Re: CESSIUM


Message posted by habu-e6 on September 13, 2009 at 20:09:34 PST:

That is exactly correct. I would like to add, ingestion by mouth is quite different than inhaling the toxin into the lungs.

Respiratory contact may be worst. Aspirating microscopic particles of cesium cooked in a hydrocarbon fuel base. This is definitely what the CDC should have been testing for including latency factors.

The fact that cesium nitrate can burn through glass is especially appealing. YuCK!!

It's most reactive and is highly explosive when it comes in contact with water. The hydrogen gas produced by the reaction is heated by the thermal energy released at the same time, causing ignition and a violent explosion, but cesium is so reactive that this explosive reaction can even be triggered by cold water or ice at temperatures down to -116°C.

Cesium is highly pyrophoric and ignites spontaneously in air to form cesium hydroxide and various oxides. Cesium hydroxide is an extremely strong base, and can rapidly corrode glass.

Cesium compounds are rarely encountered by most persons. All cesium compounds should be regarded as mildly toxic because of its chemical similarity to potassium. Large amounts cause hyperirritability and spasms, but such amounts would not ordinarily be encountered in natural sources, so it is not a major chemical environmental pollutant. Rats fed cesium in place of potassium in their diet die.

When burned with hydrocarbons and other additives the resulting compounds are unknown. Until the CDC comes out with a study, for which they say themselves is needed I guess we'll never know.

One thing we do know, it was part of the history of Area 51 and the OXCART Program. These are the types of things our troops and civilian defense workers endured as the price for Freedom.


In Reply to: Re: CESSIUM posted by psiuh88 on September 13, 2009 at 17:41:06 PST:

Replies:



[ Discussion Forum Index ] [ FAQ ]