allan

Department of Veterans Affairs Service-Disabled Veterans Insurance (S-DVI) What Is Service-Disabled Veterans Insurance (S-DVI)? Service-Disabled Veterans Insurance is life insurance for veterans who have received a service-connected disability rating by the Department of Veterans Affairs. The basic S-DVI program, commonly referred to as "RH Insurance", insures eligible veterans for up to $10,000 of coverage. Veterans who have the basic S-DVI coverage and are totally disabled are eligible to have their premiums waived. If a waiver is granted, totally disabled veterans may apply for additional coverage of up to $20,000 under the Supplemental S-DVI program. Premiums for Supplemental S-DVI coverage, however, cannot be waived. Who Is Eligible? You are eligible for S-DVI if: • You were released from service under other than dishonorable conditions on or after April 25, 1951 AND • VA has notified you that you have a service-connected disability AND • You are healthy except for your service-related disability AND • You apply within two years of being notified of your service-connected disability. You are eligible for SUPPLEMENTAL S-DVI if: • You have an S-DVI policy AND • The premiums on your basic coverage are being waived due to total disability AND • You apply within one year of being notified of the waiver AND • You are under 65 years of age. REMINDER: Waiver of Premiums - you may be eligible for a waiver if you become totally disabled before your 65th birthday and remain disabled for at least six consecutive months. (Premiums for Supplemental S-DVI can't be waived.) How Much Does It Cost? The cost varies depending upon age, type of plan (term or permanent), and the amount of coverage. How Can You Apply? You can apply by using the following forms: • VA Form 29-4364 to apply for basic S-DVI • VA Form 29-0189 to apply for Supplemental S-DVI (or you may submit a letter, over your signature, requesting Supplemental S-DVI) • VA Form 29-357 to apply for a total disability waiver of S-DVI premiums For More Information, Call Toll-Free 1-800-669-8477 or Visit Our Web Site at http://www.insurance.va.gov. Insurance Service – April 2006 SOURCE: http://www.vba.va.gov/benefit_facts/Insura...SDVIeg_0406.doc

Benefit Information http://www.vba.va.gov/bln/21/Benefits/index.htm#BM03

fwd from Kelly Veteran’s Protest for Congress in Re-Election Issues A suggestion has come in on a Veteran’s Protest for Congress. While I think, that mass demonstration planning is cumbersome and not very effective especially when out of millions only 40 to 50 Veterans show up. It is also not effective in the press or the broadcast media. One thousand illegals hit the streets and it is on every news show in the nation and in every print media but the same does not apply nor has it ever applied to THE Veterans’ Protest. Of course, I am just thinking out loud here during this election year on how to make direct contact and make the direct issues an election issue for both parties at all levels. Since it seems we stuck with the lesser of the two evils or so it seems. This would involve 40 - ? many Veterans/widows/offspring etc. This would involve staying in the DC area during the week, not on a holiday time frame. I think we or whomever sets this up can get a group rate at the Sheraton National in Arlington, VA for about $99.00 a night. Julie Tackett may have more info on that and can advise on setting it up. Yes, this will cost some money and we have no one to reimburse us only the satisfaction of taking the fight to the hill. Now this does not mean it is my show and I know there are many out there that can charge and run this so please step up. I would certainly support anything or anyone in this issue. My recommendation would be is to have specific issues with stated context, impacts, and some recommendations to fix or direct recommendations for investigations of DoD/VA as to why and how they can get away with the identified issues. We also must suggest recommendations even if it involves a pilot program. We must break up into teams, maybe two person teams, to cover both the house and the senate. This does not just include the Chair of the Veterans Affairs Committees in the House and Senate but the members of the committees also. In addition, any other senators and house persons we know that have been in the fight for Veterans such as Walz and Kagen. This should also include the following: · Veterans Affairs Chair and Committee Members in the house and senate · SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY, VETERANS AFFAIRS, AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS on Government Reform. · Judiciary Committee’s · And any other committee that has or could have an impact on veterans/widows/offspring issues The reason why I say Judiciary is there are a lot of issues that are related to justice and lets just say “misguided rules of evidence and overriding the facts and laws of physics and chemistry” that VA raters and BVA judges just override like they know better than science and medicine itself. In ADDITION, we must include suspense dates for a reply from whatever office by name. We should include the e-mail address, mailing address, and phone number of the person the office should contact with a reply as to what they intend to do as an action item. This suspense date should be no longer than six weeks of the date of the letter(s) dropped off. It should be made clear that doing nothing or no response within the suspense date will be taken as a “negative response for support of Veterans and their families” and will be identified as such on the following websites and/or blog sites. We do have some sites that will post the lack of support without having the Veteran Service Organizations websites involved. I do not know who gave them permission to speak for Veterans to Congress as our lobbyist or for our interests but obviously; they are not effective in the political arena and therefore very little gets done as a remedy. They can and do whisper in protest but that is about it. I know I will post on my site, and I believe VERPA, Veterans for Common Sense, Veterans and Military Families for Progress, Military Spouses for Change, and others will post whether those we/you contacted responded or did not respond as for information only. If you still choose to vote, for whomever then at least you are in the know of what you are getting and should have no more complaints. I know there are many different Yahoo Groups that will also post these responses or lack of responses. I would suggest a three-day event with debriefings in the evening as to what was accomplished and how to hit the hill the next day. What days should be were ever we can get the best room rate and conference room in the evenings. We do have an in-house reporter in our mix now so maybe the effort might even get some media attention - or at least a mention of our efforts. I would also suggest that actions start as soon as possible which will give us more time to get the word out as to which candidates have agreed to take actions. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here are a few examples of suggested letters identify the issues and recommendations for simple solutions that can be implemented immediately – not after 20, more years of some GAO review. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To whatever committee member: Subject: The time it takes for Veterans Affairs to approve a claim for a presumptive herbicide caused cancer/disorder. At present, without prodding by outside sources, Veterans Affairs is taking months, to over a year for a presumptive cancer disorder that requires no compensation and pension exam and is automatically approved based on three data points. Two of which are given data points. Did the Veteran serve in Vietnam and is the disorder on the presumptive list. The real only verification required is a firm diagnosis of the listed presumptive herbicide exposure disorder. Many of these are diagnosed in a Veterans Affairs hospital. Veterans Affairs without any paperwork to be signed or a release form has 100% computer access to the Veterans Medical records showing the diagnosis and treatment recommend. The cancer is already rated at to what stage of malignancy. There are no complex medical decisions to make by anyone. Yet, this claim that should take at most a few days is normally stalled until the Veteran succumbs to the cancer(s). There can be no excuse for this poor performance for our Nations “government caused” dying Veterans. RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS VETERANS AFFAIRS LACK OF PERFORMANCE: If the Veteran dies before his claim is approved his widow then has to get back in line no different than starting a new claim. Once again even this claim, which is certainly cut and dried seems to take months or even over a year again while the family goes without financial support. During the time the Veteran and his family are fighting, the government caused cancer and the government’s own federal agency they are subsidizing the United States Government and the Department of Defense with their own assets. Remembering that if the claim takes nine months to process and the Veteran dies before one day of approval that families financial assets spent in supporting the family is now lost forever, which seems to be a direct conflict of Veterans Affairs/Government bias “not to perform.” COMMON SENSE CONGRESSIONAL ACTIONS: Mandate that Veterans Affairs must approve a presumptive disorder within 30 days of the date of application using electronic transfer of funds. This should apply to all cancers and some medical disorders that are rated only by treatment plan and not the disability rating Compensation and Pension (C & P) exam per say. For all other presumptive disorders, a 30-day approval is mandated and within 30 days, a C & P exam for disability rating shall be scheduled. If a C & P exam is not obtainable within the 30 days then the Veteran should, via electronic transfer, be given the benefit of the rating doubt and rated at 40% disability until a C & P can be scheduled for disability rating purposes. If the rating decision is not commensurate with the 50% rating, the Veteran, once the C & P is completed shall have 60 days to file a letter of disagreement with regard to the rating physicians criteria addressing each issues as it applies to disability and qualify of life. During such time, the Veteran will continue to receive no less than 40% disability payments. {This will give the Veteran a chance to seek out other medical opinions as to the degree of disability that is in direct conflict with the VA contracted C & P doctors rating, which seems to be to minimized and not necessarily reflect the actual extent of the government created disability in the presumptions of herbicide exposures.} If Veterans Affairs says this is impossible to do - then it is recommended that the specified Congressional Committees call in the Veterans Affair “Workers” that touch these files and under oath create a time line of what it takes in hours to approve such claims. It is obvious the process used now is not working with no amount of justification can be attributable to this simple task. A good case to exam would the case of Gary Henton (AO cancers) and how in the world it took as long as it did and we would suggest without outside pressures this case would still not be approved. Addendum: In all cases, the definition by Veterans Affairs is when the Veterans die his case dies with him or her; no matter how much stalling or lack of sensible Veterans Affairs process is involved. This is abusive, callus to the Veterans family, and has very little to do with justice since the widow does have rights and government benefits upon the demise of the Veteran. It is therefore requested that Congress mandate to Veterans Affairs that when a claim is being processed for a veteran and the veteran succumbs before decision; that the widows name be automatically substituted for the Veteran in order to not delay the spouses government guaranteed benefits to include medical insurance, educational benefits, and widows and offspring financial assistance, etc that may be desperately needed for many issues. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To whatever committee member: Subject: The lack of VA raters and BVA judges not taking into account the proven half-life of these herbicides. In fact, overriding the laws of science and chemistry that applies around the world and to every American except Veterans. Regarding these herbicide issues used around the world by the Department of Defense, they have stated with authority, they know exactly when the spraying started and when it stopped at different facilities and areas such as the Korean DMZ. Considering the lack of integrity in this whole issue by the Department of Defense since it began this is hardly concrete to begin with or should it be considered as such. The government contracted civilian herbicide coverage by congress indicates from the years 1967 to 1971. The Department of Defense for military says a few months of 1968 and into a few months of 1969. This is hardly equitable. What happens is the Veteran shows up on the Korean DMZ and has providence that he indeed did serve on the Korean DMZ for his entire tour. Yet, because it was two months after the Department of Defense says it quit spraying the Veteran is then denied any and all presumptive disorders no matter how many presumed cancers he has developed that match the presumptive list. Including the development of pustular acne while he served on the DMZ, which is a hallmark sign of herbicide exposures. Not only is this abusive and corrupt but in a real court of law given the known science and established half life of these herbicides that contained dioxins and closely related furan and PCB isomers these decisions by rating officers and BVA judges would not stand up. Yet, this goes on daily within the Veterans Affairs. The abusive part is if Veterans Affairs were mandated to use the same inclusive dates as congress has mandated there would be no issues and collaboration against Veterans and their soon to be widows and orphans. Did the Department of Defense give pay records keeping the order to destroy pay records that would have clearly shown hazard duty pay for those that served along the Korean DMZ this authority for this reason. Veterans that would have had clear and substantiated providence of exposures now have to prove in other ways they indeed did serve in those herbicide areas along the Korean DMZ. Is this just a coincidence or do we have even more collusion from the Department of Veterans Affairs as bias against Veterans claims to protect the budget and deny the Veteran and his family death benefits created by government stupidity? A good case to exam would be that of Veteran David Hill of Tennessee. The minimized half-life as specified by our own Environmental Protection Agency for the dioxin, TCDD is: Three years on top of the ground Eight years in the ground Fifty years in water, that is heavily laden with sediment Although samples taken in Vietnam outside of Da Nang in January of 2007 by the Hatfield Corporation indicate, the above half-life specifications are indeed very minimized. COMMON SENSE CONGRESSIONAL ACTIONS: Mandate that Veterans Affairs raters and BVA judges do not and can no longer discount the half-life of these dioxins as specified by our own Environmental Protection Agency indicated above. That would put the final date at least the same as the congress has as 1971 if the Veteran just served on or near the Korean DMZ. If he were involved in digging into the ground and can prove such, the dates by the half-life would be even longer than that of the three-year half-life and Veterans Affairs raters and BVA judges must be mandated to take that performance of duty into consideration. Moreover, as some Veterans Raters have concluded that the half-life study must have been in Korea, on the DMZ is nonsensical, and would be like challenging the laws of physics per geographical location. I know I have many more issues like this and I am sure each segment of Veterans has their own common sense issues that we need congress to respond to during this election year. Obviously, we need to hit the needed presumptive issues hard for not only Vietnam Vets but other era vets as well. I think one letter for all on the background of the VACEH and IOM and how they have performed would be good enough but it should be handed out to all - to show how disingenuous this process has been. Even if I do not go, I would like to write that little jewel up with references for all to hand out with the additions that must take place. Anyway do we have folks from all these areas that are willing to go and do this. Moreover, does anyone think it will do any good? Kelley http://www.2ndbattalion94thartillery.com/C...ransActions.htm

