Answer to Question #5151 Submitted to "Ask the Experts"

The question of uranium in hair comes up quite frequently. The procedure is performed by a number of laboratories using various techniques, and if not properly done is prone to errors from contamination as uranium is found throughout nature and is a normal component (albeit in small amounts) of virtually everything we come in contact with including the water we drink and bathe with, our food, chemical reagents as might be used in a hair analysis procedure, the soil, shampoos, and so forth. Moreover, there are no recognized established standards for uranium in hair and background levels of uranium in hair are highly variable from person to person and region to region, depending in large measure on dietary factors. Contamination would likely produce an erroneously high result. Certainly several parts per million of uranium in hair would not be unusual nor would it be indicative of a hazardous level within the body. As the analysis result you report does not have units, it is not possible to evaluate how much is, in fact, in your hair or if the analysis was properly performed. And hair analysis is not an accepted method of evaluating whether you have been exposed to (or have actually suffered a significant intake) of uranium.   

Moreover, the statement by your interpreter that many people in the mountains of Arizona area have "high uranium due to the Nevada Proving Ground" is lacking in scientific merit and false. I would suspect that the natural levels of uranium—the so-called background levels—might be on average somewhat higher but still well within the range of normal in the mountainous regions of Arizona because the soil there naturally contains more uranium than, say, the soil in other parts of the United States. The Rocky Mountain Plateau soils typically naturally contain somewhat higher levels than soils elsewhere in the United States but these levels are not hazardous to health. Even more egregious is the recommendation that you be treated by chelation. You are quite right at being concerned about chelation; chelation is wholly ineffective at removing uranium from the body and is not a recognized treatment for removing uranium from the body.

With respect to the incidence of cancer in your region, I suggest that you contact your local or state health department for further information. Approximately one in three Americans will ultimately get cancer, and about one in six Americans will die from cancer. Cancer is a complex disease; some individuals have a familial inherited predisposition to cancers of certain types (colon cancer for example), and factors such as smoking and exposure to certain chemicals are well known to be associated with cancer. Your health department will be able to give you more information. As for natural uranium, while it is in fact weakly radioactive, it is also chemically toxic, and it is the chemical toxic effects, particularly related to the kidney, that are of most concern. You can also get additional information on uranium levels throughout the state and uranium hazards from the Arizona Radiation Control Program Director.
 
Ronald L. Kathren, CHP