The Victims of Fallujah's Health Crisis are Stifled by Western Silence

The Victims of Fallujah's Health Crisis are Stifled by Western Silence


To research a possible link between US
bombardment and rates of birth defects and
pediatric cancer in Iraq is a moral imperative

Ross Caputi

Gardian (UK)

October 25, 2012

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/25/fallujah-iraq-health-crisis-silence/print

Four new studies on the health crisis in Fallujah
have been published in the last three months. Yet,
one of the most severe public health crises in
history, for which the US military may be to blame,
receives no attention in the United States.

Ever since two major US-led assaults destroyed the
Iraqi city of Fallujah in 2004, Fallujans have
witnessed dramatic increases in rates of cancers,
birth defects and infant mortality in their city. Dr
Chris Busby, the author and co-author of two
studies on the Fallujah heath crisis, has called this
"the highest rate of genetic damage in any
population ever studied".







In the years since the 2004 sieges, Fallujah was the



most heavily guarded city in all of Iraq. All



movement in and out of Fallujah was monitored by



the occupying forces. The security situation made it



nearly impossible to get word out about Fallujans'



nascent health crisis. One of the first attempts to



report on the crisis was at the seventh session of the



UN Human Rights Council in the form of the report,



Prohibited Weapons Crisis: The Effects of Pollution



on the Public Health in Fallujah by Dr Muhamad Al-



Darraji. This report was largely ignored. It wasn't



until the first major study on the health crisis was



published in 2010 that the issue received



mainstream media attention in the UK and Europe.







To this day, though, there has yet to be an article



published in a major US newspaper, or a moment



on a mainstream American TV news network,



devoted to the health crisis in Fallujah. The US



government has made no statements on the issue,



and the American public remains largely



uninformed about the indiscriminate harm that our



military may have caused.







The report presented at the seventh session of the



Human Rights Council gave anecdotal evidence



gathered at the Fallujah General Hospital. It



included a stomach-turning collection of pictures of



babies born with scaly skin, missing and deformed



limbs, and horrifying tumors. Two years later, Dr



Busby and his team of researchers sought to verify



the claims in this report. What they found was that,



in addition to shocking increases in pediatric



cancers, there had also been an 18% reduction in



male births. Such a finding is a well-known



indication of genetic damage. The authors conclude that:







"These results support the many reports of



congenital illness and birth defects in Fallujah



and suggest that there is evidence of genetic



stress which appeared around 2004, one year



before the effects began to show."







In a follow up study, in which Dr Busby was a co-



author, hair, soil and water samples were taken



from Fallujah and tested for the presence of heavy



metals. The researchers expected to find depleted



uranium in the environmental samples. It is well



known that the US used depleted uranium weapons



in Iraq during the 1991 Gulf war; and Iraqis, at



least, are well aware of the increases in cancers and



infant mortality rates in the city of Basrah, which



was heavily bombarded during Desert Storm.



However, what the researchers found was not



depleted uranium, but man-made, slightly enriched uranium.







Dr Busby has been the most visible scientist behind



these studies, and for that reason, a lot of criticism



has been directed at him. He is considered by many



to be a "controversial" figure, which only means that



his research has often challenged official



government positions. His studies on Fallujah have



similarly earned the title of "controversial". Many



journals were afraid to publish his second study



because of "pressure" from "outside people".



"Outside people" means types like Roger Helbig - a



retired Lieutenant Colonel in the US Air Force who



is well-known for publishing online attacks on those



who take a critical stance against uranium weapons



- and pressure groups with similar agendas.







Some have criticized the methodology of this study,



and they have used this as an excuse to dismiss the



entire issue. But as other experts have noted:







"The role of 'quick and dirty' studies like this one,



conducted under difficult conditions, is not to



inform policy, but rather to generate hypotheses



about important questions when resources are



not yet available and other research methods are



not possible."







