has been carcinogenic in humans.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Features/DU/faq_depleted_uranium.shtml|title=IAEA Depleted Uranium Factsheet|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100318003818/http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Features/DU/faq_depleted_uranium.shtml|archive-date=18 March 2010}}</ref>

A 2005 study by the U.S. [[Sandia National Laboratory|Sandia National Laboratories']] Al Marshall used mathematical models to analyze potential health effects associated with accidental exposure to depleted uranium during the 1991 Gulf War. Marshall's study concluded that the reports of cancer risks from DU exposure are not supported by his analysis nor by veteran medical statistics. Marshall also examined possible genetic effects due to radiation from depleted uranium.<ref>[http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2005/def-nonprolif-sec/snl-dusand.pdf An Analysis of Uranium Dispersal and Health Effects Using a Gulf War Case Study] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120204035816/http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2005/def-nonprolif-sec/snl-dusand.pdf|date=4 February 2012}}, Albert C. Marshall, Sandia National Laboratories.</ref> Chemical effects, including potential reproductive issues, associated with depleted uranium exposure were discussed in some detail in a subsequent journal paper.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Marshall | first1 = A. C. | year = 2007| title = Gulf war depleted uranium risks | journal = Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology | volume = 18 | issue = 1| pages = 95–108 | doi = 10.1038/sj.jes.7500551 | pmid = 17299528 | doi-access = free }}</ref>

===Gulf War syndrome and soldier complaints===
[[File:GWI DU map.svg|right|thumb|upright=1.6|The approximate area and major clashes in which DU bullets and rounds were used in the [[Gulf War]]]]
[[File:Basrah birth defects.svg|thumb|right|Birth defect statistics in [[Basra]], Iraq.<ref name=Hindin/><ref>{{cite journal | last1=Al-Sabbak | first1=M. | last2=Sadik Ali | first2=S. | last3=Savabi | first3=O. | last4=Savabi | first4=G. | last5=Dastgiri | first5=S. | last6=Savabieasfahani | first6=M. | title=Metal Contamination and the Epidemic of Congenital Birth Defects in Iraqi Cities | journal=Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology| volume=89 | issue=5 | date=2012| doi=10.1007/s00128-012-0817-2 | pages=937–944| pmid=22983726 | pmc=3464374 | bibcode=2012BuECT..89..937A | s2cid=10774986 }}</ref>]]
{{Main|Gulf War syndrome}}

Since 1991, the year the [[Gulf War]] ended, veterans and their families voiced concern about subsequent health problems.<ref name=Murphy1999/><ref name="Dr. Doug Rokke">{{cite journal |title=Dr. Doug Rokke Address on Depleted Uranium|journal=True Democracy|date= 2002|volume= 2|issue =2|url=https://ratical.org/radiation/DU/DRonDU2000.html |author=Rokke, Doug }}</ref> In 1999, an assessment of the first 1,000 veterans involved in the [[Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom)|Ministry of Defence]]'s Gulf War medical assessment programme found "no evidence" of a single illness, physical or mental, that would explain the pattern of symptoms observed in the group.<ref name=Coker/><ref name=Murphy1999/> In 1999, [[MEDACT]] petitioned for the [[World Health Organization|WHO]] to conduct an investigation into illnesses in veterans and Iraqi civilians.<ref name=Stott/> A major 2006 review of peer-reviewed literature by a US [[Institute of Medicine]] (IOM) committee concluded that, "[b]ecause the symptoms vary greatly among individuals", they do not point to a syndrome unique to Gulf War veterans, though their report conceded that the lack of objective pre-deployment health data meant definitive conclusions were effectively impossible.<ref group=notes name = "Charatan 2006 a">{{Harvnb|Charatan|2006}}. The quote is of [[Lynn Goldman]], who chaired the IOM committee that carried out the review.</ref><ref name=Iversen/>

[[Simon Wessely]] praised the IOM's review, and noted that, despite its central conclusion that no novel syndrome existed, its other findings made it "equally clear that service in the Gulf war<!--not a typo; the article uses a lower case 'w'--> did aversely affect health in some personnel".<ref group=notes name = "Charatan 2006 b">{{Harvnb|Charatan|2006}}. The quote is of Wessely himself.</ref> Aside from the lack of baseline data to guide analysis of the veterans' postwar health, because no detailed health screening was carried out when the veterans entered service, another major stumbling block with some studies, like the thousand-veteran one, is that the subjects are self-selected, rather than a random sample, making general conclusions impossible.<ref name=Coker/><ref name=Murphy1999/>

Increased rates of [[immune system]] disorders and other wide-ranging symptoms, including chronic pain, fatigue and memory loss, have been reported in over one quarter of combat veterans of the 1991 [[Gulf War]].<ref>U.S. Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses (2004) [http://www1.va.gov/rac-gwvi/docs/ReportandRecommendations_2004.pdf "Scientific Progress in Understanding Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses: Report and Recommendations"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061231090902/http://www1.va.gov/rac-gwvi/docs/ReportandRecommendations_2004.pdf|date=31 December 2006}}.</ref> Combustion products<ref name=Murphy2009/> from depleted uranium munitions are being considered{{update inline|date=August 2015}} as one of the potential causes by the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses, as DU was used in 30&nbsp;mm and 25&nbsp;mm cannon rounds on a large scale for the first time in the Gulf War. Veterans of the conflicts in the [[Persian Gulf]], Bosnia and Kosovo have been found to have up to 14 times the usual level of chromosome abnormalities in their genes.<ref name=Arfsten/><ref>{{Cite news |author1=Fleming, N. |author2=Townsend, M. |date=11 August 2002 |title=Gulf veteran babies 'risk deformities' |work=[[The Guardian]] |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/aug/11/uk.politicalnews |access-date=29 August 2013}}</ref> Serum-soluble genotoxic teratogens produce [[congenital disorder]]s, and in white blood cells causes immune system damage.<ref name=Schroder/>

A 2005 epidemiology review concluded: "In aggregate the human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in offspring of persons exposed to DU."<ref name=Hindin/> A 2001 study of 15,000 February 1991 U.S. Gulf War combat veterans and 15,000 control veterans found that the Gulf War veterans were 1.8 (fathers) to 2.8 (mothers) times as likely to have children with birth defects.<ref name=Kang/> After examination of children's medical records two years later, the birth defect rate increased by more than 20%:

{{Blockquote| Dr. Kang found that male Gulf War veterans reported having infants with likely birth defects at twice the rate of non-veterans. Furthermore, female Gulf War veterans were almost three times more likely to report children with birth defects than their non-Gulf counterparts. The numbers changed somewhat with medical records verification. However, Dr. Kang and his colleagues concluded that the risk of birth defects in children of deployed male veterans still was about 2.2 times that of non-deployed veterans.<ref>{{cite journal|author= Department of Veterans Affairs |year = 2003|title = Q's & A's – New Information Regarding Birth Defects|url = http://www1.va.gov/gulfwar/docs/GulfWarNov03.pdf|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20060929095251/http://www1.va.gov/gulfwar/docs/GulfWarNov03.pdf|archive-date = 2006-09-29|journal = Gulf War Review|volume = 12|issue = 1| page = 10}}</ref> }}

In early 2004, the UK Pensions Appeal Tribunal Service attributed birth defect claims from a February 1991 Gulf War combat veteran to depleted uranium poisoning.<ref name=scot1>{{cite news |title = Gulf soldier wins pension fight |url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/3456433.stm |date = 2 February 2004 |work= BBC News }}</ref><ref name="scot2">{{cite news |last1=Sample |first1=Ian |last2=Fleming |first2=Nic |date=17 April 2003 |title=When the dust settles |url=https://www.theguardian.com/education/2003/apr/17/science.highereducation1 |access-date=29 August 2013 |work=[[The Guardian]]}}</ref> Looking at the risk of children of UK Gulf War veterans suffering genetic diseases such as [[congenital malformations]], commonly called "birth defects", one study found that the overall risk of any malformation was 50% higher in Gulf War veterans as compared to other veterans.<ref name=Doyle/>
[[File:DoD Environmental Uranium Gulf.jpg|thumb|upright=2.2|Excerpt from a 1998 evaluation of environmental exposure to depleted uranium in the Persian Gulf by the US Department of Defense]]
The U.S. Army has commissioned ongoing research into potential risks of depleted uranium and other projectile weapon materials like tungsten, which the U.S. Navy has used in place of DU since 1993. Studies by the U.S. Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute conclude that moderate exposures to either depleted uranium or uranium present a significant [[toxicology|toxicological]] threat.<ref>{{Cite book |author1=McClain, D. E. |author2=Miller, A. C. |author3=Kalinich, J. F. |url=http://www.afrri.usuhs.mil/www/outreach/pdf/mcclain_NATO_2005.pdf |title=Status of Health Concerns about Military Use of Depleted Uranium and Surrogate Metals in Armor-Penetrating Munitions |publisher=Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute |date=June 2005 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120207021921/http://www.afrri.usuhs.mil/www/outreach/pdf/mcclain_NATO_2005.pdf |archive-date=7 February 2012 }}</ref>

In 2003, Professor Brian Spratt FRS, chairman of the [[Royal Society]]'s working group on depleted uranium, said: "The question of who carries out the initial monitoring and clean-up is a political rather than scientific question," and "[[Multinational force in Iraq|the coalition]] needs to acknowledge that depleted uranium is a potential hazard and make in-roads into tackling it by being open about where and how much depleted uranium has been deployed."<ref name="gaurdian2003" />

A 2008 review of all relevant articles appearing in the peer-reviewed journals on [[MEDLINE]] through to the end of 2007, including multiple cohort studies of veterans, found no consistent evidence of excess risks of [[neoplasms]] that could have some link to DU, and that "[t]he overall incidence of cancers is not increased in the cohort studies of Gulf war and Balkans veterans".<ref name=Lagorio/>

One particular subgroup of veterans that may be at higher risk comprises those who have internally retained fragments of DU from shrapnel wounds. A laboratory study on rats produced by the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute showed that, after a study period of 6 months, rats treated with depleted uranium coming from implanted pellets, comparable to the average levels in the urine of [[Desert Storm]] veterans with retained DU fragments, had developed a significant tendency to lose weight with respect to the control group.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Pellmar |first1=T. C. |url=http://www.afrri.usuhs.mil/www/outreach/pdf/pellmar.pdf |title=Toxicological Evaluation of Depleted Uranium in Rats: Six Month Evaluation Point |last2=Hogan |first2=J. B. |last3=Benson |first3=K. A. |last4=Landauer |first4=M. R. |date=February 1998 |publisher=Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute |id=AFRRI Special Publication 98-1 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120207021927/http://www.afrri.usuhs.mil/www/outreach/pdf/pellmar.pdf |archive-date=7 February 2012 }}</ref>

Substantial amounts of uranium were accumulating in their [[Human brain|brains]] and [[central nervous system]]s, and showed a significant reduction of [[neurone|neuronal]] activity in the [[hippocampus]] in response to external stimuli. The conclusions of the study show that brain damage from chronic uranium intoxication is possible at lower doses than previously thought. Results from computer-based neurocognitive tests performed in 1997 showed an association between uranium in the urine and "problematic performance on automated tests assessing performance efficiency and accuracy."<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bordujenko|first= A.|date=September 2002|url= http://www.defence.gov.au/health/infocentre/journals/ADFHJ_sep02/ADFHealth_3_2_50-57.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.defence.gov.au/health/infocentre/journals/ADFHJ_sep02/ADFHealth_3_2_50-57.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live | title=Military medical aspects of depleted uranium munitions|journal=ADF Health|volume = 3}}</ref>

A 2021 report concluded that uranium from exploding munitions did not lead to Gulf War illness (GWI) in veterans deployed in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The study found no differences in secretion of uranium isotopic ratios from those meeting the standard-case definitions of GWI and control veterans without GWI. The researchers say that the most likely remaining causes for GWI are widespread low-level exposure to sarin nerve gas released by the destruction of Iraqi chemical weapons storage facilities in January 1991. This was possibly compounded by the use of anti-nerve agent medications and the use of pesticides to prevent insect-borne diseases in coalition forces.<ref name="SciTechDaily 2021">{{cite web | title=New Research Shows Gulf War Illness Not Caused by Depleted Uranium From Munitions | website=SciTechDaily | date=18 February 2021 | url=https://scitechdaily.com/new-research-shows-gulf-war-illness-not-caused-by-depleted-uranium-from-munitions/ | access-date=19 February 2021}}</ref>

===Iraqi population===
Since 2001, medical personnel working for the Iraqi state health service controlled by Saddam Hussein at the [[Basra]] hospital in [[southern Iraq]] have reported a sharp increase in the incidence of child leukemia and genetic malformation among babies born in the decade following the Gulf War. Iraqi doctors attributed these malformations to possible long-term effects of DU, an opinion that was echoed by several newspapers.<ref name=r1/><ref name="bostonglobe">Neuffer, Elizabeth (26 January 2003). [http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0126-03.htm Iraqis Trace Surge in Cancer to US Bombings] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130902013328/http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0126-03.htm|date=2 September 2013}}, Boston, Massachusetts: ''Boston Globe''. Page: A11 Section: National/Foreign.</ref><ref>Johnson, Larry (12 November 2002) [http://www.seattlepi.com/national/95178_du12.shtml Iraqi cancers, birth defects blamed on U.S. depleted uranium] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081120013734/http://www.seattlepi.com/national/95178_du12.shtml |date=20 November 2008 }} ''Seattle Post-Intelligencer''. Retrieved 25 January 2009.</ref><ref>{{cite news|author=McKay, Ron  |url=http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0114-01.htm |title=Depleted Uranium: The Horrific Legacy of Basra |newspaper=Sunday Herald |location=Scotland |date=14 January 2001 |access-date=15 February 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130527015017/http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0114-01.htm |archive-date=27 May 2013}}</ref> In 2004, Iraq had the highest mortality rate due to [[leukemia]] of any country.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.who.int/entity/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/gbddeathdalycountryestimates2004.xls |title=WHO Data, 2004 |access-date=4 September 2013}}</ref><ref name="Doctor's Gulf War Studies Link Cancer to Depleted Uranium">{{cite news |title=Doctor's Gulf War Studies Link Cancer to Depleted Uranium |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/29/world/doctor-s-gulf-war-studies-link-cancer-to-depleted-uranium.html |website=[[The New York Times]] |date=29 January 2001}}</ref> In 2003, the Royal Society called for Western militaries to disclose where and how much DU they had used in Iraq so that rigorous, and hopefully conclusive, studies could be undertaken in affected areas.<ref name = "Moszynski 2003 b">{{Harvnb|Moszynski|2003}}.</ref> The [[International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons]] (ICBUW) likewise urged that an epidemiological study be made in the Basra region, as requested by Iraqi doctors,<ref>{{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20070811074117/http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/41.html Support the Basra Epidemiological Study]}}, International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons</ref> but no peer-reviewed study has yet been undertaken in Basra.

A medical survey, "[[Cancer]], [[Infant Mortality]] and Birth [[Human sex ratio|Sex Ratio]] in [[Fallujah]], Iraq 2005–2009" published in July 2010, states that the "...increases in cancer and [[birth defects]]...are alarmingly high" and that infant mortality 2009/2010 has reached 13.6%. The group compares the dramatic increase, five years after wartime exposure in 2004, with the [[lymphoma]] that Italian peacekeepers<ref>[http://staff.polito.it/alessandro.mantelero/DUP.html Mantelero_Depleted uranium legal aspects (Italy) 2009–2011] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110401000224/http://staff.polito.it/alessandro.mantelero/DUP.html |date=1 April 2011 }} 7 May 2011.</ref> developed after the [[Balkan wars]] and the increased cancer risk in certain parts of [[Sweden]] because of the [[Chernobyl disaster|Chernobyl]] fallout. The origin and time of introduction of the [[Carcinogen|carcinogenic agent]] causing the [[genetics|genetic]] [[Stress (biology)|stress]] was expected to be addressed by the group in a separate report.<ref>{{cite journal | pmc = 2922729 | pmid=20717542 | doi=10.3390/ijerph7072828 | volume=7 | title=Cancer, infant mortality and birth sex-ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009 | date=July 2010 | journal=Int J Environ Res Public Health | pages=2828–37  | last1 = Busby | first1 = C | last2 = Hamdan | first2 = M | last3 = Ariabi | first3 = E| issue=7 | doi-access=free }}</ref> The report mentions depleted uranium as one "potentially relevant exposure" but makes no conclusions on the source.

Four studies investigating links between the use of depleted uranium by [[Multi-National Force – Iraq|Coalition forces]] during the [[Second Battle of Fallujah]] were conducted in 2012, one of which described the people of Fallujah as having "the highest rate of genetic damage in any population ever studied." In response to these studies, Ross Caputi, a former [[United States Marine Corps|U.S. Marine]] who participated in the battle, wrote a [[The Guardian|Guardian]] newspaper article calling for the [[Federal government of the United States|United States government]] to conduct its own study into the matter.<ref>{{cite news |last= Caputi |first= Ross |date= 25 October 2012 |title= The victims of Fallujah's health crisis are stifled by western silence |work= [[The Guardian]] |url= https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/25/fallujah-iraq-health-crisis-silence |access-date= 29 August 2013 }}</ref>

===The Balkans===
[[File:Kosovo uranium NATO bombing1999.png|thumb|upright=1.6|Sites in [[Kosovo]] and southern Central [[Serbia]] where NATO aviation used depleted uranium during the 1999 [[Kosovo War]].]]
In 2001, the [[World Health Organization]] reported that data from [[Kosovo]] was inconclusive and called for further studies.<ref>[https://www.who.int/entity/ionizing_radiation/pub_meet/en/Report_WHO_depleted_uranium_Eng.pdf Report of the WHO's Depleted Uranium Mission to Kosovo (pdf 123kb)] 22–31 January 2001.</ref> That same year, governments of several European countries, particularly Italy, reported an increase in illnesses and developments of cancers among veterans that served in Balkan peacekeeping missions.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Simons |first1=Marlise |author-link1=Marlise Simons |title=Radiation From Balkan Bombing Alarms Europe |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/07/world/radiation-from-balkan-bombing-alarms-europe.html |work=The New York Times |date=7 January 2001}}</ref>

A 2003 study by the [[United Nations Environment Programme]] (UNEP) in [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]] stated that low levels of contaminant were found in drinking water and air particulate at DU penetrator impact points. The levels were stated as not a cause for alarm. Yet, [[Pekka Haavisto]], chairman of the UNEP DU projects stated, "The findings of this study stress again the importance of appropriate clean-up and civil protection measures in a post-conflict situation."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20040411033334/http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=298&ArticleID=3926&l=en Low-level DU contamination found in Bosnia and Herzegovina, UNEP calls for precaution] ''United Nations Environment Programme'', 25 March 2003. Retrieved 25 January 2009.</ref>

A team of Italian scientists from the [[University of Siena]] reported in 2005 that, although DU was "clearly" added to the soil in the study area, "the phenomenon was very limited spatially and the total uranium concentrations fell within the natural range of the element in soils. Moreover, the absolute uranium concentrations indicate that there was no contamination of the earthworm species studied."<ref name=DiLella/>

Though a more comprehensive assessment is possible, a 2011 update on a cancer scare regarding Italian soldiers who had served in the Balkans found lower than expected incidence rates for all cancers, a finding "consistent with lacking evidence of an increased cancer incidence among troops of other countries deployed in the areas of Iraq, Bosnia, and Kosovo, where [[armour-piercing ammunition|armour-penetrating]] depleted uranium shells have been used."<ref name=Peragallo/>

In 2018, Serbia set up a commission of inquiry into the consequences of the use of depleted uranium during the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in southern Serbia and its link to the rise of diseases and tumors among citizens, particularly in young children born after 1999. Zoran Radovanovic, an epidemiologist and the chairman of the Serbian Medical Association's ethics committee, denied that there had been a rise in cancer cases in areas where bombings had taken place. He continued by saying that Serbians frequently worry about a cancer epidemic that does not exist.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Gocanin |first1=Sonja |title=Moscow, Serbian Media Appear To Mislead With Claims About Cancer Fight, NATO Bombings|url=https://www.rferl.org/a/moscow-serbian-media-appear-mislead-claims-cancer-fight-nato-bombings-/30320663.html |website=Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty |access-date=20 January 2023 |date=11 December 2019}}</ref> NATO has repeatedly claimed that depleted uranium found in the ammunition used in the 1999 bombardments cannot be linked to adverse health effects.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Gocanin |first1=Sonja |title=Serbian Accusation Lingers of Link Between NATO Bombing, Health Woes |url=https://www.rferl.org/a/serbian-accusation-lingers-of-link-between-nato-bombing-health-woes/29841402.html |website=Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty |access-date=4 September 2019 |date=25 March 2019}}</ref>

===Okinawa, Japan===
Between 1995 and 1996, U.S. Marine [[McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II|AV-8B Harrier]] jets accidentally fired more than 1,500 DU rounds at the Tori Shima gunnery range. The military did not notify the Japanese government until January 1997.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/9702/10/marines.japan/|title=U.S. jets fired radioactive bullets near Okinawa|date=10 February 1997|work=CNN|access-date=23 May 2019|archive-date=24 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190524105727/http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/9702/10/marines.japan/}}</ref>

===Sardinia, Italy===
Depleted uranium has been named as a possible contributing factor to a high incidence of birth defects and cancer near the [[Salto di Quirra]] weapons testing range on the Italian island of [[Sardinia]].<ref>{{Cite episode |title=Secret Sardinia |url=https://www.abc.net.au/foreign/secret-sardinia/10759968 |access-date=29 January 2019 |series=Foreign Correspondent |series-link=Foreign Correspondent (TV series) |first=Emma |last=Alberici |author-link=Emma Alberici |network=Australian Broadcasting Corporation |date=29 January 2019}}</ref>

===Afghan War===
The Canadian Uranium Medical Research Centre obtained urine samples from bombed civilian areas in [[Jalalabad]] that showed concentrations of {{convert|80|to|400|ng/L}} of undepleted uranium, far higher than the typical concentration in the British population of ≈{{convert|5|ng/L}}.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Durakovic | first1 = A. | year = 2005 | title = The Quantitative Analysis of Uranium Isotopes in the Urine of the Civilian Population of Eastern Afghanistan after Operation Enduring Freedom | journal = Military Medicine | volume = 170 | issue = 4| pages = 277–284 | doi = 10.7205/MILMED.170.4.277 | pmid = 15916293 | doi-access = free }}</ref>

===Remscheid, Germany===
{{Main|1988 Remscheid A-10 crash}}
On 8 December 1988, an [[A-10 Thunderbolt II]] attack jet of the [[United States Air Force]] crashed onto a residential area in the city of [[Remscheid]], [[West Germany]]. The aircraft crashed into the upper floor of an apartment complex. In addition to the pilot, five people were killed. Fifty others were injured, many of them seriously. When the number of cancer cases in the vicinity of the accident rose disproportionately in the years after, suspicion rose that the depleted uranium ballast in the jet may have been the cause.<ref name=Hindin/>

This was denied by the US military. However, 70 tons of top soil from the accident scene was removed and taken away to a depot.<ref>{{Cite news|author=Markmeyer, B.|date=1989-10-13|title=Remscheid-Absturz mit Folgen|language=de|pages=1–2|work=Die Tageszeitung: taz|url=https://taz.de/!1794979/|access-date=2021-01-14|issn=0931-9085}}</ref> Film material taken during the top-soil removal show radiation warning signs.<ref>{{Cite news|title=Remscheid: Starb Kind wegen Uranverseuchung? |url=https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/remscheid-starb-kind-wegen-uranverseuchung-a-112293.html|access-date=2021-01-14|newspaper=Der Spiegel|date=13 January 2001|language=de}}</ref> 120 residents and rescue workers reported skin diseases. Medical diagnosis concluded that these symptoms related to toxic irritative dermatitis.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Zeitung|first=Westdeutsche|date=2008-12-08|title=Flugzeugabsturz in Remscheid 1988: Der Schock sitzt immer noch tief|url=https://www.wz.de/panorama/flugzeugabsturz-in-remscheid-1988-der-schock-sitzt-immer-noch-tief_aid-31569121|access-date=2021-01-14|website=Westdeutsche Zeitung|language=de}}</ref>

===Atmospheric contamination===
Elevated radiation levels consistent with very low level atmospheric depleted uranium contamination have been found in air samples taken by the UK Atomic Weapons Establishment at several monitoring sites in Britain. These elevated readings appear to coincide with [[Operation Anaconda]] in Afghanistan, and the [[Shock and Awe]] bombing campaign at the start of the Second Gulf War.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Williams |first=Dai |date=October 2008|title=Under the radar: identifying third-generation uranium weapons |journal=Disarmament Forum|publisher=United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research|volume=3|pages=19–20 |url=http://www.unidir.org/pdf/articles/pdf-art2759.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120321184057/http://www.unidir.org/pdf/articles/pdf-art2759.pdf |archive-date=21 March 2012 }}</ref><ref>Busby, C. and Morgan, S. (2006). Did the Use of Uranium Weapons in Gulf War 2 Result in Contamination of Europe? Evidence from the Measurements of the Atomic Weapons Establishment, Aldermaston, Aberystwyth, Green Audit.</ref>

===Other contamination cases===
On 4 October 1992, an [[El Al]] [[Boeing 747|Boeing 747-F]] cargo aircraft ([[El Al Flight 1862|Flight 1862]]) crashed into an apartment building in [[Amsterdam]], Netherlands. Local residents and rescue workers complained of various unexplained health issues, which were being attributed to the release of hazardous materials during the crash and subsequent fires. Authorities conducted an epidemiological study in 2000 of those believed to be affected by the accident. The study concluded that there was no evidence to link depleted uranium (used as counterbalance weights on the elevators of the plane) to any of the reported health complaints.<ref name="Uijt"/>

There have been accidents involving uranium hexafluoride in the United States, including one in which 32 workers were exposed to a cloud of {{chem2|UF6}} and its reaction products in 1986 at a [[Gore, Oklahoma|Gore]], Oklahoma, commercial uranium conversion facility. One person died; while a few workers with higher exposure experienced short-term [[kidney damage]] (e.g., [[proteinuria|protein in the urine]]), none of them showed lasting damage from the exposure to uranium.<ref name="anl.gov FAQ 30">{{cite web |title=FAQ 30 – Have there been accidents involving uranium hexafluoride? |url=https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/health/faq30.cfm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210302212605/https://web.evs.anl.gov/uranium/faq/health/faq30.cfm |archive-date=2 March 2021 |access-date=22 January 2022 |website=Depleted UF<sub>6</sub> Management Information Network}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Environmental impact of war]]
* [[Radiological warfare]]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=notes}}

==References==
{{Reflist|refs=
<ref name=Arfsten>{{cite journal
|title = A review of the effects of uranium and depleted uranium exposure on reproduction and fetal development
|vauthors=Arfsten DP, Still KR, Ritchie GD |journal = Toxicology and Industrial Health
|volume = 17
|issue = 5–10
|pages = 180–191
|year = 2001
|doi = 10.1191/0748233701th111oa
|pmid = 12539863
|bibcode=2001ToxIH..17..180A |s2cid=25310165}}</ref>
<ref name=Briner>{{cite journal
|title = Effects of short-term and long-term depleted uranium exposure on open-field behavior and brain lipid oxidation in rats
|vauthors=Briner W, Murray J |journal = [[Neurotoxicology and Teratology]]
|volume = 27
|issue = 1
|pages = 135–44
|year = 2005
|doi = 10.1016/j.ntt.2004.09.001
|pmid = 15681127|bibcode=2005NTxT...27..135B }}</ref>

<ref name=Carter>{{cite journal |last1=Carter |first1=R. F. |last2=Stewart |first2=K. |year=1970 |title=On the oxide fume formed by the combustion of plutonium and uranium |journal=Inhaled Particles |volume=2 |pages=819–38 |pmid=5527739}}</ref>
<ref name=Coker>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Coker |first1= W. J. |last2= Bhatt |first2= B. M.
 |last3= Blatchley |first3= N. F. |last4= Graham |first4= J. T. |year= 1999
 |title= Clinical findings for the first 1000 Gulf war veterans in the Ministry of Defence's medical assessment programme
 |journal= [[BMJ]] |volume= 318 |issue= 7179 |pages= 290–294
 |jstor= 25181700 |doi=10.1136/bmj.318.7179.290|pmid= 9924053 |pmc= 27710 |quote=As the veterans assessed by the programme were all self selected, the prevalence of illness in Gulf war veterans cannot be determined from this study. Furthermore, it is not known whether the veterans in this study were representative of sick veterans as a group.}}</ref>

<ref name=Craft>{{cite journal
| vauthors=Craft ES, Abu-Qare AW, Flaherty MM, Garofolo MC, Rincavage HL, Abou-Donia MB
| year = 2004
| title = Depleted and natural uranium: chemistry and toxicological effects
| journal = Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B: Critical Reviews
| volume = 7
| issue = 4
| pages = 297–317
| doi = 10.1080/10937400490452714
| pmid = 15205046 | bibcode = 2004JTEHB...7..297C
|citeseerx=10.1.1.535.5247 |s2cid=9357795
| url=http://www.dmzhawaii.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/health-overview-04.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.dmzhawaii.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/health-overview-04.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live}}</ref>

<ref name=DiLella>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Di Lella |first1= L. A. |last2= Nannoni |first2= F.
 |last3= Protano |first3= G. |last4= Riccobono |first4= F. |year= 2005
 |title= Uranium contents and atom ratios in soil and earthworms in western Kosovo after the 1999 war
 |journal= Science of the Total Environment |volume= 337 |number= 1–3 |pages= 109–118
 |doi= 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.07.001 |pmid= 15626383 |bibcode= 2005ScTEn.337..109D }}</ref>
<ref name=Domingo>{{cite journal
|title = Reproductive and developmental toxicity of natural and depleted uranium: a review
|vauthors = Domingo JL
|journal = Reproductive Toxicology
|volume = 15
|issue = 6
|pages = 603–9
|year = 2001
|doi = 10.1016/S0890-6238(01)00181-2
|pmid = 11738513|bibcode = 2001RepTx..15..603D
|s2cid = 38317769
}}</ref>
<ref name=Doyle>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Doyle |first1= P. |last2= MacOnochie |first2= N.
 |last3= Davies |first3= G. |last4= MacOnochie |first4= I.
 |last5= Pelerin |first5= M. |last6= Prior |first6= S.
 |last7= Lewis |first7= S. |year= 2004
 |title= Miscarriage, stillbirth and congenital malformation in the offspring of UK veterans of the first Gulf war
 |journal= [[International Journal of Epidemiology]]|volume= 33 |number= 1 |pages= 74–86
 |doi= 10.1093/ije/dyh049 |pmid= 15075150 |doi-access= free }}</ref>

<ref name=Hindin>{{cite journal
|vauthors = Hindin R, Brugge D, Panikkar B
|year = 2005
|title = Teratogenicity of depleted uranium aerosols: A review from an epidemiological perspective
|journal = Environmental Health
|volume = 4
|article-number = 17
|pmc=1242351
|pmid = 16124873
|doi = 10.1186/1476-069X-4-17
|issue = 1
|doi-access = free
|bibcode = 2005EnvHe...4...17H
}}</ref>
<ref name=Horan>{{cite journal |last1=Horan |first1=P. |last2=Dietz |first2=L. |last3=Durakovic |first3=A. |title=The quantitative analysis of depleted uranium isotopes in British, Canadian, and U.S. Gulf War veterans |journal=Military Medicine |volume=167 |issue=8 |date=August 2002 |pages=620–627 |pmid=12188230 |doi=10.1093/milmed/167.8.620 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

<ref name=Iversen>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Iversen |first1= Amy |last2= Chalder |first2= Trudie
 |last3= Wessely |first3= Simon |author3-link= Simon Wessely |year= 2007
 |title= Gulf War Illness: Lessons from medically unexplained symptoms
 |journal= [[Clinical Psychology Review]] |volume= 27 |number= 7 |pages= 842–854
 |doi= 10.1016/j.cpr.2007.07.006 |pmid=17707114|quote= .. despite clear evidence of an increase in symptom burden and a decrease in well being" among Gulf War veterans, "exhaustive clinical and laboratory based scientific research has failed to document many reproducible biomedical abnormalities in this group. Likewise, there has been no evidence of an increase in disease related mortality.}}</ref>

<ref name=Kang>{{cite journal
|vauthors= Kang H, Magee C, Mahan C, Lee K, Murphy F, Jackson L, Matanoski G
|year = 2001
|title = Pregnancy Outcomes Among U.S. Gulf War Veterans: A Population-Based Survey of 30,000 Veterans
|journal = Annals of Epidemiology
|volume = 11
|issue = 7
|pages = 504–511
|pmid = 11557183
|doi = 10.1016/S1047-2797(01)00245-9}}</ref>

<ref name=Lagorio>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Lagorio |first1= S. |last2= Grande |first2= E.
 |last3= Martina |first3= L. |year= 2008
 |title= Review of epidemiological studies of cancer risk among Gulf War and Balkans veterans
 |journal= Epidemiologia e Prevenzione |volume= 32 |pages= 145–155
 |pmid= 18828552 |issue=3, number 3}}</ref>
<ref name=Livengood>{{Cite book |last= Livengood |first= David R. |year= 1996 |chapter= Introduction to the Problem |editor= David R. Livengood |title= Health Effects of Embedded Depleted Uranium Fragments |page= 3 |chapter-url= http://www.usuhs.mil/afrri/outreach/pdf/livengood.pdf |location= Bethesda, Maryland |publisher= [[Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute]] }}{{Dead link|date=January 2024 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}<!-- Possible alt URL: www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf --></ref>

<ref name = "McDiarmid 2001 123">{{Cite journal
 |last= McDiarmid |first= Melissa A. |year= 2001
 |title= Depleted uranium and public health: Fifty years' study of occupational exposure provides little evidence of cancer
 |journal= [[BMJ]] |volume= 322 |issue= 7279 |pages= 123–124
 |jstor= 25466001 | pmc=1119402
 | doi = 10.1136/bmj.322.7279.123 |pmid=11159557|quote=Depleted uranium possesses only 60% of the radioactivity of natural uranium, having been 'depleted' of much of its most highly radioactive U<sup>234</sup> and U<sup>235</sup> isotopes.}}</ref>
<ref name=Macfarlane>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Macfarlane |first1= Gary J. |last2= Biggs |first2= Anne-Marie
 |last3= Maconochie |first3= Noreen |last4= Hotopf |first4= Matthew
 |last5= Doyle |first5= Patricia |last6= Lunt |first6= Mark |year= 2003
 |title= Incidence of cancer among UK Gulf War veterans: cohort study
 |journal= [[BMJ]] |volume= 327 |issue= 7428 |pages= 1373–1375
 |jstor= 25458017 |doi=10.1136/bmj.327.7428.1373|pmid= 14670879 |pmc= 292984|quote=There is no current excess risk of cancer overall nor of site specific cancers in Gulf war veterans. Specific exposures during deployment have not resulted in a subsequent increased risk of cancer. The long latent period for cancer, however, necessitates the continued follow up of these cohorts. }}</ref>
<ref name=Miller>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Miller |first1= A. C. |last2= McClain |first2= D. |year= 2007
 |title= A Review of Depleted Uranium Biological Effects: In Vitro and in Vivo Studies
 |journal= Reviews on Environmental Health |volume= 22 |issue= 1 |pages= 75–89
 |doi= 10.1515/REVEH.2007.22.1.75 |pmid= 17508699 |s2cid= 25156511 }}</ref>
<ref name=Miller2>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Miller |first1= A. C. |last2= Stewart  |first2= M.
 |last3= Brooks |first3= K. |last4= Shi |first4= L.
 |last5= Page |first5= N. |year= 2002
 |title= Depleted uranium-catalyzed oxidative DNA damage: absence of significant alpha particle decay
 |journal= Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry |volume= 91 |issue= 1 |pages= 246–252
 |doi= 10.1016/S0162-0134(02)00391-4 |pmid= 12121782 |url= https://zenodo.org/record/1259849 |doi-access= free }}</ref>
<ref name=Mitsakou>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Mitsakou |first1= C. |last2= Eleftheriadis |first2= K.
 |last3= Housiadas |first3= C. |last4= Lazaridis |first4= M. |year= 2003
 |title= Modeling of the dispersion of depleted uranium aerosol
 |journal= Health Physics |volume= 84 |number= 4 |pages= 538–544
 |doi= 10.1097/00004032-200304000-00014 |pmid= 12705453 |s2cid= 3244650 }}</ref>
<ref name=Murphy1999>{{Cite journal
 |last= Murphy |first= Frances M. |year= 1999
 |title= Gulf war syndrome: There may be no specific syndrome, but troops suffer after most wars
 |journal= [[BMJ]] |volume= 318 |issue= 7179 |pages= 274–275
 |jstor= 25181681
 |doi= 10.1136/bmj.318.7179.274 |pmid= 9924035 |pmc= 1114762 |quote=[T]hough Gulf War veterans' illnesses are real and sometimes disabling, they do not seem to constitute a unique illness.}}</ref>
<ref name=Murphy2009>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Murphy |first1= Dominic |last2= Greenberg |first2= Neil
 |last3= Bland |first3= Duncan |year= 2009
 |title= Health concerns in UK Armed Forces personnel
 |journal= [[Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine]] |volume= 102 |number= 4 |pages= 143–147
 |doi= 10.1258/jrsm.2009.080387 |pmid= 19349506 |pmc= 2666054|quote=Metallic DU is weakly radioactive and therefore contact with unbroken skin is an extremely low risk to health. However, when a DU round strikes an armoured target, it undergoes spontaneous partial combustion resulting in a fine aerosol of largely insoluble uranium oxides. Presence of this aerosol elevates the risk of potentially chemotoxic or radiotoxic exposure via inhalation or ingestion.<br />[T]here is now a large body of evidence to suggest that, whatever the cause of the ill-health experienced by Gulf War veterans, neither DU nor vaccinations are likely to have caused them.}}</ref>

