I would not be so quick in declaring Depleted Uranium to be relatively hazardless. I am not scientific at all, and I have no axe to grind in this discussion, as I do not collect any caliber of ammunition that generally has DU cores, nor was I ever in close contact with any such ammunition during my military service. I will say that this subject is highly controversial, and that the reference cited, which I have added to my one-inch thick file on this subject, is a statement by the U.S. Government, who certainly do have an axe to grind in this matter. I will, to be fair, state that I am skeptical of almost any statement made by Government Agencies in matters like this, based on nothing more than the repeated pattern of half-truths on subjects that I am either well acquainted with, or of which Government statements have been conclusively proven to be false and/or misleading. Just think for a minute of the statements of some government agencies regarding gun control, and I think you will find my statement to be not an outrageous one.
I am not qualified to judge the statements made in the source cited in this thread. Let’s just repeat that I am sceptical when Government exonerates itself. “Fox in charge of the Hen House?”
I could not possibly give a synopsis here of the many articles indicating that DU is a dangerous material to have around and to handle. I cannot even say that they are correct since I don’t know some of the organizations involved with them, and since there is a political question about DU, they may be slanted to the left on the issue.
I do know personally, and for over forty years, IAA Member Fred Davis, an active pro-gun Benefactor Member of the NRA, a Life Member of the California Rifle and Pistol Association, a Life Member of IAA and a highly educated and credentialed chemist who worked for years in a major U.S.Customs and Homeland Security laboratory. Please see his article entitled “Denal” - “DU” - “Depleted Uranium”: A Warning," that appeared in the IAA Journal Issue 434, November-December 2003, pages 20 and 21. There have been other articles in the Journal about DU, so mirroring the Government’s position and some inbetween. I cannot judge the qualifications of the author’s of those articles in relation to knowledge about the properties and potential hazards of DU, but I can judge those of Mr. Davis, and his credentials in this area are impeccable.
His opinions appear to be “somewhat” at odds with the Government’s positions, and while I take no hard stand on this issue out of my own ignorance, if I were a betting man, I will bet on source with no axe to grind.