Did anyone claim that he died of polonium poisoning from cigarettes? Really? I also don’t recall anyone seriously arguing that he died of AIDS. We had carnivorous plant saying “I think that he died of AIDS, and the Palestinians doped his stuff with polonium to incriminate the Israelis. :)” (I am interpreting the to mean that he was joking) That comment was followed by Ibn Warraq saying
So yes, you’re dealing in strawmen.
Nonsense. For example, check out the current cannabis thread where a devotee posted links to numerous peer-reviewed papers as supposedly conclusive evidence that cannabis is an effective cancer remedy. Numerous posters have pointed out to him that those papers are far from sufficient to back his claim.
You are clinging desperately to a single published report which finds it likely that Arafat was poisoned with polonium and “moderately probable” that it killed him, ignoring or mischaracterizing all dissension from that view, and going beyond the conclusions of that single report into a personal certainty that he was fatally poisoned by polonium.
That is not a good example of the scientific method in action.
Honesty - I’ve tried to keep up with this thread, and I have looked at the 108 page report (but certainly not read every word). Perhaps you can give me a clear answer to this question, which was raised before but I haven’t seen a direct answer to it:
Since Polonium has such a short half life, how is it that such significant quantities were found on Arafat’s clothes eight years later?
If you can answer this question without the frustration and aggravation you have for certain other posters, I would be interested in the answer.
Of course, this assumes that not only do you want him dead, but that once you’ve accomplished your goal, your (political, geopolitical, or whatever) position has improved*. So, let me ask - whose position was improved after Arafat was dead? (Hint: it was not Israel’s).
*satisfying your need for vengeance, while perhaps ‘satisfying’, doesn’t count
Sure and thanks for the question; the half-life of polonium about 140 days which means that you can use simple mathematics to back-calculate the original amount of polonium exposure. The fact that there were high levels of polonium persisted on Arafat’s clothes after 8 years suggests that he was given a very large dose of polonium. In post #28, showed that you take the final measure of radioactivity and using half-life of polonium, extrapolate what the dose must have been during the initial exposure.
No one wasn’t interested.
The paper by Froidevaux et al. (2013) used similar mathematics and concluded that it was “reasonable to expect an activity in the order of magnitude of 1-10 mBq in February 2012 in a urine stain coming from a person that incorporated 1 GBq in October 2004.” If you do the math with the radioactivity, 1 Gbq is equal 27 mCi. The LD50 for polonium is 0.41 mCi meaning that Mr. Arafat was exposed to 65x the lethal dose. The calculation is likely that it’s an understatement of initial polonium exposure because it doesn’t take account whole body distribution of polonium (e.g. cells, tissues, bones, and blood) after oral consumption, only renal excretion.
So that’s a partial answer. If you’re interested, we can do the math the results from the Swiss report.
For this discussion let us assume that the other labs replicared these findings and that Mr. Arafat was indeed exposed to that very high level of polonium including in his bones (samples from his bone reported these levels).
How do we square that hypothesis with the fact that his bone marrow was active consistent with fighting off an infection, rather than hypocellular as should be expected with a radiation exposure being concentrated in bone?
Here’s what happens with high dose polonium poisoning. It causes a decrease in the WBC and platelet counts and bone marrow failure. Early. Then other systems.
A high dose concentrated in bone would without question have caused bone marrow failure. Bone marrow failure was not present. We have in the real world two other labs testing the samples and neither is reporting similar findings.
Actually, given the various descriptions of Arafat’s body, itself, high levels of polonium eight years after his death suggests that the clothes were contaminated separately from his body.
I have no specific views on the possibility of Arafat being poisoned–by Israelis or rival Palestinians or Iranians looking to change Palestinian leadership or whoever. I also have no particular criticism of the analysis that was conducted. However, we are a long way from establishing that Arafat was poisoned, even if he was, placing speculation regarding who did it into the realm of “anyone’s guess.”
I’m not. The Swiss study claims they found “unnaturally high levels of polonium in Arafat’s ribs and pelvis” … not just on his effects.
Given that the two other labs with samples have not replicated these results the leading explanation to me is that the Swiss team hired the same people responsible for the wiring in the experiment that found faster than light particles: IOW they screwed something up technically. The first explanation for a lab result that does not make any sense is lab error.
It is of course also possible the samples were tampered with.
Both of those seem much more plausible than a dose, as Honesty calculates, 65 times higher than the lethal dose, high enough to still be detectable in bone this much later, high enough to kill and then some, but which completely spared the bone marrow. The fact that that University Centre of Legal Medicine in Lausanne handwaves away the lack of bone marrow suppression saying that such is “not necessarily [associated with] ingestion of radioactive substances” makes me highly suspect of their objectivity as every expert source I can find says it is and basic understanding of the mechanism of polonium toxicity would unavoidably have one recognize that a high dose present within bone would cause bone marrow effects.
It is simply not possible to have had that level of polonium in the bone and have had no bone marrow suppression. That is more than an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence. Faster than light particles were more believable than that.
I don’t have much time tonight, but the short answer is: I don’t know. mCi is simply milliCuries which is a measure of radioactivity. How mCi equals the physical amount of polonium, I have no idea. Someone who is a physicist would be better equipped to answer that specific question. Will respond to other comments tomorrow.
I quoted the relevant part from the peer-reviewed paper, not the Swiss report… The LD50 of polonium is on the Wikipedia page.
[QUOTE=Wikipiedia]
It has been estimated that a median lethal dose of 210Po is 15 megabecquerels (0.41 mCi), or 0.089 micrograms, still an extremely small amount.
[/QUOTE]
As you can see, the LD50 is much higher than the dose Arafat was exposed to. I’ll pick up this and other replies tomorrow. Good night.
Two labs? Arafat’s belongings/remains were sent to Swiss and Russian labs. Only one lab released their data. What other lab are you referring to? I cannot take into account fictional Russian data that hasn’t been released to the public. When the Russians release their data, then we can look at it. The lack of bone marrow suppression does not surprise me given the relatively low dose of polonium. Earlier in this thread, I approximated his dose to be 0.5 - 1 Gy, below the threshold for bone marrow suppression but large enough for the cause severe gastrointestinal symptoms. I’m not going to touch the tampering claim because, frankly, it’s a specious and trite claim. As for tampering, you could say the same thing about the 9/11 Commission Report or the Warren Commission report. <shrug>
to mean that he was joking) That comment was followed by Ibn Warraq saying