劣化ウラン兵器に関する国連決議についての科学者の共同声明

１１月１日、国連第一委員会で「劣化ウラン兵器使用の影響に関する決議」（提案国：インドネシア、「非同盟中立諸国」共同提案）が、賛成多数で可決された。私達は、劣化ウラン兵器の環境と健康への有害な影響を懸念する科学者として、この決議を歓迎する。

決議は世界の多くの国々が、「劣化ウランを含む武器・砲弾の使用が人体や環境に及ぼす、潜在的に有害な影響を考慮に入れつつ」（前文第４項）、「環境を保護するため直接的手段を取る必要をより強く認識しているが故に、そうした努力を脅かす事柄に対しては、いかなるものであっても、必要な措置を速やかに講じる必要があると確信し」（前文第３項）、採択されたものである。また、国連憲章と国際人道法に従い（前文第１項）、武器規制と軍縮を進めることの決意（前文第２項）を劣化ウラン兵器の問題においても示したものである。

私達はこの決議によって、「対人地雷」や「クラスター爆弾」に続いて、劣化ウラン兵器の問題が、国際的な軍縮の重要課題のひとつとして、国連の場でも公に取り上げられ、ウラン兵器の危険性について真剣に検討し、その禁止に向けて国際社会が前進するための議論を開始する第一歩となることを確信し、期待している。

私達は、同決議を提案した諸国に敬意を表し、感謝する。また、第一委員会の投票で、決議に賛成票を投じた国々にも感謝し、来る総会でも賛成の立場を堅持されることを要請する。

第一委員会の投票で棄権した国々については、この決議の前文に示された上記の国際的意義を改めて熟考し、独自の政策的意志に基づき、積極的に賛成票を投じるよう強く要請する。

「劣化ウラン兵器の環境と人々の健康への潜在的影響」については、これまでの国連機関や各国政府などの報告では、未だ十分に参照・考慮されていない最新の科学的研究の成果が数多く報告されている。これらの報告では、主に劣化ウランの肺への放射性毒性と腎臓への化学毒性による影響に焦点があてられている。このような既存の報告の欠陥を考慮せず、それに基づいて、本決議に反対することは誤りである。

第一委員会の投票で反対した国々は、このことを真摯に受け止め、影響を危惧する世界の多くの国々との「多国間協調」と対話を重視し、少なくとも、「劣化ウランを含む武器・砲弾の使用の影響」についての議論のテーブルに付くべきである。従って、来る総会においては、反対の立場を改め、賛成票を投じるよう強く要請する。

私達、科学者は、医学、化学、生物学、物理学、環境学、疫学等の専門家として、劣化ウラン兵器の使用によって、放射性毒性と重金属としての化学毒性を持つ劣化ウランが、環境を汚染し、人々が被曝することによる「潜在的に有害な影響」について深く憂慮している。核濃縮過程で生成される廃棄物である劣化ウランは、天然ウランに比べて核分裂性のウラン２３５は減衰しているが、その大部分を占めるウラン２３８はアルファー線を放出し、天然ウランの約６０％の放射能（アルファー線の放出で比較）を有している。アルファー核種は、体内に取り込まれた場合には生体へより大きな影響を与える。化学毒性は劣化ウランも天然ウランも同じである。劣化ウランは、世界の多くの国々では、国内法によって、その取扱いが厳しく管理されている放射性物質であることは周知のことである。

劣化ウラン弾は、素材である（劣化）ウランの比重が大きく、弾芯に用いれば射程距離が長くなる。それに易燃焼性という物理的性質が加わり、戦車の装甲をも焼き払いながら貫通する「徹甲焼夷弾」である。強固な標的にあたると3000℃以上の高温を発し、瞬時に燃え上がり、標的物を貫通しながら酸化ウランの微粒子（アエロゾール）となり容易に環境中に放出される。このような高温によって生じたウラン微粒子は、自然界でのウランの存在形態と異なるものである。