Thank you TBird for Hadit.com. Hadit.com is a life saver and a gift of yours that keeps on giving to all of us, year after year. My mental state was not very good during 2007. Please except my apologies for any tudes i've gotten into. I'm praying this year will be better. Through your work TBird, we remain a family and the best Veterans information site on the Internet. Thank you for helping us all. My best to you...............Allan

fwd from: Mike Harris Hello Everyone, Jerrel Cook asked me to be the Host of the "Surviving Veterans Resolve" (SVR) broadcast on January 2, 2008. It will be the first show of the New Year. I will have Dana Morgan, a USMC Vietnam Veteran and current President of Point Man International Ministries (PMIM) as my Guest. It will be a 1.5 hour call-in Talk Show. The entire purpose of SVR is to reach out to our Nation's active duty personnel, veterans, family members and friends with lay answers to how we have dealt with life following our experiences in the military. I recall coming home from Vietnam with tons of pain, grief and callousness. My life had changed so dramatically in 12 months. I was very confused. At that time in my life I didn't need Bible thumping, religious icons or choir songs. I needed someone to meet me exactly where I was with simple love and compassion. Unfortunately this did not take place. My vision of this program is for us to corporately meet veterans where they are at and not expect any more. Our testimonies and actions will go much further at this point in their lives. If we are successful in winning their trust first, then they will begin to ask the key questions later on. I will include the instructions on connecting to SVR. Thanks for your prayers and support in this matter...! Don't be hesitant to call in with your comments. Only By HIS Mighty Grace, Mike Harris Business: http://www.legaciesofhonor.com Personal: http://www.riverinesailor.com Webmaster: http://www.mrfa.org Webmaster: http://www.pointman101.org > Here are some simple instructions for connecting to the broadcast. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To Listen to the SVR "Surviving Veterans Resolve" With Host Jerrel Cook > > * 5:30 to 7:00 pm eastern time Every Wednesday > > Instructions To Listen To Live Shows On Stardust Web Radio > > 1) Using Windows Media > > * Go to http://www.stardustent.com/ > > * Go To Upper Right Corner. Under picture of microphone you will see: > > * If you are having problems listening to our station...click here for > winamp or real player > > * Click where shown and your sound device will show up allowing you to > start > the sound from the station. > > [ The Chat Star phase below is optional. You can listen to the broadcast > by > using the information above without participating in the chat portion ] > > 2) Using Chat Star Auditorium with Multi Media (Sound & Video) > > * Go to http://www.stardustent.com/ > > * Scroll down to and then click on the Gold & White Chat Star box > > * You will see two boxes - If you are already a member, click on the > member > box. > > * If you would like to become a member to use the auditorium, click on the > sign-up box. Fill out the information in the next screen. At some point in > the sign up process, you will be asked to download the software to use > Chat > Star. It takes about 30 seconds and it is totally safe - no spyware or > anything else. Chat Star is a totally family safe "community" and only > legal > and ethical software and behavior is allowed. > > * Next, you will be taken to the Chat Star Welcome page where you will see > some highlights on some upcoming events and you will see a list of the > "rooms" to your left. If you wish to listen to the SVR Broadcast or any > other show, just click on that room. > >> Once you have entered the SVR room, you can interact by typing in your >> questions or comments to the moderators and show hosts! Place your cursor >> in the small center box and type in your message. By hitting your "Enter" >> key, your message will be moved from that box into the upper box, where >> it >> will be visible to all in the auditorium. > > * Stardust has recently introduced Chat Star and is making rooms available > at very reasonable corporate rates and is offering special arrangements to > those involved in the support of our country.

Christmas Greetings, On Dec 24th 1967, my guys that were off duty were sitting around the tent talking of home and what everyone back home was doing that evening and what the plans for the next day would be for the family. We were up in the mountains in Vietnam so it was cool and we had an old potbelly stove in the tent. We had made some hot chocolate from C rats on top of that old stove. Still can taste how good it was back then. Of course, it might have been the company I was in. About 2200 hours the perimeter opened up and the call went out sappers in the wire. Marine CIC called a 100% alert. This was supposed to be one of those negotiated cease-fires but that only applied to us or so it seemed. We were hit on the previous Thanksgiving also. We grabbed our gear and headed out; Superman, Mailman, The Texan, George Washington, The Mortician, The Hat, and myself (Radar). Festus was not with us that night, as he had gone to Cam Ranh to get rabies shots from rat bites. The Texan had been drinking heavy all day as none of us had guard or LP duty that night. To make it short, I decided to disarm him before he killed one of us or one of the other teams and in the fray, he damn near killed me as his M14 discharged about an inch from my left ear. If he had not had his bayonet fixed, I would not be writing these best wishes. I am sure all Veterans remember where they were on a certain Christmas Eve and the magnificent company they were with. We had millions in the war and normally only one year away from family and friends. The new Military it seems we have the same 150,000 or so fighting year after year. I for one do not to see how that can continue as a family military with the displacements we have now. Ironically, I heard them tonight talk of FOB instead of FSB. Make no mistake it is exactly what we spent months on in our war. Be that as it is we need to make sure our Nation, especially our government, remember these new Veterans, and that they receive the best treatment possible; and that promises made “will be kept†in an honorable and timely manner. Something our government and its entities have not done in the past for Veterans. To all of you and your families here in this Nation and those mates in New Zealand and Australia a Merry Christmas (Happy Hanukkah) and all the very best the New Year can bring to you and yours. Remember those soldiers that are away from home, wherever they may be, this special time of the year. Glenda and Kelley

Manganese Exposures for Navy Workers. This information was taken from a study conducted by the Navy Environmental Health Center. It suggests that Navy personnel may be at risk for exposure to manganese. Conclusions presented in this study should be considered by DA Health authorities to determine if similar exposure potentials exist for Army personnel. In June 1996, the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Environmental Security) requested an evaluation of manganese exposures to Navy workers, and an assessment of the impact of a reduced manganese standard. Background note - The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Chemical Substances TLVr Committee has determined that manganese is a chronic toxin and that a time weighted average (TWA) exposure limit over the work day is appropriate. In 1992, the TLV Committee proposed a Notice of Intended Change for manganese as a TLV-TWA of 200 ug/m3 as manganese for elemental and inorganic compounds. The previous TLVs were similar to the OSHA PELs, which were vacated by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in July 1992. These values were 5,000 ug/m3 as a ceiling limit for dust, 3,000 ug/m3 as a short-term exposure limit (STEL), with a 1,000 ug/m3 limit as an 8hour TWA for fumes. In setting the PELs OSHA had concluded that both a TWA and a STEL limit were required to protect workers from manganese fume poisoning, lung damage and pneumonia. Because the PELs were vacated, the current OSHA PEL reinstates the old value of 5,000 ug/m3 as a ceiling limit for both dust and fume. Manganese may be absorbed both from the lungs and GI tract. Inhalation exposure to high levels of manganese can lead to a disabling neurological syndrome "manganism". The Chief of Naval Operations (N45 staff) convened a Navy working group comprised of technical professionals representing the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, Marine Corps, Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Air Systems Command, Navy Environmental Health Center, and Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division. This group analyzed the tasking and developed an action plan to prepare this report. The primary author and coordinator for the report was Mr. John Bishop, Navy Environmental Health Center. The study concluded the following: *666 exposures were reviewed *95 % of the TWA exposures (with 95 % confidence) of the population performing the operation were below the anticipated OSHA PEL of 200 ug/m3 *7% of the exposures were at or above the anticipated action level of 100 ug/m3, and *3.5% of the exposures were at or above the anticipated PEL of 200 ug/m3. *Work operations with assessments greater than 100 ug/m3 are mechanical metal cleaning (e.g., abrasive blasting), welding, thermal cutting, and utilities (e.g., boiler maintenance). *There were two mechanical cleaning assessments that resulted in concentrations >1000 ug/m3. The report also summarized types of engineering control that is being used to reduce manganese exposures to workers. SOURCE: http://list.uvm.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9704D...FETY&P=4758

I heard a combat Iraq vet make a call in to C-Span early in the morning. He said it took "six" months to get his first medical appointment with the VA. He said it took another six months to get a follow up appointment. He was asking a lady in regards to military health care, "WHEN" will the VA actually hire more staff? He got the usual" we're doing a wonderful job according to the latest, and we are diligent in.....crap. Several more callers complained of long waits. We will be lucky to see 10% of the funding go to actually helping veterans. >This is outrageous Allan-at least at the BVA they can read- I knew anyone with a brain cell at the BVA could see the defiant acts of raters to follow law. However, if the BVA wanted to resolve the issue, all they had to do was "grant" the benefit based on obvious evidence, than remand it to be rated. Sending it back to the same contractors, to weigh the same evidence(3 IMO's) they have no intention of recognizing, is hardly encouraging. According to the AMC, they just received my claim from the BVA, OCT 6th,07. My claim has not been viewed by anyone and has been in ready to wait status since June 22, 06. If they re-log my claim as just being received, say every six months, they can ignore the remand indefinitely. A couple weeks ago, I get a call from the AMC that my claim has been decided and rated. Someone named Cathy said I would get a call from someone in a few days that will explain the outcome. Theres been no contact since. I don't know what to make of it. >I sent them NO evidence and they pull that 'transfer to BVA' crap again. They will do anything to delay. >I wonder how long it will Take Secretary Peake to get up to speed and see just what he got into. I hope not as long as it took Nicholson........... Lord help us all. Allan ***************************************************************** This is outrageous Allan-at least at the BA they can read- I saw a BA decision one day and went ballistic- the veteran had FOUR independent medical opinions that the RO had continuously ignored- of course the BVA granted the claim but it had to go back to the RO for a proper rating. My main claim has been with a DRO since October- it went to a different DRO then back to the same DRO- the VA goves me continuous dates of movement but not decision yet- I recently ordered my FOURTH IMO . They have never rebutted my 2 IMOs from Dr. Bash yet-or the freeby from a former VA doctor- I sure was going to hold off on this additional expense for the 4th IMO -from MedOps but I figured 3 weeks ago-might as well get it anyhow- and surround the EN with the ammo (evidence) and this way I have something to pull it back from the BVA if they say I sent them NO evidence and they pull that 'transfer to BVA' crap again. I wonder how long it will Take Secretary Peake to get up to speed and see just what he got into.

Hello Stretch, every once in a while I find a nugget. Sure pleased you can use it. Knew as soon as I read it, that many deck & flight crews were exposed to this. Other services including US Coast Guard may have used this. Was looking through OSHA site for airborn contaminates, US NAVY personel when I came found it. Please pass this on to all. Merry Christmas! Allan

Hello Attack boat vet, Merry Christmas and a Merry Christmas to everyone.

Hello Pete, this is disgusting. During her testimony to congress, It was stated that 1/3rd of our returning women veterans have experienced rape. I wonder if the DOD and our Justice Dept would turn their heads so quickly, if it were men being raped? If convicted, they should get 25 yrs to life without parole. Our Waves, WAC's and contract personnel like Jamie Leigh should be looked out for and protected, not treated like our enemies would. What ever has gotten into this nation to turn their backs on our women & men who serve? The SHAME is on everyone of us for not demanding the immediate arrest of all involved. Allan

>Anyone know about how long on the average it takes a review officer to eyeball your claim and then make a decision or a statement of case? Back in Feb 2005, the AMC issued a SOC for multiple sclerosis without granting any weight to Dr Bash's IMO's or service records. In June 2006, the BVA stated the raters were in violation of procedural law of properly considering evidence in the last three SOC's. Soon, my claim will be three years of bonus justification for AMC raters.

Hello Holli, Thank you lady. Please pass it on. Merry Christmas Troops and all hadit members!!!!!!!

2-METHYLCYCLOPENTADIENYL MANGANESE TRICARBONYL CAS: 12108-13-3; Chemical Formula: (CH(3))C(5)H(5) - Mn(CO)(3) H.S. No. 1271 OSHA formerly had no limit for 2-methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl (Cl-2). The ACGIH has a TLV-TWA of 0.2 mg/m(3), measured as manganese, with a skin notation. The proposed PEL was 0.2 mg/m(3) as an 8-hour TWA, with a skin notation; NIOSH (Ex. 8-47, Table N1) concurs. This limit, measured as manganese, is established in the final rule, along with a skin notation. Cl-2 is a dark orange liquid with a faintly pleasant odor; it is a complex organic compound containing about 25 percent manganese by weight. 2-Methylcyclopentadienyl Mn tricarbonyl is highly toxic in its concentrated form, causing adverse effects primarily on the central nervous system. It is somewhat irritating to the eyes but skin contact does not produce irritation or sensitization; however, Cl-2 is readily absorbed through the skin (ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). Animal studies indicate that Cl-2 has a toxicity similar to that of tetraethyl lead and is highly toxic by all routes of exposure (U.S. Navy Smoke Abatement Additive, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). The single-dose oral LD(50) for rats is 23 or 39 mg/kg, depending on sex. The skin LD(50) for rabbits is 1692 + 145 mg/kg, and the 1-hour inhalation LC(50) for rats is about 350 mg/m 3 (The Ethyl Corporation, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). Toxic exposures by all routes produce rapidly appearing symptoms of mild excitement, hyperactivity, tremors, severe clonic spasms, weakness, respiratory distress, and occasional clonic convulsions, followed by terminal coma (U.S. Navy Smoke Abatement Additive, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). Acute exposure causes damage to the liver, kidneys, and cerebral cortex, as well as changes in lung tissue (ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). Browning (1966/Ex. 1-1018) observed chronic bronchitis, peribronchitis, interstitial pneumonia, and lung abscesses in animals that subsequently died from long-term inhalation exposure to Cl-2; exposure to Cl-2 concentrations of approximately 12 mg/m(3) for 100 days produced no deviation in weight gain patterns and no gross or microscopic changes in two dogs (Browning 1966/Ex. 1-1018). The liver and kidneys are the principal target organs associated with acute overexposures; the lungs of overexposed animals were hemorrhagic (Browning 1966/Ex. 1-1018). In humans, skin contact should be entirely avoided. A 5 to 15-ml spill on one worker's hand and wrist was reported to have caused "thick tongue," nausea, giddiness, and headache within 3 to 5 minutes (U.S. Navy Smoke Abatement Additive, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 387). NIOSH submitted the only comment on this substance. In the final rule, OSHA establishes a PEL of 0.2 mg/m(3) TWA, measured as manganese, with a skin notation, for 2-methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl. The Agency concludes that this limit will protect workers against the significant risk of CNS effects and systemic damage, which constitute material health impairments and are associated with exposure to Cl-2 at levels higher than the new PEL. A skin notation is established because of Cl-2's demonstrated ability to penetrate human skin rapidly and to cause systemic effects. SOURCE: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.sh...ES&p_id=770

Hello 68Mustang, US Naval Boilerman were exposed to high levels of Vanadium. (see health effects of Vanadium below, Cardiac and vascular disease) If you worked in the fireboxes, cleaned air registers and changed burners, you were exposed to high levels of Vanadium. Bunker crude oil is primarilly "used" motor oil and contains high levels of heavey metals and toxins. Many of the WWII vessels used bunker crude fired boilers including the Tin Can I served on. This stuff hits the brain and heart. All US Naval Boilerman, turbine machanics and refueling operations crew, should read the health effects of exposure to high levels of Vanadium. If you did the work, it is an occupational hazzard. .............The acute effects of vanadium are irritation of lungs, throat, eyes and nasal cavities. Other health effects of vanadium uptake are: - Cardiac and vascular disease - Inflammation of stomach and intestines - Damage to the nervous system - Bleeding of livers and kidneys - Skin rashes - Severe trembling and paralyses - Nose bleeds and throat pains - Weakening - Sickness and headaches - Dizziness - Behavioural changes

Iraq: US Military Women Suffer Rape, Sexual Assault and Harassment http://edstrong.blog-city.com/iraq_us_mili...lt_and_hara.htm

Military Hides Cause of Women Soldiers' Deaths By Marjorie Cohn t r u t h o u t | Report Monday 30 January 2006 In a startling revelation, the former commander of Abu Ghraib prison testified that Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, former senior US military commander in Iraq, gave orders to cover up the cause of death for some female American soldiers serving in Iraq. Last week, Col. Janis Karpinski told a panel of judges at the Commission of Inquiry for Crimes against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration in New York that several women had died of dehydration because they refused to drink liquids late in the day. They were afraid of being assaulted or even raped by male soldiers if they had to use the women's latrine after dark. The latrine for female soldiers at Camp Victory wasn't located near their barracks, so they had to go outside if they needed to use the bathroom. "There were no lights near any of their facilities, so women were doubly easy targets in the dark of the night," Karpinski told retired US Army Col. David Hackworth in a September 2004 interview. It was there that male soldiers assaulted and raped women soldiers. So the women took matters into their own hands. They didn't drink in the late afternoon so they wouldn't have to urinate at night. They didn't get raped. But some died of dehydration in the desert heat, Karpinski said. Karpinski testified that a surgeon for the coalition's joint task force said in a briefing that "women in fear of getting up in the hours of darkness to go out to the port-a-lets or the latrines were not drinking liquids after 3 or 4 in the afternoon, and in 120 degree heat or warmer, because there was no air-conditioning at most of the facilities, they were dying from dehydration in their sleep." "And rather than make everybody aware of that - because that's shocking, and as a leader if that's not shocking to you then you're not much of a leader - what they told the surgeon to do is don't brief those details anymore. And don't say specifically that they're women. You can provide that in a written report but don't brief it in the open anymore." For example, Maj. Gen. Walter Wojdakowski, Sanchez's top deputy in Iraq, saw "dehydration" listed as the cause of death on the death certificate of a female master sergeant in September 2003. Under orders from Sanchez, he directed that the cause of death no longer be listed, Karpinski stated. The official explanation for this was to protect the women's privacy rights. Sanchez's attitude was: "The women asked to be here, so now let them take what comes with the territory," Karpinski quoted him as saying. Karpinski told me that Sanchez, who was her boss, was very sensitive to the political ramifications of everything he did. She thinks it likely that when the information about the cause of these women's deaths was passed to the Pentagon, Donald Rumsfeld ordered that the details not be released. "That's how Rumsfeld works," she said. "It was out of control," Karpinski told a group of students at Thomas Jefferson School of Law last October. There was an 800 number women could use to report sexual assaults. But no one had a phone, she added. And no one answered that number, which was based in the United States. Any woman who successfully connected to it would get a recording. Even after more than 83 incidents were reported during a six-month period in Iraq and Kuwait, the 24-hour rape hot line was still answered by a machine that told callers to leave a message. "There were countless such situations all over the theater of operations - Iraq and Kuwait - because female soldiers didn't have a voice, individually or collectively," Karpinski told Hackworth. "Even as a general I didn't have a voice with Sanchez, so I know what the soldiers were facing. Sanchez did not want to hear about female soldier requirements and/or issues." Karpinski was the highest officer reprimanded for the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, although the details of interrogations were carefully hidden from her. Demoted from Brigadier General to Colonel, Karpinski feels she was chosen as a scapegoat because she was a female. Sexual assault in the US military has become a hot topic in the last few years, "not just because of the high number of rapes and other assaults, but also because of the tendency to cover up assaults and to harass or retaliate against women who report assaults," according to Kathy Gilberd, co-chair of the National Lawyers Guild's Military Law Task Force. This problem has become so acute that the Army has set up its own sexual assault web site. In February 2004, Rumsfeld directed the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to undertake a 90-day review of sexual assault policies. "Sexual assault will not be tolerated in the Department of Defense," Rumsfeld declared. The 99-page report was issued in April 2004. It affirmed, "The chain of command is responsible for ensuring that policies and practices regarding crime prevention and security are in place for the safety of service members." The rates of reported alleged sexual assault were 69.1 and 70.0 per 100,000 uniformed service members in 2002 and 2003. Yet those rates were not directly comparable to rates reported by the Department of Justice, due to substantial differences in the definition of sexual assault. Notably, the report found that low sociocultural power (i.e., age, education, race/ethnicity, marital status) and low organizational power (i.e., pay grade and years of active duty service) were associated with an increased likelihood of both sexual assault and sexual harassment. The Department of Defense announced a new policy on sexual assault prevention and response on January 3, 2005. It was a reaction to media reports and public outrage about sexual assaults against women in the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan, and ongoing sexual assaults and cover-ups at the Air Force Academy in Colorado, Gilberd said. As a result, Congress demanded that the military review the problem, and the Defense Authorization Act of 2005 required a new policy be put in place by January 1. The policy is a series of very brief "directive-type memoranda" for the Secretaries of the military services from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. "Overall, the policy emphasizes that sexual assault harms military readiness, that education about sexual assault policy needs to be increased and repeated, and that improvements in response to sexual assaults are necessary to make victims more willing to report assaults," Gilberd notes. "Unfortunately," she added "analysis of the issues is shallow, and the plans for addressing them are limited." Commands can reject the complaints if they decide they aren't credible, and there is limited protection against retaliation against the women who come forward, according to Gilberd. "People who report assaults still face command disbelief, illegal efforts to protect the assaulters, informal harassment from assaulters, their friends or the command itself," she said. But most shameful is Sanchez's cover-up of the dehydration deaths of women that occurred in Iraq. Sanchez is no stranger to outrageous military orders. He was heavily involved in the torture scandal that surfaced at Abu Ghraib. Sanchez approved the use of unmuzzled dogs and the insertion of prisoners head-first into sleeping bags after which they are tied with an electrical cord and their are mouths covered. At least one person died as the result of the sleeping bag technique. Karpinski charges that Sanchez attempted to hide the torture after the hideous photographs became public. Sanchez reportedly plans to retire soon, according to an article in the International Herald Tribune earlier this month. But Rumsfeld recently considered elevating the 3-star general to a 4-star. The Tribune also reported that Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks, the Army's chief spokesman, said in an email message, "The Army leaders do have confidence in LTG Sanchez." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, President-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists. She writes a weekly column for Truthout. SOURCE: http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exe...ew.cgi/57/17327

Victim: Gang-Rape Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3977702

The Jamie Leigh Foundation http://www.jamiesfoundation.org/index.htm

The Hoist Navy-Together We Served News Letter_ Dec issue http://navy.togetherweserved.com:80/usn/ne...newsletter.html

Feds Ask Judge to Reject Suit Over Treatment of Combat Veterans I find after reading this again, I must comment on some of these issues discussed below. Kelley My Opinion - like all of us has one. I found it strange that Judge Conti suggested that if Veterans have a problem with “their legal system” and rights they address it with Congress or Veterans Affairs. When has anyone heard the congress step up and speak about Veterans Rights? They will go on CSPAN on the floor of the senate and the house and speak for days and days about the rights of terrorists and possible torture of terrorist, not one word about the treatment of Veterans. They can talk about water boarding, which I guess in some circles is considered torture. Yet, when our own government uses its Veterans in biological chemical warfare (WMD) testing for over a decade creating a lifetime of misery or death this seemingly is acceptable to our elected officials and to our Executive Branch and the Commander in Chief with this legal system set aside for one segment of society. Since when does the Judiciary allow Congress and the Executive Branch to take over legal justice and fairness? When did the separation of powers guaranteed by our constitution that so many in that segment of society died in protecting go away for those men and women. When and what segment of society is next for congressional and executive branch collusion while the judiciary sits with their pompous hands folded saying – not our problem. As you recall, recently congress tried to take the asbestos victims and put them in this category of Executive Branch/Congressional collusion. Thankfully, enough in congress had the foresight to see how wrongful that would be. Moreover, it is wrong for Veterans and their widows to have to face this same cooked up government collusion with no guarantee of justice or fairness. Facing chemical company, Department of Defense, and Veterans Affairs lies that because of this cooked up system cannot be challenged. Judge Conti said that in 1988, Congress created a system of reviewing veterans' claims and it can't be second-guessed by regular courts. How unconstitutional is that? Now why did congress and the executive branch cook up such a biased legal system in 1988? Vietnam Veterans and hoards of Herbicide claims; that is the why. Reagan/Bush had decided after the long protracted government lying fight with Veterans they did not want the financial responsibility of the mistakes of other administrations. Therefore, the system we have now was cooked up to at least delay, minimize, and to have a yearly undated budget on the award of such compensations in service connection, disability, and death. HR 101-672 released in 1991 by congress identifies that the Reagan/Bush White House did indeed interfere with the CDC studies. (HR 101-672 “The Agent Orange cover-up: a case of flawed science and political manipulation.”) Still nothing was done or is being done to rectify this crime. Reagan and Bush, two from the “Greatest Generation,” deliberately caused the needless deaths and suffering of Vietnam veterans and our families. Moreover, it continues to this day in Vietnam Veterans; Gulf War Veterans; and Biological Chemical Warfare Testing Veterans and apparently the new Veterans. The only reason that the Secretary of the VA even gave (non-Hodgkin’s) to the veterans was because of the leak that the Reagan/Bush administration had directed that they did not want to support the veterans in the toxic chemical issue. In other words, they tossed a bone to the veterans because they got caught. This “bone” was 22 years too late for many veterans, and their families. I am not aware of any attempt on the part of the VA to notify the families of deceased veterans of this changed ruling concerning this disease that might allow their widows to claim pensions. Now you know how the government paid for destroying Russia by denying the billions of dollars of damages that were done to our Veterans. No different than the Veterans pay decreases paid for many of the social programs to get us out of the depression years. In other words, a Vietnam Veterans VA Hamster Wheel, as it is known, was created along with a Vietnam Veterans Lottery System. Remember it was not until 1990-1991 that the first mortality disorder was finally admitted to by Veterans Affairs controlled by the Executive Branch. On December 4, 1950, the United States Supreme Court engaged in the most devastating unconstitutional act in our Nation’s history by creating judicial-legislation known as the Feres Doctrine. Since that day, all American service members, veterans and their families have been stripped of, without their knowledge or consent, their inalienable Constitutional rights to petition our government for redress of grievances arising “incident to service” in our military. This has resulted in a long-train of human, constitutional, and systemic intentional abuses. It is argued that if the Feres Doctrine were abolished the federal laws on the books to remedy fraud, waste, abuse or dangers to the public health and welfare would be enforced, thus compelling the Government to prosecute rather than defend crimes. Was the Feres Doctrine a cold-calculated atrocity? “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” The Feres Doctrine and its blanket grant of “sovereign immunity” and the human and constitutional rights abuses dismissed by our Government to include “WMD’s” is “treachery and treason.” How can it not be declared treachery and treason for federal employees in our Government to injure and kill its own citizens and be afforded a legal “damage control tool” to cover up these illegal acts? Now of course we older Veterans now understand this. However, if our judiciary system is going to allow this to happen then at least they should mandate that DoD and Veterans Affairs inform America’s perspective sons and daughters that are considering a military career that the constitution, even after discharge, no longer applies to them. Lets see if we have any takers, once they know the real facts that our courts systems will not look after them and they will be subject to congressional/executive branch justice departments. Everyone understands the separate UCMJ and why it is needed while in the military. Once out from under the UCMJ, the “rights of all citizens” should be reinstated to the former military personnel - no different than the convicted criminal or the terrorist who now has more rights than the former soldier. Justice Scalia wrote: “Feres was wrongly decided and heartily deserves the widespread, almost universal criticism it has received.” Furthermore, "Congress's inaction regarding this doctrine and its doing little, if anything in the way of modifying it to prevent Constitutional claims is clearly unjust and irrational. Again, allowing such power to military leaders can and does result in abuse therefore, where are the checks and balances on the military." Maybe someone should ask Judge Conti, which segments of society, is the Judiciary Branch going to turn over to the congress/executive branch justice and legal system next. Moreover if so, when will it be that the Judiciary is out of the business of justice and fairness IAW with the constitution and constitutional law? Maybe Judges should be included in this new fair and just system so that when they are harmed or their children are harmed they to can join in the fight for some kind of real justice and fairness from the congress/executive branch where they make up their own rules of evidence and what constitutes evidence. Does anyone know of any segment of society that would or will put up with being thrown out of the constitutional justice system. That would be front page news on any major paper and media broadcast. When it comes to our disposable government obsolete Veterans - there is not even a peep. Kelley -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I would add one of our I Corps Khe Sanh Marines suggestion is to contact a pro bono attorney similar to social security and I have heard some good reports back on these. As I was told you can contact one of the following and if they think it has merit then they can assign you to the nearest participating attorney. Trying to fight the VA as Congressman Filner suggested is worse than the disorder or disease. A vet should not have to fight for justice. Brian D. Robertson Veterans Consortium Pro Bono Program 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. #131 Washington, DC 20004 (202) 628-8164 Ofc. (202) 628-8169 Fax. E-Mail: BrianR@vetsprobono.org Carol W. Scott Veterans Consortium Pro Bono Program 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. #131 Washington, DC 20004 (202) 628-8164 Ofc. (202) 628-8169 Fax. E-Mail: carols@vetsprobono.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Feds Ask Judge to Reject Suit Over Treatment of Combat Veterans Bob Egelko San Francisco Chronicle Dec 17, 2007 December 15, 2007 - The government asked a San Francisco federal judge on Friday to dismiss a high-profile lawsuit challenging the system of treatment and benefits for returning combat veterans. The government's lawyers argued that civil courts have no authority over the Department of Veterans Affairs' medical decisions or how it handles grievances and claims. "If plaintiffs are not happy with the way the system is currently working, their remedy is to take it up with Congress" or with the veterans department, Justice Department attorney Daniel Bensing told U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti. He said that in 1988, Congress created a system of reviewing veterans' claims and it can't be second-guessed by regular courts. It was the first hearing on the nationwide lawsuit that is being closely watched by veterans, their families, and advocacy groups. The suit seeks a judicial finding that the VA's system of handling claims and appeals violates veterans' rights. The plaintiffs also want court orders requiring the department to provide immediate medical and psychological help to returning troops and to screen them for risk of stress disorders and suicide. Gordon Erspamer, a lawyer for veterans' advocates, argued Friday that the system established under the 1988 law is rife with constitutional violations that federal courts are competent to judge. Wounded veterans, he said, are arbitrarily denied care and benefits, are forced to wait months for vital treatment and years for benefits, have no access to lawyers or potential witnesses, and have little recourse when their claims are rejected. Under the current procedures, Erspamer said, the government "can deny health care to veterans coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan with impunity. ... If this court dismisses this case, there is no way that these claims will ever be adjudicated." Conti, a World War II veteran and a judicial conservative during his 37 years on the bench, raised questions about the courts' authority over the dispute but did not say how he would rule on the government's dismissal motion. The suit was filed in July by two organizations - Veterans for Common Sense and Veterans United for Truth - as a proposed class action on behalf of 320,000 to 800,000 veterans, or their survivors, claiming service-connected deaths and disabilities. They focused on claims of post-traumatic stress disorder, increasingly common among returning troops. A Pentagon study group reported in June that about 84,000 veterans, more than one-third of those who sought care from the VA from 2002 through 2006, had been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress or another mental disorder. The Pentagon group also found that the system was understaffed, prompting the VA to announce staffing increases in July. The suit said the department has a backlog of more than 600,000 disability claims. Veterans' advocates say the VA pressures stressed-out soldiers to acknowledge pre-existing "personality disorders" that gain them a speedy discharge while forfeiting future disability benefits. Erspamer said improper delays and denials of treatment and benefits have contributed to an "epidemic of suicides." E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com. http://www.VeteransforCommonSense.org/ArticleID/8972 My opinion: I would like to ask Judge Conti to review veterans' claims by comparing the VA's denial documentation to the evidence and information that the veterans have actually submitted. We (veterans) can easily show examples of the VA discounting significant medical evidence, asserting it's own conjecture as evidence and intentionally misinterpreting veterans' claims and statements. The VA even ignores the medical opinions of its own VA doctors. The VA quasi-judicial process does not respect constitutional parameters. While it may be a rhetorical due process of regulations, it is obviously not the Due Process of Law that criminals and other US citizens take for granted. The VA's adjudication system, including the CAVC, applies regulations and rulings that contradict laws. A review of the laws enacted for veterans-- comparing the original texts and intents as they were when passed by Congress to the federal regulations resulting from the VA's "implementation" of the law-- would plainly show that the VA has reversed, disabled and contradicted every law made to extend justice to veterans and improve the veteran's lot. The VA has become the dictatorial "fourth branch of government" that President Roosevelt feared when he authorized his Attorney General to conduct an extensive study (ten years) to install rights protections into the administrative procedures (APA) that the VA has since usurped. In this Vietnam veteran's opinion, the District Court should have jurisdiction in the Veterans' suit against the VA, because the complaint is not about veterans' entitlements, but is about an agency of the government denying the Constitutional Rights of US citizens. Americans damaged and disabled by way of service to our country are entitled to Equal Protection, Due Process and Just Compensation. I would contend that Just Compensation is not a budget item. That fact that the White House and the appointed VA Secretary impose a budge upon disabled veterans' compensation through the VA is proof enough that the VA violates veterans' rights. Norm Cegelnik http://www.2ndbattalion94thartillery.com/Chas/rejectsuit.htm

Forwarding another e-mail that just came in. I cannot comment more on what Norm wrote as it implicitly describes what I have been saying all along. Congress in creating the Department of Veterans Affairs and giving them the absolute omnipotent powers that they use daily against Veterans and their families violates the separation of powers demanded by the constitution for all citizens; ... not just those that never wore the uniform of the United States Military. Kelley Feds Ask Judge to Reject Suit Over Treatment of Combat Veterans Bob Egelko San Francisco Chronicle Dec 17, 2007 December 15, 2007 - The government asked a San Francisco federal judge on Friday to dismiss a high-profile lawsuit challenging the system of treatment and benefits for returning combat veterans. The government's lawyers argued that civil courts have no authority over the Department of Veterans Affairs' medical decisions or how it handles grievances and claims. "If plaintiffs are not happy with the way the system is currently working, their remedy is to take it up with Congress" or with the veterans department, Justice Department attorney Daniel Bensing told U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti. He said that in 1988, Congress created a system of reviewing veterans' claims and it can't be second-guessed by regular courts. It was the first hearing on the nationwide lawsuit that is being closely watched by veterans, their families and advocacy groups. The suit seeks a judicial finding that the VA's system of handling claims and appeals violates veterans' rights. The plaintiffs also want court orders requiring the department to provide immediate medical and psychological help to returning troops and to screen them for risk of stress disorders and suicide. Gordon Erspamer, a lawyer for veterans' advocates, argued Friday that the system established under the 1988 law is rife with constitutional violations that federal courts are competent to judge. Wounded veterans, he said, are arbitrarily denied care and benefits, are forced to wait months for vital treatment and years for benefits, have no access to lawyers or potential witnesses, and have little recourse when their claims are rejected. Under the current procedures, Erspamer said, the government "can deny health care to veterans coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan with impunity. ... If this court dismisses this case, there is no way that these claims will ever be adjudicated." Conti, a World War II veteran and a judicial conservative during his 37 years on the bench, raised questions about the courts' authority over the dispute but did not say how he would rule on the government's dismissal motion. The suit was filed in July by two organizations - Veterans for Common Sense and Veterans United for Truth - as a proposed class action on behalf of 320,000 to 800,000 veterans, or their survivors, claiming service-connected deaths and disabilities. They focused on claims of post-traumatic stress disorder, increasingly common among returning troops. A Pentagon study group reported in June that about 84,000 veterans, more than one-third of those who sought care from the VA from 2002 through 2006, had been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress or another mental disorder. The Pentagon group also found that the system was understaffed, prompting the VA to announce staffing increases in July. The suit said the department has a backlog of more than 600,000 disability claims. Veterans' advocates say the VA pressures stressed-out soldiers to acknowledge pre-existing "personality disorders" that gain them a speedy discharge while forfeiting future disability benefits. Erspamer said improper delays and denials of treatment and benefits have contributed to an "epidemic of suicides." E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com. http://www.VeteransforCommonSense.org/ArticleID/8972 My opinion: I would like to ask Judge Conti to review veterans' claims by comparing the VA's denial documentation to the evidence and information that the veterans have actually submitted. We (veterans) can easily show examples of the VA discounting significant medical evidence, asserting it's own conjecture as evidence and intentionally misinterpreting veterans' claims and statements. The VA even ignores the medical opinions of its own VA doctors. The VA quasi-judicial process does not respect constitutional parameters. While it may be a rhetorical due process of regulations, it is obviously not the Due Process of Law that criminals and other US citizens take for granted. The VA's adjudication system, including the CAVC, applies regulations and rulings that contradict laws. A review of the laws enacted for veterans-- comparing the original texts and intents as they were when passed by Congress to the federal regulations resulting from the VA's "implementation" of the law-- would plainly show that the VA has reversed, disabled and contradicted every law made to extend justice to veterans and improve the veteran's lot. The VA has become the dictatorial "fourth branch of government" that President Roosevelt feared when he authorized his Attorney General to conduct an extensive study (ten years) to install rights protections into the administrative procedures (APA) that the VA has since usurped. In this Vietnam veteran's opinion, the District Court should have jurisdiction in the Veterans' suit against the VA, because the complaint is not about veterans' entitlements, but is about an agency of the government denying the Constitutional Rights of US citizens. Americans damaged and disabled by way of service to our country are entitled to Equal Protection, Due Process and Just Compensation. I would contend that Just Compensation is not a budget item. That fact that the White House and the appointed VA Secretary impose a budge upon disabled veterans' compensation through the VA is proof enough that the VA violates veterans' rights. Norm Cegelnik

fwd fron Colonel Dan Those with Gulf War Syndome, or unexplained illnesses, specially if you live near Inman SC, should make contact with H. Hugh Fudenberg, MD, nitrf@hotmail.com NITRF Director of Research Neuro Immuno Therapeutic Research Foundation NIT Research Foundation 226 Edgewater Rd. Inman, SC 29349-8663 Phone(864) 592-8076 http://www.nitrf.org/ Some of my patients who received the 17 vaccines, many poorly if at all attenuated, developed full blown illness even though the war ended 2-3 days before they were to be sent over, and they remained on U.S. soil for the whole duration of the conflict, never setting foot in the Gulf3. Full article at: http://www.nitrf.org/gulf.html partial reprint below Gulf War Syndrome I read with great interest Gary Matsumoto's essay "The Pentagon's Toxic Secret" (Vanity Fair, April 1999) regarding the possible role of squalene in Gulf War Illness. Squalene is an ingredient of "Freund's adjuvant", rarely given to humans. It boosts humoral (antibody) response to the antigen given together with it (causing "polyclonal gammopathy"), but depresses cell-mediated immunity. Antibody immunity is involved in protection against sugar coated organisms, such as meningococcus, streptococcus, pneumococcus, etc., whereas cell-mediated immunity protects against viruses and strange organisms including parasites, yeast and other fungi, mycobacterium tuberculosis and mycobacterium of leprosy. Too much of this can lead to marked overproduction of antibody to a single injected agent, resulting in a malignancy of the antibody producing cells -- termed multiple myeloma. Freund himself died of multiple myeloma, as did several other immunologists of his vintage (right after World War II), who were engaged in studies using this new adjuvant. (This was 20 years before cell-mediated immunity was known.) As a member of a committee appointed by the National Research Council of the Natl. Acad. of Sciences, I had an opportunity 20 years ago to examine the records of technicians working at our biologic warfare facility; Fort Detrick, Maryland, who had been injected with "preventative" vaccines to protect against those organisms with which they were working. These technicians all had polyclonal gammopathy. We were given records, but none showed that they had been given Freund's adjuvant. I have also corresponded with the then-Asst. Secretary of Defense handling Gulf War illnesses in 1996. He did not mention Freund's adjuvant. This plus Anthrax bacillus would form a deadly combination. The RAND Corporation has recently issued a report on Gulf War Illness that makes no mention of vaccines or petrochemicals. The role of vaccines in both suppressing cell-mediated immunity and causing infection have been well-documented by several authors (see below), but have been covered up by US Defense Department and British Ministry of Defense. This follows papers in the Lancet, 16 January on the Gulf War Illnesses by Catherine Unwin and colleagues1 and Khalifda Ismail and colleagues2 conclude that "there is no unique Gulf War syndrome" are a great oversimplification- and completely unwarranted; at least 3 Gulf War illnesses exist, either alone or in combination. The first of these syndromes (approx. 80%) is due to the marked depression of cell-mediated immunity by more than 3 vaccines given simultaneously-and many soldiers received 17 simultaneously3; many of these were hurriedly and poorly attenuated, and hence potent infectious agents, but with a prolonged latent period. In my many inquires of patients and their physicians over 4 years (1993-96) until at least 12 months ago, neither the many Dept. of Defense, Veteran's Administration or physicians in private practice asked the patients about vaccines (a "hush" topic); nor were any relevant immune function tests performed--or any test of cell mediated immunity3. I called these to the attention of the American Department of Defense on many occasions (reply to first letter enclosed) and the British Ministry of Defense in 1996. I have published that tests of cell mediated immunity have a characteristic profile in 80 per cent of those so diagnosed, and this pattern is restricted to vaccine recipients not exposed to petrochemicals or organophosphate insecticides.3 About 20-25% of all U.S. troops, and of British and Canadian troops in the area, developed symptoms. However, none of the French, Algerian, or Moroccan troops, all of whom refused the vaccines, developed symptoms of this illness. Some of the troops from the Czech Republic and Slovakian Republic who received these vaccines developed identical symptoms. However, the incidences of those receiving the vaccines in Slovakia and the Czech Republic and those developing the highly infectious Gulf War syndrome with its characteristic symptoms are unknown. Some of my patients who received the 17 vaccines, many poorly if at all attenuated, developed full blown illness even though the war ended 2-3 days before they were to be sent over, and they remained on U.S. soil for the whole duration of the conflict, never setting foot in the Gulf3. The role of the vaccines is complicated by the pyridostigmine administration--the latter caused severe vomiting and diarrhea for as long as it was taken, and most of the American troops date the onset of illness from the day after they began taking "the pill". Unless and until they are treated successfully (with immunotherapy), these veterans do not remember that there was an interval of 6-18 months before other symptoms appeared, including in some, a blindness of about 15 months duration, for which ophthalmologists could find no cause, a finding suggestive of anthrax. The second of the Gulf War syndromes is apparently associated with, and presumably due to, ORGANOPHOSPHATE TOXICITY. Seventy-seven per cent of British Troops refused the vaccines4. But the British troops were housed in tents painted with organophosphates to protect against mites and other insects.5 In addition to the symptoms of the 1st group, they developed other symptoms including tightness in the chest, coughing, dyspnea, and pulmonary edema (the cough and breathing difficulties were originally ascribed by the US Defense Dept. to fine sand particles6), bizarre behavior, sweating, salivation, and blurred and/or dark vision. (This agent inhibits blood cholinesterase; it was originally developed as a biologic warfare agent!) Requests to the US Defense Department for information on whether any American troops were housed in such tents, what percent of these received the vaccines and what percent did not, remain "classified information." The American troops with this syndrome whom I have talked to said they slept on the ground and wore petrochemical insecticide collars. It is noteworthy that the French troops (who, again, refused the vaccines), under separate command, refused such pesticides7. However, M. Hooper, Professor Emeritus of Medicinal Chemistry from the University of Sunderland, has obtained some data by spending much time visiting with officials of British Gulf War Veterans Associations7 The same agent is used in some areas of the U.S. as an insecticide and in Northern England for "dipping" sheep to protect against insect infestation, The "sheepherders syndrome", indistinguishable in symptoms from those described above,8 is now defined as recognized medical entity by the Ministry of Health9; is no longer considered psychological, and sheep dipping is no longer mandatory. Many of the victims have myocardial disease, a finding characteristic of many patients with Coxsackie virus -induced myalgic enkephalitis, and in an experimental model thereof in inbred mice by mouse Coxsackie virus B69. Furthermore, the selective immunosuppression observed in CFIDs and in organophosphate toxicity is also induced by Coxsackie B virus infection10 The third Gulf war illness is related to being drenched in petrochemical-soaked clothing for 3 days, after explosion of oil wells by Allied missiles.10 The percentage of troops who suffered from such environmental exposure is unknown, and those who previously had (or developed from such exposure) petrochemical hypersensitivity therefore had additional symptoms11- some are now universal reactors to all chemicals. Some Czech troops had both vaccine exposure and petrochemical exposure of the type outlined if not described above. Some of those with petrochemical hypersensitivity who also received the vaccines had symptoms of Myalgic Enkephalitis plus neurologic symptoms similar to multiple sclerosis. The situation is further complicated by the so-far lack of data on differences in symptoms between those that received vaccinations plus the "pill" versus those that received vaccinations without the pill; and also between data on those who were and those who were not exposed to massive doses of organophophosphates (the French were not); and between those who were exposed to the vaccines with, and those who received vaccines without, petrochemical exposure, etc. The article by Dr. Ismael and Dr. Wessel, one of the co-authors referred to above, implies that there is no characteristic illness; they appear unaware, since the illness of those who received the vaccines was highly infectious,6 with 80% of spouses and 60% of children living in the same household developing the same symptoms, and 40% of DOGS and/or CATS IN THE HOUSEHOLD DEVELOPING NEUROLOGIC SYMPTOMS,5 again within 6-18 months after exposure to an affected veteran. Perhaps the other 20% who did not infect household contacts suffered from type 2 or 3, rather than type 1 GWI. I have also seen silent carriers of the infectious agent(s) e.g., a healthy Canadian nurse who apparently transmitted disease to her mother12 The mother developed the disease 6 months after exposure to her daughter for 3 months beginning in Nov. 1993. SEVERE SYMPTOMS DEVELOPED in March 1994. The carrier, a nurse who had worked in a Saudi Hospital, had been on vacation in Canada at her parents' house during these 3 months, before returning to the Gulf Hospital.) Symptoms persist to this day, undiminished in severity, and the patient is confined to the house, as she is now a "UNIVERSAL REACTOR" to all chemicals. Her daughter remains well, but the daughter's child, age 25 months, was hospitalized in the same Hospital with a mysterious illness. __._,_.___ "Keep on, Keepin' on" Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan" See my web site at: http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/

