• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Tungsten in bullets may be a problem

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sindawe

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
3,480
Location
Outside The People's Republic of Boulder, CO
Ran across this article this morning. May be an issue if the observations prove to be valid.

===================
Tungsten bullets cause cancer in wounds:

[Health India]: BETHESDA, Md., Feb. 16 : Tungsten alloys, being used in battlefield munitions to make them less toxic may cause cancer in soldiers wounded by them, U.S. Army researchers said.

Researchers at the Forces Radiobiology Research Institute implanted pellets of the tungsten alloys in rats to simulate shrapnel wounds from the weapons. Some rats received high-dose pellets, some low-dose and some pellets of other material for controlled comparison.

All of the rats implanted with tungsten developed extremely aggressive tumors surrounding the pellets. Though the tumors in the low-dose individuals grew more slowly, all of the tumors spread rapidly to the lungs of the rats, requiring researchers to euthanize the animals well before the anticipated end of the study.

"(The findings raise) extremely serious concerns over the potential health effects of tungsten-alloy-based munitions currently being used as non-toxic alternatives to lead and depleted uranium," the researchers said.

"If the findings ... are validated by further research, it appears that soldiers could be at risk of surviving battlefield wounds only to develop an aggressive form of cancer," said Dr. Jim Burkhart, science editor for the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, which published the research.

Source: http://www.newkerala.com/news-daily/news/features.php?action=fullnews&id=72866
 
Well, how long does the tungsten have to stay in the wound to develop a tumor? Is this like the diet soda causing cancer test, where the rat would have to drink the equivalent of 700 cans of soda a day to develop cancer?
 
pardon me for sounding heartless, but since the U.S. and its western allies are the only ones that can afford to develop Tungsten bullet technology and its highly unlikely that they will be against U.S. forces, who gives a flyin' flip if they cause cancer? here's a little news flash: that U.S. soldier shot you because HE WANTED YOU TO DIE! now or later makes no difference to me, as long as you're out of the fight.

Bobby
 
We do sometimes hit people we did not intend to get harmed and fratricide remains a pressing battlefield concern.
 
That's like using all copper bullets for hunting or self defense so you don't give the target lead poisoning !! BTW I think tungsten bullets were invented by the germans during WWII for their 88 !
 
Tungsten is a lead substitute for waterfowl shot.Didn't our own .gov say that it was inert & acceptable for such use?
 
So, in other words, "non-toxic" isn't non-toxic. Who'd a thunk it?

I thought the tungsten pellets were supposed to increase armor piercing capability, not reduce toxicity.
 
Here in Oregon, bird hunters have to use steel shot to keep the lead from polluting the waterways.
The switch to tungsten was made during Slick Willie's reign. It seems that the Rihyadi Group (remember them?) owns huge tungsten mines in Indonesia. About the same time, the domestic tungsten mines here in the U.S. were put out of business by classifying the surrounding lands as Nationl Monuments or something similar. Lead was outlawed to "protect the environment"... and the children, of course.
 
The first question I'd have to ask is the strain of rat used for the test. Soem of the cancer prone rats get cancer if you look at them funny.
 
Already been done.
================
Cartridge, Caliber .50, Saboted Light Armor Penetrator (SLAP), M903
50_M903_SLAP.gif

Used by M2HB machine gun. The SLAP is used in combat against current and future light armored targets and Armored Attack Helicopters (AAHs). The M903 offers the capability to defeat these targets at ranges two to three times that of currently available ammunition.

Armor Penetration.
500 meters: 1.34 in (34 mm)
1,200 meters: 0.91 in (23 mm)

Projectile diameter: 0.30 inches (7.7 mm)

The cartridge consists of a heavy metal (tungsten) penetrator that is sabot-launched at a much higher velocity than standard rounds. The sabot, which is designed to break up at the muzzle to release the penetrator, must also survive the gun environment until launch. It is injection molded of special high strength plastic and is reinforced with an aluminum insert in the base section. The cartridge is identified by an amber sabot (Ultem 1000).

Type Classification: STD. Type Classification Date: 31-MAR-1993. Unit cost: $8.87 (Fiscal Year 2005).

Source: http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/mg/50_ammo.html
 
Tungsten is being promoted as a "nontoxic" alternative to depleted uranium in armor-piercing tank munitions, the theory being that if someone is wounded by shrapnel (or comes upon expended munition fragments or particles after the battle is over), uranium is somewhat toxic and tungsten is not. It appears the latter assumption may be incorrect at least in regards to tungsten in wounds.
 
