Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Uranium ore is mostly alpha particle radiation. Clothing and aluminum foil are generally sufficient to block alpha particle radiation. Uranium metal can be up 28% beta particle, which can be blocked by sandbags or a thick brick wall. Depleted uranium contains almost no beta particle radiation. Uranium ore lacks the purity of uranium metal and usually more beta particles than depleted unranium but not much more though it’s purity and composition are naturally variant.

Because of that uranium is radioactive and that radioactivity is harmful, but is not the primary harm, unless you are allergic to uranium at which point the radiation is the primary harm. Also, sensitivity to radiation varies wildly by person. Uranium is a high density metal that has some dissolution capability into water, like lead, which means heavy metal poisoning. Uranium is more dense than lead and thus more poisonous but less poisonous than osmium. Under certain conditions uranium can be (or become) very brittle and break apart into a fine dust that can be respirated.




> Uranium is more dense than lead and thus more poisonous

I think there’s a little more to heavy metal toxicity than that...


How so?


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_toxicity It appears as there if is little correlation between metal density and toxicity


Weird, your source says the opposite.

> Toxic metals sometimes imitate the action of an essential element in the body, interfering with the metabolic process resulting in illness. Many metals, particularly heavy metals are toxic

Metal toxicity is the correlation between density and reactivity.

Iron and manganese are limited exceptions where iron is about 84% of hemoglobin, which is about 80% of red blood cells, but its toxic (though in larger doses) matches almost exactly the implications of other metal toxicity.


> Weird, your source says the opposite.

No, it doesn't. Your quote truncates a sentence that supports GP's point.


The remainder of that sentence does not suggest anything about density. But, I will ask your expert opinion: What makes metals toxic and what makes heavy metals more or less toxic than other metals?


"Toxicity is a function of solubility."

First sentence of third paragraph in linked wiki page.


I mentioned that specifically in my original comment.


No, you said that uranium (which you say is toxic because of its density) "has some dissolution capability."


It pleases me you can read. For a second I was about to lose faith in humanity.


Gold is nearly twice as dense as Lead, but it's completely safe.


Gold is toxic if consumed regularly. The symptoms of gold poisoning are no different than other forms of metal poisoning. The primary difference between gold and uranium is that gold isn't very reactive and so it has virtually no contact toxicity. Also, some people are allergic to gold, which does manifest contact toxicity.


Metallic gold is completely safe to consume. You'd have to be taking deliberately prepared compounds to suffer from toxicity.


* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold#Toxicity

> Although the gold ion is toxic, the acceptance of metallic gold as a food additive is due to its relative chemical inertness, and resistance to being corroded or transformed into soluble salts (gold compounds) by any known chemical process which would be encountered in the human body.

This is true of known natural metabolic processes, but not true with connection to certain drug interactions. Gold is not chemically inert and can be converted into an ion or gold salt, even within the body, when mixed with other reactive non-toxic chemicals. Gold metal is popularly consumed in trace amounts of certain alcoholic beverages and there are many medications that should not be taken in connection with alcohol for many different metabolic altering processes. I am not sure if it has been thoroughly tested, but a combination of gold and nangarin could also result in potentially toxic consequences, which is why certain fruits are forbidden with consumption of certain other chemicals/drugs.

This is exceedingly rare though, since platinum group metals are so expensive, but the same conditions are observed with other platinum group metals. Silver is more toxic than gold because it is more reactive, but the behaviors are similar. A major symptom of advanced toxicity from platinum group metals is a changing of skin color towards the metallic color of the metal toxin.


For the purposes of human consumption, metallic gold is inert. I've probably eaten on the order of a gram in the last decade. It ends up in the toilet.


* https://www.nuclear-power.net/gold-affinity-electronegativit...

Gold has a far lower ionization energy than you are giving it credit for, which means it is capable of becoming toxic with relatively minor interactions. The safe for consumption statement implies interactions natural to human physiology are not likely to make gold toxic, but that doesn't account for other things humans consume that do trigger reactions not normal to human physiology.

Like gold we generally believe fruit juice is safe for consumption. Fruit juice is even classified as safe for consumption, like gold, by the FDA. This was proven to be not completely true when the price of grapefruit production fell in the 1980s. Certain chemical interactions with fruit juice will make you sick and in extreme cases will kill you. This phenomenon was only discovered because of numerous associated deaths.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grapefruit%E2%80%93drug_intera...


Metallic gold is pretty inert. Ionic gold, on the other hand, is toxic.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: