Hi,
I am a professional scientist and one of my major irritations in life is the misrepresentation of science by well meaning (giving them the benefit of the doubt) journalists and pundits. For example, my laboratory was heavily involved in the analysis of depleted uranium in post conflict regions (Balkans and Kuwait). The job was highly politically sensitive, so all of it was covered by well thought out quality control measures and thoroughly documented through our quality management system. A journalist came to report on the laboratory for national radio and we toured her through the faciity, explained what we had done and why, taking time to get the message across. At the end of the tour she asked a colleague "So let me just check that I've got this right... The DU penetrator pierces the armour and then the radiation released kills the tank crew, right?" Wrong! What kills the tank crew is the initial percussion, a potential fire due to spallation of the uranium penetrator and bits of supersonic shrapnel bouncing around the inside of the tank. Depleted uranium is less radioactive than natural radiation and you'd be more at risk from its toxicity than its radioactivity! Hopefully, the journalist had it straight by the time she left!
Mike