汚染は戦場を越え一般市民の居住区にも達し、国境をも越えて拡散する可能性がある。特に、乾燥し、強い風の吹くような気象条件では、容易に拡散すると考えられる。兵士のみならず、一般市民（感受性の高い子どもも含め）もウランの微粒子を吸入し被曝する可能性がある。また、実際には一般市民の居住区内でも使用されたことが確認されている。そして、このような環境汚染は、戦闘終了後も持続する。このような意味において、私達は、劣化ウラン兵器が、国際人道法に反する「非人道的・無差別殺傷兵器」であると考える。

ウランは天然にも存在する物質である。しかし、このように高温に熱せられて生成した酸化ウランの微粒子は、マイクロあるいはナノメートルのサイズの微粒子であり、しかも標的の素材である他の毒性のある金属も混入した粒子である。このような粒子が、環境中に放出され、吸入などによって、体内に取り込まれるような状況は、自然界では起こりえないことに留意すべきである。私達は、環境と人々の健康への全く新たな形での汚染と被曝の問題に直面しているのである。

確かに、このような酸化ウラン微粒子の人体への影響は、科学的に完全に解明されているわけではない。しかしウランが、その放射性毒性と化学毒性によって生体に及ぼす有害な影響の科学的根拠となる基礎データは十分に蓄積されている。それらは今のところ、主に細胞（ヒトの肺由来の細胞も含む）や動物実験による研究データである。これらの研究データからは、吸入などによって体内に取り込まれたウラン（可溶性部分、あるいは難容性の微粒子）が、細胞内に取り込まれた場合、細胞の遺伝情報を有するDNAに直接・間接的に作用することにより、遺伝的毒性（発癌性、変異原性）を示すことは明らかである。また、細胞内の酵素蛋白や小器官に作用し、細胞の損傷修復機構へ影響を及ぼす可能性も指摘されている。これらの作用は、免疫系、神経系など、生体内のあらゆる組織で起こる可能性があり、生殖細胞系に作用した場合には次世代への影響も懸念される。妊娠中の動物の母体に投与した場合には、催奇形性が確認されている。湾岸戦争帰還兵の精液中に劣化ウランが検出されたことも報告されている。放射性毒性と化学毒性、および、それらの相乗効果の可能性も指摘されている。

すでに劣化ウラン兵器が使用された地域については、長期にわたる、環境モニタリングと、被曝した可能性のある一般市民及び兵士の健康影響調査など、独立した機関による環境及び疫学調査を、即刻、本格的に開始することが非常に重要である。また最近、ウラン兵器製造工場の労働者や工場周辺住民の汚染についての調査報告も発表されており、ウラン兵器製造過程での汚染や健康影響の可能性についても大きな関心を寄せるべきである。しかし、これらの環境や人々の健康への影響調査の結果が（統計的に有為な形で）判明するには、何十年もの年月を要するであろうことにも、留意すべきである。

1992年にリオデジャネイロで開かれた「国連環境開発会議」（地球サミット）で出された「環境と開発に関するリオ宣言」には、「環境を保護するために、それぞれの国は、できる限り、予防的措置を広く行うべきである。重大あるいは取り返しのつかない損害のおそれがあるところでは、十分な科学的確実性がない場合でも、環境破壊を予防するための費用効果の高い対策を行うことを遅らせてはならない。」（第１５原則）と明記された。この「予防原則」は、これまで国連をはじめ国際社会で繰り返し確認され、すでに多くの国際的政策や各国の施策に反映されている環境保護の重要な原則である。また私達、科学者にとっても、その社会的責任を果たす上で、重要で当然の理論である。劣化ウラン兵器の問題においても、「予防原則」に基づき、国連の場でも諸国が国際的な対策を真剣に議論すべきである。

すでに私たちが確認している基礎的な科学的知見を考慮するならば、既存の、限界のある「劣化ウランの環境・健康評価報告」において「確定した結論には至っていない」ことを言い訳に、ウラン兵器を使用し続けることは正しくない。私たちは全ての国連加盟諸国が、劣化ウラン兵器が使用された地域での除去可能な汚染物の撤去など、環境と人々の健康を守るための具体的な対策を即刻講じるよう、真剣な議論を行うことを求める。また、劣化ウラン兵器が「完全に安全である」ことが証明されないのであれば、その使用を控えるべきである（使用のモラトリアム）。その「証明義務」は、兵器を使用している者にある。さらに、国際社会が、「非人道的・無差別殺傷兵器」であるウラン兵器の禁止に向けて、前進することを強く望む。

参考文献：

Keith Baverstock,”Presentation to the Defence Committee of the Belgian House of Representatives, 20 November 2006”, http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/docs/15.pdf.