Raz-O has a very good point there. A study like that is good for little more than suggesting that something ought to be looked into. It's well established that lab animals and humans can have radically different reactions to various toxins and carcinogens. A dose of dioxin that will drop a guinea pig in it's tracks, for instance, might cause a human a slight rash.
 
Interesting.

I just went back to the Ammo Oracle on 5.56 ammo. Turns out that the tungsten round isn't the one most of our guys are carrying. The standard issue round for the M16 and M4 seems to be the M855 (SS-109), which has a STEEL penetrator. The round with the tungsten penetrator is the M995, which is supplied only in belts for use in SAWs (Squad Automatic Weapons).

Like my former boss used to say, "Everything you read is true ... unless you have first-hand knowledge of the facts."
 
All the rounds that have been discussed so far have enough penetrative power to go cleanly through anyone's body. Hence they are unlikely to be lodged inside to cause cancer.

That said, it seems that if this information becomes common knowledge among the doctors working on war injuries then they'll make sure to remove the bullets - which they'd probably do anyway to limit infection.

Either way it's not a problem.
 
Tungsten bullets cause cancer in wounds:
Click to expand...

Let me make it real simple here. Common sense says, "Don't do things that would give you a gunshot wound and you will never get toxic carcinogenic buildup from ammunitions." I wish there was an "idea" smiley right about here.

In other words, don't go making people angry at you, especially the deranged.

Don't mess around with another man's wife/girlfriend.

Stay away from drugs, drug dealers, and users.

Be cooperative with law enforcement. Don't run from or fire upon them.

Don't handle a gun if you are intoxicated.

Point the muzzle away from you. If a hole is staring you in the face and you have to "push" the trigger, stop for a moment and reconsider.

Never use the handle on your loaded six as a nail driver.

Blah blah blahhh ... it goes on and on ...
 
here's a little news flash: that U.S. soldier shot you because HE WANTED YOU TO DIE! now or later makes no difference to me, as long as you're out of the fight.
Click to expand...

Poor Bobby doesn't quite get it. Unless the war lasts for years and years, cancer isn't going to be what takes an injured enemy soldier out of the fight and even if it does, chances are that the American who did the damage won't be around to experience the success.

I read the article. Interesting. So I wonder how ballistic tungsten differs from tungsten used as medical implants.
 
Perhaps you're thinking about titanium for use in medical implants? Although tungsten is fairly inert, I can't think of any other good properties in an implant.
 
Tungsten coils are apparently used to "reinforce" aneurysms in the brain, keeping them from rupturing. (Though now it seems they are rethinking that, as the tungsten dissolves over time and leaves the aneurysm at risk again... Source, heavy reading.)

Tungsten IS toxic, though at a higher threshold than lead and similar heavy metals. It can cause lung/kidney/liver damage (among other things), depending on the method of exposure. There's an interesting link documenting one case of tungsten poisioning in a French soldier.

Oh, and if anyone's interested, I stumbled upon what seems to be the original article of the study in question.
 
Sure enough, coils are one use for tungsten as medical implants. Interestingly, the tungsten tends to break down over time and has been somewhat problematic because of this aspect, assuming it breaks down earlier than desired. Why would tungsten be used with an aneurysm when it will later cause a brain tumor?
 
Well, if an aneurism isn't treated it could lead to death way before a brain tumor could. It might be a last-ditch effort to add a few more years to life.
 
Why would tungsten be used with an aneurysm when it will later cause a brain tumor?
Click to expand...
Why, its a cunning plan they have. Hit the patient up for the cost of "fixing" the aneursym now, then again years later when the patient "develops" brain cancer from the earlier fix. Which, by the way, has surprisingly dissolved and needs to be redone, at extra co$t of cour$e.

Realisticly, I think the tungsten may have been the best choice at the time, balancing cost, inertness in the body and such factors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Allegations that "green" ammunition more hazardous than lead
Replies
8
Views
932
MD_Willington
M
P
  • Locked
Depleted uranium ammo - the facts
Replies
15
Views
1K
Malone LaVeigh
M
Shawn Dodson
  • Locked
Army's Proposed New M855A1 to Use Solid Copper Bullet
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
42K
Bartholomew Roberts
B
Back
Top