Search Terms: Vanadium and Brain http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed 1: Neurochem Res. 2004 Jul;29(7):1365-9. Nigrostriatal modifications after vanadium inhalation: an immunocytochemical and cytological approach. National University of Mexico, Mexico City. Vanadium (V) has increased in the air as a component of suspended particles originated from fuel combustion. In this report, a model of inhaled V in mice was implemented to identify the effect that V has in the corpus striatum and substantia nigra, structures with high concentrations of dopamine and scarce antioxidants burden. Mice inhaled 0.02 M V2O5 1 h twice a week and were sacrificed at points from 1 to 8 weeks after inhalation, perfused, and processed for Golgi method and for tyroxine hidroxylase (TH) inmunocytochemistry. Cytological analysis consisted in counting the number of dendritic spines in 20 medium-size spiny neurons and the number of TH immunoreactive neurons in the substatia nigra pars compacta. Dendritic spine density decreased drastically after V exposure; the same was observed with the TH-positive neurons, which decreased in a time-dependent mode. No previous morphological studies about V and nervous system have been reported. The decrease in spine density and in TH-positive neurons might have functional repercussions that should be studied because the trend of this element in the atmosphere is to increase. PMID: 15202766 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Search Terms: vanadium AND brain http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed 1: Toxicol Pathol. 2003 Sep-Oct;31(5):524-38. DNA damage in nasal and brain tissues of canines exposed to air pollutants is associated with evidence of chronic brain inflammation and neurodegeneration. Environmental Pathology Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-7310, USA. liliancalderon888@hotmail.com Acute, subchronic, or chronic exposures to particulate matter (PM) and pollutant gases affect people in urban areas and those exposed to fires, disasters, and wars. Respiratory tract inflammation, production of mediators of inflammation capable of reaching the brain, systemic circulation of PM, and disruption of the nasal respiratory and olfactory barriers are likely in these populations. DNA damage is crucial in aging and in age-associated diseases such as Alzheimer's disease. We evaluated ... healthy dogs naturally exposed to urban pollution in Mexico City. Nickel (Ni) and vanadium (V) were measured by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). Forty mongrel dogs, ages 7 days-10 years were studied (14 controls from Tlaxcala and 26 exposed to urban pollution in South West Metropolitan Mexico City (SWMMC)). Nasal respiratory and olfactory epithelium were found to be early pollutant targets. Olfactory bulb and hippocampal AP sites were significantly higher in exposed than in control age matched animals. Ni and V[anadium] were present in a gradient from olfactory mucosa > olfactory bulb > frontal cortex. Exposed dogs had (a) nuclear neuronal NFkappaB p65, (b) endothelial, glial and neuronal iNOS, © endothelial and glial COX2, (d) ApoE in neuronal, glial and vascular cells, and (e) APP and beta amyloid(1-42) in neurons, diffuse plaques (the earliest at age 11 months), and in subarachnoid blood vessels. Increased AP sites and the inflammatory and stress protein brain responses were early and significant in dogs exposed to urban pollution. Oil combustion PM-associated metals Ni and Vanadium were detected in the brain. There was an acceleration of Alzheimer's-type pathology in dogs chronically exposed to air pollutants. Respiratory tract inflammation and deteriorating olfactory and respiratory barriers may play a role in the observed neuropathology. These data suggest that Alzheimer's disease may be the sequela of air pollutant exposures and the resulting systemic inflammation. PMID: 14692621 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

US NAVY BOILERMAN and Occupational exposure to vanadium-rich fuel-oil ash http://www.ehs.cornell.edu/ Article Acute respiratory symptoms in workers exposed to vanadium-rich fuel-oil ash Mark A. Woodin, ScD, MS 1 2, Youcheng Liu, MD, ScD, MPH 1, Donna Neuberg, ScD 3, Russ Hauser, MD, ScD, MPH 1, Thomas J. Smith, PhD, MPH 1, David C. Christiani, MD, MPH 1 2 4 * 1Department of Environmental Health (Occupational Health Program), Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115 2Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115 3Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115 4Pulmonary and Critical Care Unit, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114 email: David C. Christiani (dchris@hohp.harvard.edu) *Correspondence to David C. Christiani, Harvard School of Public Health, Department of Environmental Health, 665 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115. Funded by: NIEHS; Grant Number: ES05947, ES07069, ES00002 NIOSH; Grant Number: OH02421, CCU109979 Keywords vanadium; PM10; occupational epidemiology; occupational lung disease; boilermakers; industrial hygiene Abstract Background Occupational exposure to fuel-oil ash, with its high vanadium content, may cause respiratory illness. It is unclear, however, what early acute health effects may occur on the pathway from normal to compromised respiratory function. Methods Using a repeated measures design, we studied prospectively 18 boilermakers overhauling an oil-fired boiler and 11 utility worker controls. Subjects completed a respiratory symptom diary five times per day by using a 0-3 scale where 0=symptom not present, 1=mild symptom, 2=moderate symptom, and 3=severe symptom. Daily symptom severity was calculated by using the highest reported score each day for upper and lower respiratory symptoms. Daily symptom frequency was calculated by summing all upper or lower airway symptom reports, then dividing by number of reporting times. Respiratory symptom frequency and severity were analyzed for dose-response relationships with estimated vanadium and PM10 doses to the lung and upper airway by using robust regression. Results During the overhaul, 72% of boilermakers reported lower airway symptoms, and 67% reported upper airway symptoms. These percentages were 27 and 36 for controls. Boilermakers had more frequent and more severe upper and lower respiratory symptoms compared to utility workers, and this difference was greatest during interior boiler work. A statistically significant dose-response pattern for frequency and severity of both upper and lower respiratory symptoms was seen with vanadium and PM10 in the three lower exposure quartiles. However, there was a reversal in the dose-response trend in the highest exposure quartile, reflecting a possible healthy worker effect. Conclusions Boilermakers experience more frequent and more severe respiratory symptoms than utility workers. This is most statistically significant during boiler work and is associated with increasing dose estimates of lung and nasal vanadium and PM10. Am. J. Ind. Med. 37:353-363, 2000. © 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>. http://www.osha.gov/dts/sltc/methods/inorg...d185/id185.html Inorganic Methods Evaluation Branch OSHA Salt Lake Technical Center Salt Lake City, Utah 1. Introduction The goal of this method is to provide confirmation for occupational vanadium pentoxide (V2O5) exposures. To achieve that end, the published X-ray diffraction (XRD) approach presented in a NIOSH study (8.1.) for various V compounds was evaluated for applicability. Unlike the NIOSH study, this method focuses on only V2O5. The method was further extended to evaluate the applicability of X-ray fluorescence (XRF) to measure V2O5 exposures, since sample preparation was also compatible with XRF analysis. The procedure used in the NIOSH XRD study was adapted from the published analytical procedure (8.1.) and techniques (8.2.) that were in print prior to the publication of NIOSH Method 7504 (8.3.). The NIOSH sampling approach collects and analyzes only the respirable fraction because of its toxic effects (8.1.). [Vanadium pentoxide is also toxic by other routes of exposure (8.4.-8.6.)] Particle size effects on the analysis were investigated during the OSHA validation when the OSHA PEL was for total dust and fume (i.e. Transitional PELs). The respirable particle-size range was used for validation of this method because of the size dependence associated with XRD. The validation is applicable to the newer Final Rule V2O5 PELs because total dust is now excluded other than consideration as nuisance dust. The OSHA V2O5 PELs are currently for respirable dust or fume and are 8-h time weighted average (TWA) values (8.7.). 1.4. Vanadium Pentoxide (CAS 1314-62-1) Some Sources of Exposure (8.6.): Application Source of Exposure catalyst oxidation of nitrogen and sulfuroxides colorant manufacture of yellow glass developer photography industry coating using welding rods alloys manufacture of special steels contaminant cleaning fuel oil burners 1.6. Toxicology Information contained in this section is a synopsis of current knowledge of the physiological effects of V2O5 and is not intended as a basis for OSHA policy. 1.6.1. When inhaled, the chief effects of V2O5 are on the respiratory passages. Tracheitis, bronchitis, emphysema, pulmonary edema, or bronchial pneumonia may be observed, but no specific chronic lung lesions have been described. Other symptoms reported include eye irritation, conjunctivitis, dermatitis, green tongue, metallic taste, throat irritation, increased mucus, and cough (8.6.). 1.6.2. The toxic effects of V2O5 are primarily from exposures to dusts in the respirable particle-size range. Exposure to non-respirable dust can also produce toxic effects. 1.6.3. Death has been observed when animals were exposed to 70 mg/m3 for a few hours (8.6.). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lenntech.com/Periodic-chart-ele...20of%20vanadium Health effects of vanadium (data sheet) The uptake of vanadium by humans mainly takes place through foodstuffs, such as buckwheat, soya beans, olive oil, sunflower oil, apples and eggs. Vanadium can have a number of effects on human health, when the uptake is too high. When vanadium uptake takes places through air it can cause bronchitis and pneumonia. The acute effects of vanadium are irritation of lungs, throat, eyes and nasal cavities. Other health effects of vanadium uptake are: - Cardiac and vascular disease - Inflammation of stomach and intestines - Damage to the nervous system - Bleeding of livers and kidneys - Skin rashes - Severe trembling and paralyses - Nose bleeds and throat pains - Weakening - Sickness and headaches - Dizziness - Behavioural changes The health hazards associated with exposure to vanadium are dependent on its oxidation state. This product contains elemental vanadium. Elemental vanadium could be oxidized to vanadium pentoxide during welding. The pentoxide form is more toxic than the elemental form. Chronic exposure to vanadium pentoxide dust and fumes may cause severe irritation of the eyes, skin, upper respiratory tract, persistent inflammations of the trachea and bronchi, pulmonary edema, and systemic poisoning. Signs and symptoms of overexposure include; conjunctivitis, nasopharyngitis, cough, labored breathing, rapid heart beat, lung changes, chronic bronchitis, skin pallor, greenish-black tongue and an allergic skin rash. Effects of vanadium on the environment Vanadium can be found in the environment in algae, plants, invertebrates, fishes and many other species. In mussels and crabs vanadium strongly bioaccumulates, which can lead to concentrations of about 105 to 106 times greater than the concentrations that are found in seawater. Vanadium causes the inhibition of certain enzymes with animals, which has several neurological effects. Next to the neurological effects vanadium can cause breathing disorders, paralyses and negative effects on the liver and kidneys. Laboratory tests with test animals have shown, that vanadium can cause harm to the reproductive system of male animals, and that it accumulates in the female placenta. Vanadium can cause DNA alteration in some cases, but it cannot cause cancer with animals. Copyright © 1998-2005 Lenntech Water treatment & air purification Holding B.V. Rotterdamseweg 402 M 2629 HH Delft, The Netherlands tel: (+31)(0)15 26.10.900 fax: (+31)(0)15 26.16.289 e-mail: info@lenntech.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMME ON CHEMICAL SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CRITERIA 81 VANADIUM World Health Orgnization Geneva, 1988 http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/eh...tm#PartNumber:1 8.4.2 Cleaning and related operations on oil-fired boilers Bronchitis and conjunctivitis resulting from exposure to soot (containing 6 - 11% vanadium) during the cleaning of the stacks of oil-fired boilers were first recognized by Frost (1951). Frost did not report any other effects, but, in a subsequent report of a boiler-cleaning operation by Williams (1952), sneezing, nasal discharge, lachrymation, sore throat, and substernal pain occurred within 0.5 - 12 h of exposure. Within 6 - 24 h, secondary symptoms developed; these consisted of dry cough, wheezing, laboured breathing, lassitude, and depression. In some cases, the cough became paroxysmal and productive. Symptoms lessened only after removal from the working environment for 3 days. Air sampling showed most of the dust particles to be smaller than 1 µg. The vanadium concen- tration ranged from 17.2 mg/m3 in a superheater chamber to 58.6 mg/m3 in a combustion chamber. Roshchin (1962) observed 8 cases of acute vanadium poisoning in workers who cleaned boiler flues at power stations burning high-sulfur oil. Analysis of soot deposits showed that the soot in the region of greatest dust formation (the pipes of the steam superheater and water economizer) contained from 24 to 40% vanadium pentoxide. The workers carried out cleaning operations without respirators or with respirators that did not provide the necessary protection. After cleaning the boilers, the workers developed acute vanadium poisoning: itching in the throat, sneezing, cough with difficult expectoration, and smarting eyes. On the following days, the symptoms became more severe. Tightness in the chest, sweating, general weakness, conjunctivitis, and noticeable loss of weight developed. On examination one week later, hyperaemia and oedema of the fauces and posterior pharyngeal wall were observed. Harsh breathing sounds and dry crepitations were heard in the lungs. X-ray examination showed intensified lung markings in the middle zones of the right and left lungs and thickening of the fissure on the right. One month later, only one worker still had cough, weakness, perspiration, loss of energy, and dyspnoea. The other workers recovered quickly, with complete disappearance of cough and shortness of breath. In another study on workers engaged in boiler-cleaning operations (Troppens, 1969), the symptoms were described as similar to mild coryza or influenza with bronchitis. Following recovery, workers were tired, debilitated, irritable, without any appetite, and complained of watery eyes. The first symptoms were swelling of face and eyes as early as 20 min after entering the boiler area. Removal from exposure for 2 - 3 weeks resulted in the disappearance of symptoms. Skin blemishes described as allergic dermatoses were attributed to absorption of vanadium through sensitive skin. Troppens claimed that there was an increased susceptibility of the vanadium worker to asthmatic bronchitis and emphysema. An investigation is reported on 53 workers performing emergency repair work on oil-fired power station boilers (Izycki et al., 1971). They were exposed to vanadium pentoxide in average concentrations of from 1.2 to 11 mg/m3 and also to manganese, calcium, and nickel oxides, and sulfur compounds. Characteristic features of both acute and chronic vanadium poisoning included upper respiratory catarrh in 45%, increased lung markings in 24.5%, and bradycardia in 22% of cases. Persistent chronic changes in the respiratory tract (rhinitis, pharyngeal catarrh, laryngitis, and changes in the paranasal sinuses) were present in 45%. Milby (1974) reported 21 cases of vanadium poisoning in boilermakers installing new catalytic-converter tubes. This work involved marble-sized pellets of vanadium containing 11.7% V2O5. The dust formed during the shaking of these pellets had a particle size of 1.1 - 1.5 µm. After working for 72 h, the workers began to complain of nasal, eye, and bronchial irritation. By the 4th day, most felt very ill, with signs of irritation of the upper respiratory tract and eyes and pains in the chest. In a study by Garlej (1974) 50 workers engaged in the cleaning of oil-fired boilers were compared with a control group of 60 other workers. Boiler deposits contained 44 -65% V2O5; the maximum exposure was estimated to be 10 mg/m3. Although no clinical evidence of vanadium poisoning was seen, a number of exposure-dependent positive biochemical reactions were found in the boiler-cleaning group. Urinary excretion of delta-amino- levulinic acid (ALA), porphobilinogen (PBG), and porphyrin increased beyond the physiological limit, and the positive Nadi reaction (with associated green fluorescence) occurred. The increased excretion of cytochrome (as indicated by the Nadi reaction) suggested oxidation through V2O5 of the thiol group -SH cysteine in the protein carrier, resulting in decreased binding of cytochrome in the mitochondria. A study on 17 men who were engaged in cleaning boilers at an electric generating station was reported by Lees (1980). In addition to clinical findings, which were similar to those described above, urine-vanadium levels were determined, and pulmonary function measurements were made for a week following exposure. Sixteen of the men wore protective clothing, and respirators that were found to have about 9% leakage. One workman volunteered to wear only a simple oro-nasal dust mask for 1 h of exposure. The dust exposure level was estimated to be 26 mg/m3; respirable dust (under 10 µm) was measured at 523 µg/m3 with a vanadium content of 15.3%. All of the men developed reduced pulmonary function that had not fully returned to normal in one week, but did so after one month. Reduced function outlasted the clinical symptoms by several days. Fig. 3 shows the contrast in pulmonary reaction between the more heavily exposed individual and one of the other workmen. The urine-vanadium level of the volunteer was 280 µg/litre, whereas those of the remainder of the workers were below 40 µg/litre. Other observations of boiler-cleaning operations have been made by Fallentin & Frost (1954), Sjöberg (1955), Thomas & Stiebris (1956), Hickling (1958), and Kuzelova et al. (1975). In terms of respiratory symptoms relating to boiler-cleaning, it should be noted that sulfates and sulfuric acid may be present in boiler soot and may be partly responsible for irritative effects. Hudson (1964) suggested that the quick onset of symptoms (lachrymation with nose and throat irritation) with rapid recovery following removal from exposure is character- istic of exposure to acid sulfates. Response to vanadium expo- sure is characterized by some delay in the onset of irritative symptoms (a few hours to several days) and persistence of symptoms following removal from exposure (Hudson, 1964). A recent report by Levy et al. (1984) concerned a comparatively high incidence of severe respiratory tract irritation in boilermakers (74/100), many of them welders in areas without adequate ventilation, exposed to vanadium pentoxide fumes in a power plant where conversion from oil- to coal-burning occurred. The severe illness of 70 men caused an average of 5 days of absence, some objective tests (e.g., FVC) being markedly affected. The vanadium pentoxide content was above the permissible exposure limit in 8 samples, and this resulted in litigation for inadequate protection of the workers. Kuzelova et al. (1977) drew attention to the occupational risk of chimney sweeps cleaning large-capacity heating facilities in large housing settlements. This coincided with a report of a detailed cross-sectional examination of 121 chimney sweeps by Holzhauer & Schaller (1977) in the Federal Republic of Germany with an average exposure duration of 19 years ( ± 5 years). Vanadium exposure was determined by personal samples, and measurements between 0.73 and 13.7 mg vanadium pentoxide/day were determined compared with 4 µg in the normal (average) population. Urinary excretion was determined to be between 0.15 and 13 µg/litre, which was significantly higher than the values in 31 referents. The main complaints of the chimney sweeps were wheezing, rhinitis, conjunctival irritation, cough, sputum dyspnoea, and hoarseness; there were no skin symptoms. A prospective follow-up of the cohort was emphasized, but the results are not yet available. 8.4.3 Handling of pure vanadium pentoxide or vanadate dusts Health effects due to occupational handling of pure vanadium pentoxide or vanadate dusts have been reported. Tara et al. (1953) described the effects of vanadium exposure in 4 dock workers who unloaded and bagged spilled calcium vanadate. The symptoms (bronchitic wheezing sounds, dyspnoea, productive cough, haemoptysis in one case, and headache) necessitated interruption of the work after 1´ days. Zenz et al. (1962) described an acute illness that occurred in 18 workers pellet- izing pure vanadium pentoxide; it was characterized by a rapidly developing mild conjunctivitis, severe pharyngeal irritation, a non-productive persistent cough, diffuse rales, and broncho- spasm. With severe exposure, 4 men complained of itching skin and a sensation of heat in the face and forearms. The symptoms became more severe after each exposure, suggesting a sensitivity reaction, but their duration was not prolonged by repeated exposures. 8.4.4 Other industries Browne (1955) studied vanadium poisoning in 12 patients exposed to exhaust fumes from gas turbines using heavy fuel oil. Evidence of poisoning appeared between the first and 14th day of exposure and consisted of conjunctivitis, rhinitis, cough, crepitations, and dyspnoea. Bleeding appeared before the rhinorrhoea. Other occupations in which respiratory effects of vanadium exposure have been reported include operations connected with the gasification of fuel oil (Fear & Tyrer, 1958) and the manufacture of phosphor for television picture tubes (Tebrock & Machle, 1968). In the latter study, elevated blood pressure was noted in men exposed to vanadium pentoxide. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>