Occup Environ Med

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER
[Advanced]

The most recent version of this article was published on 1 June 2008

Occup Environ Med. Published Online First: 12 October 2007. doi:10.1136/oem.2007.033381
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
oem.2007.033381v1
65/6/398    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Brian G Miller
Andrew P Colvin
Peter A Hutchison
Heather Tait
Scott Dempsey
David Lewis
Colin A Soutar
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Miller, B. G
Right arrow Articles by Soutar, C. A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Miller, B. G
Right arrow Articles by Soutar, C. A

Original Article

A normative study of levels of uranium in the urine of British Forces personnel

Brian G Miller 1*, Andrew P Colvin 1, Peter A Hutchison 1, Heather Tait 1, Scott Dempsey 1, David Lewis 2 and Colin A Soutar 1

1 Institute of Occupational Medicine, United Kingdom
2 Institute of Naval Medicine, United Kingdom

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: brian.miller{at}iom-world.org.

Accepted 5 October 2007


*   Abstract

Objectives: The UK Ministry of Defence controls a biological monitoring programme that includes testing for uranium in personnel who served in the conflict in Iraq in 2003. To help interpret the results, the MoD commissioned this study, to quantify a normative reference distribution of urinary uranium concentrations in military personnel who had not served in that conflict. Methods: The study selected and visited various military establishments to recruit a representative mix of ranks, genders, and occupational groups (combat, support and auxiliary). A standardised protocol and recruitment questionnaire were used. The 125 ml spot urine samples collected were analysed for uranium and creatinine concentrations and (where possible) for uranium isotope 238U/235U ratio. Results: In all, samples from 732 eligible subjects were analysed. Adjusted uranium concentrations ranged up to over 556 ng.g-1 creatinine, somewhat higher than reference values quoted for the USA, but much lower than recorded in granite areas e.g. Finland. Isotope ratio measurements were available for 125 samples (17%) with the highest concentrations; these all had a natural isotope signature, and no evidence of depleted uranium (DU). On average, urinary uranium concentrations were somewhat lower in officers than in other ranks; they differed also across the Services, the Navy being lowest and the Army highest. The levels give no concern for health risks in the personnel studied. Conclusion: Since even the highest values were from natural sources, we assume the differences represent differences in ingestion of natural uranium. Definition of a reference distribution or normal values will depend on the sub-population of interest.


Keywords: Military personnel, Reference distribution, Uranium, Urine analysis







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.