<ref name=Patel>{{Cite journal
 |last= Patel |first= Amit |year= 2006
 |title= No strong link between depleted uranium and cancer
 |journal= [[BMJ]] |volume= 333 |issue= 7575 |pages= 970–971 |jstor= 40700763 |doi=10.1136/bmj.333.7575.971-b |pmid=17082557 |pmc=1633807|quote=[t]he majority evidence and expert opinion on the lack of a clear association between depleted uranium are quite consistent}}</ref>
<ref name=Pattison>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Pattison |first1= John E. |last2= Hugtenburg |first2= Richard P.
 |last3= Green |first3= Stuart |year= 2010
 |title= Enhancement of Natural Background Gamma-radiation Dose around Uranium Micro-particles in the Human Body
 |journal= Journal of the Royal Society Interface |volume= 7 |issue= 45 |pages= 603–611
 |doi= 10.1098/rsif.2009.0300 |pmid= 19776147 |pmc= 2842777}}</ref>
<ref name=Peragallo>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Peragallo |first1= M. S. |last2= Urbano |first2= F.
 |last3= Sarnicola |first3= G. |last4= Lista |first4= F.
 |last5= Vecchione |first5= A. |year= 2011
 |title= Cancer incidence in the military: an update
 |journal= Epidemiologia e Prevenzione |volume= 35 |pages= 339–345
 |pmid= 22166781 |issue=5–6, number 5–6|quote=[T]he excess of reported cases for this malignancy [lymphoma] in 2001–2002 was probably due to a peak that occurred in 2000 among the whole military; it is therefore unrelated to deployment in the Balkans, and probably represents a chance event}}</ref>

<ref name=Salbu>{{cite journal |vauthors=Salbu B, Janssens K, Lind OC, Proost K, Gijsels L, Danesi PR |year=2005 |title=Oxidation states of uranium in depleted uranium particles from Kuwait |journal=Journal of Environmental Radioactivity |volume=78 |issue=2 |pages=125–135 |pmid=15511555 |doi=10.1016/j.jenvrad.2004.04.001|bibcode=2005JEnvR..78..125S }}</ref>
<ref name=Schroder>{{cite journal|vauthors=Schröder H, Heimers A, Frentzel-Beyme R, Schott A, Hoffman W |title=Chromosome Aberration Analysis in Peripheral Lymphocytes of Gulf War and Balkans War Veterans |journal=Radiation Protection Dosimetry |year=2003 |volume=103 |pages=211–219 |pmid=12678382 |issue=3 |doi=10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a006135 |url=http://www.cerrie.org/committee_papers/INFO_9-H.pdf |archive-url=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140108135436/http://www.cerrie.org/committee_papers/INFO_9-H.pdf |archive-date= 8 January 2014 }}</ref>
<ref name=Shelton>{{cite report |vauthors=Shelton S, Daxon E, Oxenberg T, Kowalski RT, Lindsay DO, O'Brien GP, Rael JE, Silva DG, Smith RA, Stone SJ, Strickland L, Thomson BM, Tomei Torres F |date=June 1995 |title= Health and Environmental Consequences of Depleted Uranium Use in the U.S. Army |publisher=U.S. Army Environmental Policy Institute (AEPI) |type=Technical Report |doi=10.13140/2.1.3468.3201}}</ref>
<ref name=Stone>{{cite journal
 |first=Richard |last=Stone
 |date=13 September 2002
 |title=Environmental Radioactivity: New Findings Allay Concerns Over Depleted Uranium
 |journal=Science
 |volume=297
 |issue=5588
 |page=1801
 |doi=10.1126/science.297.5588.1801
 |pmid=12228701
 |s2cid=128852045}}</ref>
<ref name=Stott>{{Cite journal
 |last1= Stott |first1= Robin
 |last2= Holdstock |first2= Douglas |year= 1999
 |title= WHO should undertake full inquiry into Gulf war illness
 |journal= [[BMJ]] |volume= 318 |issue= 7195
 |page= 1422
 |jstor= 25184732 |doi=10.1136/bmj.318.7195.1422a|pmid= 10334774
 |pmc= 1115801
 }}</ref>

<ref name=Wan>{{cite journal
|vauthors=Wan B, Fleming J, Schultz T, Sayler G |title = In vitro immune toxicity of depleted uranium: effects on murine macrophages, CD4+ T cells, and gene expression profiles
|journal = Environmental Health Perspectives
|volume = 114
|issue = 1
|pages = 85–91
|year = 2006
|pmid = 16393663
|pmc = 1332661
|doi=10.1289/ehp.8085|bibcode = 2006EnvHP.114...85W
}}</ref>
<ref name=Zwijnenburg>{{Cite book |last= Zwijnenburg |first= Wim |year= 2012 |title= Hazard Aware: Lessons learned from military field manuals on depleted uranium and how to move forward for civilian protection norms |url= http://www.ikvpaxchristi.nl/media/files/hazard-aware.pdf |location= Utrecht |publisher= IKV Pax Christi |isbn= 978-9-070-44327-6 |archive-date= 4 July 2013 |access-date= 8 June 2013 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130704134255/http://www.ikvpaxchristi.nl/media/files/hazard-aware.pdf }}</ref>

}}

==Cited sources==
*{{Cite journal
 |last= Charatan |first= Fred |year= 2006
 |title= Gulf war symptoms do not constitute a syndrome
 |journal= [[BMJ]] |volume= 333 |issue= 7569 |page= 618
 |jstor= 40700302 |doi=10.1136/bmj.333.7569.618-b|pmid= 16990302 |pmc= 1570822 }}
*{{Cite journal
 |last1= Greenberg |first1= Neil |last2= Iversen |first2= Amy C.
 |last3= Unwin |first3= Catherin |last4= Hull |first4= L.
 |last5= Wessely |first5= S. |author5-link= Simon Wessely |year= 2004
 |title= Screening for depleted uranium in the United Kingdom armed forces: who wants it and why?
 |journal= [[Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health]] |volume= 58 |issue= 7 |pages= 558–561
 |doi= 10.1136/jech.2003.014142 |pmid= 15194715 |pmc= 1732813}}

*{{Cite journal
 |last= Moszynski |first= Peter |year= 2003
 |title= Royal Society warns of risks from depleted uranium
 |journal= [[BMJ]] |volume= 326 |issue= 7396 |page= 952 |jstor= 25454350 |doi=10.1136/bmj.326.7396.952|pmc= 1125878 |pmid=12727744}}
*{{Cite journal
 |last= Mould |first= Richard F. |year= 2001
 |title= Radiation dose from depleted uranium can now be measured
 |journal= [[BMJ]] |volume= 322 |issue= 7290 |pages= 865–866
 |jstor= 25466697
 |doi=10.1136/bmj.322.7290.865/a|pmid= 11321019 |pmc= 1120031 |s2cid= 683662 }}
*{{Cite report |author=Royal Society working group on the health hazards of depleted uranium munitions |title=The health hazards of depleted uranium munitions: Part II |url=http://royalsociety.org/policy/publications/2002/health-uranium-munitions-ii/ |location=London, England |date=2002 |publisher=[[The Royal Society]] |ref=CITEREFRSDUWG2002}}

==Further reading==
{{Refbegin|2|indent=yes}}
*{{Cite journal
 |last= Brown |first= Mark |year= 2006
 |title= Toxicological assessments of Gulf War veterans
 |journal= [[Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society]] |volume= 361 |issue= 1468 |pages= 649–679
 |jstor= 20209668 |doi=10.1098/rstb.2006.1825 |pmid=16687269 |pmc=1569627}}
*{{Cite journal
 |last1= Dorsey |first1= Carrie D. |last2= Engelhardt |first2= Susan M.
 |last3= Squibb |first3= Katherine S. |last4= McDiarmid |first4= Melissa A. |year= 2009
 |title= Biological Monitoring for Depleted Uranium Exposure in U.S. Veterans
 |journal= [[Environmental Health Perspectives]] |volume= 117 |number= 6 |pages= 953–956
 |jstor= 25549605 |doi=10.1289/ehp.0800413|pmc= 2702412 |pmid=19590689|bibcode= 2009EnvHP.117..953D }}
*{{Cite journal |last1=Fetter |first1=Steve |last2=von Hippel |first2=Frank N. |date=1999 |title=The hazard posed by depleted uranium munitions |journal=Science & Global Security |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=125–161 |doi=10.1080/08929880008426473 |s2cid=122678543 |url=https://scienceandglobalsecurity.org/archive/sgs08vonhippel.pdf |issn=0892-9882}}
*{{Cite report
 |author= Royal Society working group on the health hazards of depleted uranium munitions |year= 2001
 |title= The health hazards of depleted uranium munitions: Part I
 |url= http://royalsociety.org/policy/publications/2001/health-uranium-munitions-i/
 |location= London |publisher= [[The Royal Society]]
 |ref= CITEREFRSDUWG2001 <!--Please don't change this or {{Harvnb}} fails!--> }}
*{{Cite journal
 |author= Royal Society working group on the health hazards of depleted uranium munitions |author-mask=3 |year= 2002b
 |title= The health effects of depleted uranium munitions: a summary
 |journal= [[Journal of Radiological Protection]] |volume= 22 |number= 2 |pages= 131–139
 |article-number=301 |doi= 10.1088/0952-4746/22/2/301
 |pmid= 12148788
 |bibcode= 2002JRP....22..131T
 |s2cid=250798819 |ref= CITEREFRSDUWG2002b <!--Please don't change this or {{Harvnb}} fails!--> }}
*{{Cite journal
 |last1= Squibb |first1= Katherine S. |last2= McDiarmid |first2= Melissa A. |year= 2006
 |title= Depleted uranium exposure and health effects in Gulf War veterans
 |journal= [[Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society]] |volume= 361 |issue= 1468 |pages= 639–648
 |jstor= 20209667 |doi=10.1098/rstb.2006.1823|pmc= 1569622 |pmid=16687268}}
{{Refend}}

==External links==
{{Wiktionary}}
{{commons category|Depleted uranium}}
Scientific bodies
* US [http://www.hps.org/ Health Physics Society]

;United Nations
* [http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.Sub.2.2002.38.En?Opendocument "Human rights and weapons of mass destruction, or with indiscriminate effect, or of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering"] (The UN 2002 report)
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20071220182915/http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Features/DU/du_qaa.shtml Depleted Uranium and the IAEA]

;Scientific reports
* [https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.html ATSDR – Case Studies in Environmental Medicine (CSEM): Uranium Toxicity] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160204174821/http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.asp?csem=7&po=7 |date=4 February 2016 }} U.S. [[Department of Health and Human Services]]
* [http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/BiH_DU_report.pdf "Depleted Uranium in Bosnia and Herzegovina – Postconflict Assessment"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120225000556/http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/BiH_DU_report.pdf |date=25 February 2012 }} by [[UN Environment Programme]]
* [http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1164_web.pdf "Radiological Conditions in Areas of Kuwait With Residues of Depleted Uranium"] by [[International Atomic Energy Agency]]
* [http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/Iraq_DU.pdf "Technical Report on Capacity-building for the Assessment of Depleted Uranium in Iraq"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120309214031/http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/Iraq_DU.pdf |date=9 March 2012 }} by [[UN Environment Programme]]
* [https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/2005/MR1018.7.pdf "A Review of the Scientific Literature As It Pertains to Gulf War Illnesses"] by [[RAND]]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20041115142512/http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/landing.asp?id=1243 Depleted Uranium] article from the Royal Society (archived)
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20120204035816/http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2005/def-nonprolif-sec/snl-dusand.pdf An Analysis of Uranium Dispersal and Health Effects Using a Gulf War Case Study] by Sandia National Laboratories
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20050417062505/http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/Depleted-Uranium.pdf Depleted Uranium Human Health Fact Sheet] by Argonne National Laboratory Environmental Assessment Division
* [http://www.iom-world.org/pubs/IOM_TM0503.pdf Depleted uranium (DU) normative value pilot study: levels of uranium in urine samples from the general population] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726130340/http://www.iom-world.org/pubs/IOM_TM0503.pdf |date=26 July 2011 }} by A.D. Jones, B. G. Miller, S. Walker, J. Anderson, A. P. Colvin, P.A. Hutchison, C.A. Soutar. IOM Research Report TM/05/03
* [http://www.iom-world.org/pubs/IOM_TM0508.pdf A normative study of levels of uranium in the urine of personnel in the British Forces] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726130451/http://www.iom-world.org/pubs/IOM_TM0508.pdf |date=26 July 2011 }} by B. G. Miller, A. P. Colvin, P. A. Hutchison, H. Tait, S. Dempsey, D. Lewis, C. A. Soutar. IOM Research Report TM/05/08
* [http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/environmental_risks/docs/scher_o_123.pdf Opinion on the environmental and health risks posed by depleted uranium] by the Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks

{{Chemical agents}}
{{Nuclear Technology}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Depleted uranium| ]]
[[Category:Aftermath of war]]
[[Category:Element toxicology]]
[[Category:Environmental impact of war]]
[[Category:Medical controversies]]
[[Category:Nuclear materials|Uranium, Depleted]]
[[Category:Suspected teratogens]]
[[Category:Uranium]]
[[Category:Vehicle armour]]
[[Category:Ammunition]]