Rosalie Bertell, “Depleted Uranium: All the Questions about DU and Gulf War Syndrome are not yet Answered”, International Journal of Health Services 36(3), 503-520, 2006.

Wayne Briner and Jennifer Murray, “Effects of short-term and long-term depleted uranium exposure on open-field behavior and brain lipid oxidation in rats”, Neurotoxicology and Teratology 27, 135-144, 2005.

Virginia Coryell and Diane Stearns, “Molecular analysis of s hprt mutations generated in Chinese hamster ovary EM9 cells by uranyl acetate, by hydrogen peroxide, and spontaneously”, Molecular Carcinogenesis 45(1), 60-72, 2006.

Wendy J. Hartsock et al, “Uranyl Acetate as a Direct Inhibitor of DNA-Binding Proteins”, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 20, 784-789, 2007.

Arjun Makhijani et al., “Science for the Vulnerable: Setting Radiation and Multiple Exposure Environmental Health Standards to Protect Those Most at Risk”, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER), October 19, 2006. (http://www.ieer.org)

Melissa A. McDiarmid et al, “Health Effects of Depleted Uranium on Exposed Gulf War Veterans”, Environmental Research Section A 82, 168-180, 2002 (p. 172 on DU in semen of Gulf War veterans).

J.L. Domingo, Reproductive and developmental toxicity of natural and depleted uranium: a review, Reproductive Toxicology, no.15, pp. 603-609, 2001.

Alexandra C. Miller (editor), Depleted Uranium: Properties, Uses, and Health Consequences, Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, 2007. See Chapter 1 by David McClain and A.C. Miller and Chapter 4 by Wayne Briner (Neurotoxicology of depleted uranium in Adult and Developing Rodents), as well as other chapters.

A.C. Miller et al., “Observation of Radiation-Specific Damage in Human Cells Exposed to Depleted Uranium: Dicentric Frequency and Neoplastic Transformation as Endpoints”, Radiation Protection Dosimetry 99, 275-278, 2002.

Marjorie Monleau et al. “Genotoxic and Inflammatory Effects of Depleted Uranium Particles Inhaled by Rats”, Toxicological Sciences 89(1), 287-295, 2006.

Randall R. Parrish et al., “Depleted uranium contamination by inhalation exposure and its detection after approximately 20 years: implications for human health assessment”, Science of the Total Environment, 2007 October 30 [E-pub ahead off print]

Adaikkappan Periyakarupan et al, “Uranium induces oxidative stress in lung epithelial cells”, Arch. Toxicol. 8(16) 2007.

Diane M. Stearns et al., “Uranyl acetate induces hprt mutations and uranium-DNA adducts in Chinese hamster ovary EM9 cells”, Mutagenesis 20(6), 417-423, 2005.

Bin Wan et al. “In Vitro Immune Toxicity of Depleted Uranium: Effects on Murine Macrophages, CD+T Cells, and Gene Expression Profiles”, Environmental Health Perspectives 114(1), 85-91, 2006.

Sandra S. Wise et al, “Particulate Depleted Uranium Is Cytotoxic and Clastogenic to Human Lung Cells”, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 20(5), 815-820, 2007.

(Originally drafted by Katsumi Furitsu M.D. Ph.D. and Gretel Munroe. Nov. 20. 2007)

但し、「声明案」の修正、加筆の作業の中で、意見調整などがされ、現時点で英語と日本語が必ずしも「直訳的」に一致しておりません。大きな内容の違いはないかと思いますが、最終的に調整する予定ですので、ご了承下さい。

Joint Communiqué from Scientists On the UN Resolution Concerning Depleted Uranium Weapons

On November the 1st, the resolution entitled 'Effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium' was passed at the UN First Committee by an overwhelming majority. The resolution was drafted by the Movement of Non-Aligned States and submitted by Indonesia. We the scientists who have been concerned about the harmful effects of depleted uranium (DU) weapons, welcome this resolution.

The resolution was adopted, because the majority of UN member states took ‘into consideration the potential harmful effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium on human health and the environment’ (Preparatory Paragraph: PP 4); ‘convinced that as humankind is more aware of the need to take immediate measures to protect the environment, any event that could jeopardize such efforts requires urgent attention to implement the required measures’ (PP 3). It was also ‘guided by the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the UN and the rules of Humanitarian International Law’ (PP 1) and showed the determination ‘to carry forward negotiations on arms regulation and disarmament’ (PP 2) on the issue of DU weapons.

We are convinced that, and expect that, this resolution will be the first step to place the issue of DU weapons on the disarmament agenda, following the issues of Landmines and Cluster Munitions, and the beginning of a serious discussion about the deleterious nature of DU weapons and a possible ban, among the member nations of the UN.

We really respect and appreciate the effort of the leading countries on behalf of this resolution. We also appreciate the support from all the countries that voted for the resolution. We request and believe that these supportive countries will vote for the resolution again at the Plenary Session in December.

We strongly urge the countries that abstained from voting, to seriously reconsider the international meaning of the resolution stated in the PPs and to vote in its support at the Plenary Session, based on the independent political will of each country.

There is mounting scientific research, including studies reported in the most recently peer -reviewed papers, which clearly indicate ‘the potential harmful effects of the use of armaments and ammunitions containing depleted uranium on human health and the environment’. We think that the previous reports from a number of governmental bodies and international organizations have not yet fully reflected and referenced these scientific studies. They mainly focus on the radiological toxicity to the lung and the chemical toxicity to the kidneys. It is not right to vote against the resolution based on those previous reports, without considering these omissions.

The countries which voted against the resolution, should seriously consider such circumstances, take account of the multilateralism and dialogue with many other countries which are concerned about the effect of these weapons and at least come to the table to discuss the issue. Therefore, we urge these countries to change their previous stance and vote to support the resolution at the coming Plenary Session.

We, the scientists who have been working as specialists in different scientific fields including medicine, chemistry, biology, physics, environmental science and epidemiology, have been deeply concerned about the potentially harmful effects on the environment and human health, which may be caused by the radioactive and chemical toxicity of DU following the use of DU weapons.

DU is ‘nuclear waste’ produced from the enrichment process and is mostly made up of the alpha emitting isotope Uranium 238 and is depleted in the fissionable isotope Uranium 235, as compared to concentrated natural uranium (NU). DU is somewhat less radioactive than NU, yet has about 60% of the radioactivity of concentrated NU (NU in nature is a thousand times less concentrated).  DU is mostly an alpha emitter, a very damaging type of radioactivity inside the body. DU and NU are identical in terms of the chemical toxicity, which is also a source of potential damage to the body. With regard to DU’s radioactivity, it is well known that concentrated DU is one of a number of radioactive materials, which are strictly controlled by laws in most of the countries of the world.

Uranium’s high density gives DU shells increased range and penetrative power. This density, combined with uranium’s pyrophoric nature, results in a high-energy kinetic weapon that can punch and burn through armour plating. Striking a hard target, DU munitions create extremely high temperatures of more than 3000oC. The uranium immediately burns and vaporizes into an aerosol, which is easily diffused in the environment, while the shell is penetrating the target. The uranium particles formed by this heat are unlike forms of naturally formed uranium in terms of their size (10 to 100 times smaller).  These extremely small particle sizes are known to be much more toxic and more rapidly absorbed from the lungs than larger (micron-sized) particles.

Aerosolized DU dust can easily spread over the battlefield, and can be re-suspended by the winds especially where the climate is dry, spreading over civilian areas, sometimes even crossing international borders. Therefore, not only the military personnel but also the civilians, including children who are very sensitive to such toxic substances, might inhale the fine DU particles and internalize them in their bodies. It was also recognized that DU weapons were actually used even in highly populated residential areas. The contamination also continues after the cessation of hostilities. DU particles will remain in the environment and retain their radiation for decades and centuries if not longer. Taking these aspects of DU weapons into account, we consider that DU weapons are illegal under binding international humanitarian, human rights and environmental law and is one of the inhumane weapons of ‘indiscriminate destruction’.

Uranium is a radioactive element naturally distributed in the environment. However, we repeat that the very fine particles of DU created at the extremely high temperatures that result from the impact of a DU shell on a tank are micron- and nano-sized and can travel in the body once inhaled. They have no analogue in history. In addition, the high temperatures at impact sublimate the metals in the tank around the penetrating holes and in the shell casing, adding tiny particles of these metals and their oxides to the aerosol which can be internalized if inhaled, like the uranium, and which are toxic to the body. We have been facing an entirely new type of contamination to humans and the environment through these weapons.

It is true that we do not, as yet, understand the full impact of fine particles of DU oxide on the human body. However, there is a considerable amount of basic scientific evidence from both animal and cellular studies (including studies of human lung cells) that suggest deleterious effects on human health from inhaled DU particles through both radiological action and chemical toxicity. These data clearly indicate that the internalized uranium (both soluble component and insoluble particles) has genotoxic effect (carcinogenic, mutagenic), for it affects directly and/or indirectly the DNA, which codes the genetic information of the cell. It has also been pointed out that the internalized uranium may affect the intracellular organelles and/ or enzyme proteins and damage some of the repair mechanisms of the cells. These harmful effects are possibly produced in the various tissues and organs in a body, including potential damage to the immune and nervous systems. If genotoxic effects are produced in the germ line cells, it might lead to trans-generational effects. A teratogenic effect to the fetus was detected in animal studies where rodents were exposed to DU during gestation; also a number of Gulf War veterans were found to have DU in their semen. We should in addition consider the possible synergistic effect of radio-toxicity and chemical-toxicity from DU exposure.

We think it critical to immediately launch a full-dress, long-lasting and independent environmental monitoring as well as health and medical research on possibly exposed populations, both military and civilian, in the areas where the DU weapons have been used. We should also pay serious attention to the contamination and possible harmful health effects due to the manufacturing of DU weapons; a recent study clearly indicates that the workers of the DU weapons-producing factory as well as residents living nearby were contaminated by DU. However, we should also note that it may take many years, even decades, before we get statistically significant results on affected populations from epidemiological studies.

In the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, which was adapted at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development (Earth Summit) in Rio de Janeiro, they stated: ‘In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation; Principle 15.’ This ‘precautionary principle’ has been confirmed repeatedly in the UN. It is also recognized widely in the international community as one of the most important principles concerning the international as well as the domestic policies for environmental and public health protection. It is also a valuable and logical principle for us, scientists, when we take responsibility for our society. The issue of DU weapons should be also discussed seriously based on the 'precautionary principle' among the UN member countries.

Considering the basic scientific evidence we already have, it is not right to continue using DU weapons making the excuse that ‘no definitive conclusions had been reached’ in the present limited risk assessments of the health and environmental impact of DU. We request all the UN member countries to discuss seriously what concrete measures are needed, including the immediate clearance of contaminated remnants, and the protection of the environment and the public health of contaminated populations following the use of DU weapons. We request the member nations of the UN to refrain from using DU weapons, unless they are proved to be completely safe. The burden of proof is on the users. Furthermore, we hope very much that the international community will go forward to ban DU weapons, one of the inhumane weapons of ‘indiscriminate destruction’.

References:

Keith Baverstock,”Presentation to the Defence Committee of the Belgian House of Representatives, 20 November 2006”, http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/docs/15.pdf.

Rosalie Bertell, “Depleted Uranium: All the Questions about DU and Gulf War Syndrome are not yet Answered”, International Journal of Health Services 36(3), 503-520, 2006.

Wayne Briner and Jennifer Murray, “Effects of short-term and long-term depleted uranium exposure on open-field behavior and brain lipid oxidation in rats”, Neurotoxicology and Teratology 27, 135-144, 2005.

V. Chazel et al, Characterisation anddissolution of depleted uranium aerosols produced during impacts of kinetic energy penetrators against a tank. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 105, 163-166, 2003.

Cooper, J.R. et al. "The behaviour of uranium-233 oxide and uranyl-233 nitrate in rats." Intl. J. Radiat. Biol. 41(4), 421-433, 1982.

Virginia Coryell and Diane Stearns, “Molecular analysis of s hprt mutations generated in Chinese hamster ovary EM9 cells by uranyl acetate, by hydrogen peroxide, and spontaneously”, Molecular Carcinogenesis 45(1), 60-72, 2006.

J.L. Domingo, Reproductive and developmental toxicity of natural and depleted uranium: a review, Reproductive Toxicology 15, pp. 603-609, 2001.

Wendy J. Hartsock et al, “Uranyl Acetate as a Direct Inhibitor of DNA-Binding Proteins”, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 20, 784-789, 2007.

Arjun Makhijani et al., “Science for the Vulnerable: Setting Radiation and Multiple Exposure Environmental Health Standards to Protect Those Most at Risk”, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER), October 19, 2006. (http://www.ieer.org)

Melissa A. McDiarmid et al, “Health Effects of Depleted Uranium on Exposed Gulf War Veterans”, Environmental Research Section A 82, 168-180, 2000 ,(p. 172 on DU in semen of Gulf War veterans).

Alexandra C. Miller (editor), Depleted Uranium: Properties, Uses, and Health Consequences, Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, 2007. See Chapter 1 by David McClain and A.C. Miller and Chapter 4 by Wayne Briner (Neurotoxicology of depleted uranium in Adult and Developing Rodents), as well as other chapters.

A.C. Miller et al., “Observation of Radiation-Specific Damage in Human Cells Exposed to Depleted Uranium: Dicentric Frequency and Neoplastic Transformation as Endpoints”, Radiation Protection Dosimetry 99, 275-278, 2002.

Marjorie Monleau et al. “Genotoxic and Inflammatory Effects of Depleted Uranium Particles Inhaled by Rats”, Toxicological Sciences 89(1), 287-295, 2006.

Randall R. Parrish et al., “Depleted uranium contamination by inhalation exposure and its detection after approximately 20 years: implications for human health assessment”, Science of the Total Environment, 2007 October 30 [E-pub ahead off print]

Adaikkappan Periyakarupan et al, “Uranium induces oxidative stress in lung epithelial cells”, Arch. Toxicol. 8(16)389-395, 2007.

Diane M. Stearns et al., “Uranyl acetate induces hprt mutations and uranium-DNA adducts in Chinese hamster ovary EM9 cells”, Mutagenesis 20(6), 417-423, 2005.

G.N. Stradling et al. "The metabolism of ceramic and nonceramic forms of uranium dioxide after deposition in the rat lung." Human Toxicol. 7, 133-139, 1988.

Bin Wan et al. “In Vitro Immune Toxicity of Depleted Uranium: Effects on Murine Macrophages, CD+T Cells, and Gene Expression Profiles”, Environmental Health Perspectives 114(1), 85-91, 2006.

H.B. Wilson et al. "Relation of particle size of uranium dioxide dust to toxicity following ingalation by animals: II." Archives of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Medicine 6(2), 93-104, 1952.

H.B. Wilson et al. "Relation of particle size of U3O8 dust to toxicity following inhalation in animals." Arch. of Indust. Health 11, 11-16, 1955.

Sandra S. Wise et al, “Particulate Depleted Uranium Is Cytotoxic and Clastogenic to Human Lung Cells”, Chem. Res. Toxicol. 20(5), 815-820, 2007.

(Originally drafted by Katsumi Furitsu M.D. Ph.D. and Gretel Munroe. Nov. 20. 2007)