Busby is not the only researcher who takes



"controversial" positions. His findings are



complimented by the work of Dr Dai Williams, an



independent weapons researcher. Williams has been



investigating what he calls "third generation



uranium weapons" (pdf). He has found patents for



weapon systems that could use undepleted



uranium, or slightly enriched uranium,



interchangeably with tungsten, either as a dense



metal or as a reactive metal. Undepleted and slightly



enriched uranium have also been found on other



battlefields (Afghanistan (pdf) and Lebanon). These



findings lead researchers like Dr Williams to believe



that there is a new generation of weapons being



used, possibly by the US and Israeli militaries, that



could have serious indiscriminate health effects on



the populations living near bombing targets.







Many people have dismissed these hypotheses as



speculative, and with that, they dismiss the



research, the issue and the suffering of the people



on the ground. What these naysayers fail to



understand is that hypotheses are always



speculative to a degree - they are informed, but they



are claims intended to be verified or falsified. This is



the nature of the scientific method. First, you



observe certain phenomena in the world, then you



come up with a hypothesis to explain those



phenomena. Then, you conduct an experiment to



test your hypothesis.







Many of these naysayers have not responded to



these studies by calling for more research and



investigation to test the hypotheses of Dr Busby or



Dr Williams. Rather, they dismiss these hypotheses



because they don't like their moral and political



implications. In doing so, they show a great deal of



antipathy for the scientific method and the pursuit



of truth. But more importantly, they also dismiss the



suffering of the people of Fallujah, and all people



affected by these issues.







One weapon system that may use uranium, in some



form or another, is the SMAW-NE (Shoulder-fired



Multipurpose Assault Weapon - Novel Explosive).



My former unit battle-tested this weapon for the first



time in Fallujah during Operation Phantom Fury in



2004. It is not my intention irresponsibly to lay



blame on the US military, but there is a potential



connection between this weapons system and the



health crisis in Fallujah - and this connection



needs to be investigated.







There are also other avenues of investigation



besides uranium weapons. One recent study



examines the possible contributions of mercury and



lead to the health crisis in Iraq. Metal



Contamination and the Epidemic of Congenital



Defects in Iraqi Cities, by Al-Sabbak et al, compared



the levels of lead and mercury in hair, nail and teeth



samples from Fallujah and Basrah. The study found



that the population studied in Fallujah had been



exposed to high levels of "two well-known



neurotoxic metals, Pb and Hg".







In Basrah, the authors found even higher levels of



lead exposure than in Fallujah. Basrah has the



highest ever reported level of neural tube defects,



and the numbers continue to climb. The authors of



this study note:







"Toxic metals such as mercury (Hg) and Pb are an



integral part of war ammunitions and are



extensively used in the making of bullets and



bombs . the bombardment of al-Basrah and



Fallujah may have exacerbated public exposure



to metals, possibly culminating in the current



epidemic of birth defects."







The conclusion of this study is not abstract, and it



is not merely an intellectual or medical issue. It has



real world importance. The modern means of



warfare may be inherently indiscriminate. This is a



scientific finding worthy of discussion at the highest



levels of academia, politics and international affairs.



While it may yet get some attention outside the



borders of the United States, its "controversial"



nature (its implications of the US military's guilt in



creating possibly the worst public health crisis in



history) ensures that it will be ignored at all costs by



the callous and corrupt US government and its



subservient media establishment.







Ultimately, it may not be the case that either lead



alone, or uranium alone, is the sole cause of the



health crisis in Fallujah. It could be a combination



of the two agents, or something different entirely.



But this is an empirical question that demands



further investigation. Methodology and proper



science are important, but we must remember that



science is a means to an end, and not an end in and
itself. The welfare of the people of Fallujah should
be our ends, and our goal should be to help them.

Those who choose misguided political allegiance
over the pursuit of truth, and those who use
methodological flaws to dismiss real-world suffering,
have already lost their humanity.

What we need to do to help Fallujans is clear. More
studies need to be done to figure out what is
harming those poor children, and then steps need to
taken to ensure that this never happens again.

But first, we must find a way to overcome the stifling
silence of governments.

2 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies.