Most of you already know this history of denial but let’s review this section anyway
VA’s distancing themselves from the problem early on and meeting behind closed doors with medical directors from Monsanto and Dow. Rewards where then handed out.
VA’s chastising its own employees and telling them to cease and desist in trying figure out what was going on with our dying and disabled veterans.
The many ways Vietnam Veterans were exposed and that form of exposure makes a difference as to what will and can develop.
· Water in the environment in bomb craters and/or artillery craters or wherever the Veteran could find it – using a cloth over the canteen to keep out the large chucks of dioxin laden sediment
· Stored food - such as potatoes in drums
· Mixed with gas - creating a dioxin aerosol (Reference Fort Detrick Emergency Memo to MACV in 1969)
· Boiling water in dioxin drums for drinking because of the numerous dead bodies
· Using Herbicide 55 gallon drums to bath, shower, or cook food
· Operation Ranch Hand target-areas were in a 4.8 mile radius
· Operation Ranch Hand drift rate areas were an 11.2 mile radius
· Helicopter and firebase spraying by individual tank sprayers were not recorded nor done by properly trained personnel.
· B-52 arc lights in I Corps that within minutes it was hard to breathe in the dioxin laden soil sediment. (Show picture of B-52 strike on cut-off Camp Carroll taken by me)
· Then we have these chemical weapons used as tactical weapons with calls from Marine HQ to have areas of ground operations saturated three days prior to commencement of ground sweeps in a particular area.
The bias of Veterans Affairs was clearly demonstrated in 1985 when the director, of the Office of Environmental Medicine, Veterans Health Services and Research Administration, claimed that TCDD "presents no threat from the exposures experienced by the veterans and the public at large,” and accused scientists who find that such health effects do exist to be nothing more than witch doctors
Lets not forget at the same exact time Veterans Affairs and our government was denying any and all medical impacts of our herbicide issues they bought out homes in Times Beach, Missouri and Love Canal, New York. (Slight double standard)
Then lets not forget, that during the war, to reduce cost to the government and improve productivity for the needs in Vietnam and elsewhere, the government allowed the chemical companies to change the processes. Where these new chemicals that were produced studied at all or tested? Probably not!
As far as analysis goes we have no idea what was sprayed by manufacturer or by lot date codes. Therefore, even the toxicity is in question.
Do the scientific studies “used to deny” our disability compensations and service connection from herbicide death and disability take all of this into account when comparing Vietnam Veterans to civilian studies? Probably NOT! Do the scientists tasked with direct legal action and decisions used against we Veterans and our families even consider these facts? Probably NOT!
Does Congress consider these misstated facts when they hear from Veterans Affairs officials and IOM? Probably NOT!
Does Congress take an active role in this issue? The answer is no! They leave it up to the Secretary of the Veterans Affairs. This is like Adolph Hitler saying that that all the courts in Germany in 1939 should have no appointed Jewish Judges to the courts of the land. Veterans receive about that much fairness from these appointed executive branch puppets.
Vietnam Veterans are unique in their form of exposures including many multiplicity forms of exposures to include both chronic and acute and many different forms of dioxins and dioxin like furan isomers, and PCB’s. In addition, a totally different form of toxic chemical was used in arsenic acid (Agent Blue) that has its own set of medical issues in both chronic and acute exposures of which many overlap what is said; to be only caused by the dioxin, TCDD by our government and Veterans Affairs.
Thanks to Texas Tech and their archives, we now find that there was a physical reaction between Agent Orange and Agent Blue. What did this do in our bodies? Is anyone considering this fact that a synergy effect may be at work in our Veterans. We have testing for inclusion but no testing for exclusion, which by the even the novice investigator is paramount to the science conclusions itself.
Do the studies done by our government and the comparison of other studies
that were exposed to some single isomer make any sense to anyone?
Other than Veterans Affairs budget control for the Executive Branch?
Probably NOT!
Science compares the carcinogenic severity of other dioxins, dibenzofurans, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s) to the dioxin, TCDD that “IS” quantified and qualified as the world’s worst. The key words are “carcinogenic severity of other carcinogens in this family of toxic chemicals.” Therefore, it is logical the Veteran would not only be exposed to the single toxicant of one component but many toxicants of the many components that made up the “Herbicides” (plural).
Does it make any sense to only verify inclusion of the dioxin, TCDD when Veterans were exposed in many different ways to many different toxic chemical isomers? Probably NOT!
What are dioxins? The term dioxin or dioxins is generic. Used as such it typically refers to a compound or group of compounds from the dibenzodioxin or dibenzofuran classifications. The classification names suggest that the basic structure is of two benzene rings connected in one class by a dioxane structure and a furan structure in the other. The basic structure is tricyclic or three-ringed. Further, the compounds generically referred to as dioxins have one or more chlorine or bromine atoms added to this basic structure. Many different numbers and configurations of these halogen atoms around the basic structure are possible.
Those compounds with chlorine are referred to as polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs). By chemical definition, they are broadly classified as halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons. Structurally they are tricyclic aromatic compounds that are chlorinated or brominated.
One compound of the PCDD class is 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. This compound has undergone extensive study and is sometimes called simply dioxin. The toxicity of this compound and those similar to it are of concern. To provide a way to measure the relative concern for those similar compounds this compound has been assigned a toxicity equivalence factor (TEF) of 1.0. This is based on laboratory studies, which measured its toxic effect. It has thus become the reference compound for this class of compounds. The similar compounds, which have been assigned a TEF value, are those with chorines substituted in at least the 2,3,7, and 8 positions. Additionally, the brominated dioxins and furans of the same substitution patterns and some polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) have been included in the definition of dioxin-like compounds.
Clearly, this data indicates our governments stand and many other studies have been fraudulent in their assessments and conclusions that only the by-product dioxin, TCDD could have caused the wide spread uncompensated death and disability in our returning Veterans. Any known impacts of dioxins and furans of the same substitution patterns and some polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) should have been included in the Vietnam Experience and toxic chemical outcomes.
Yet, because of this misguided, government directed, search for an unproven linear dose response to only the dioxin, TCDD and its relationship to medical findings in our Veterans this simply must be called a government hoax of the largest magnitude.
The Herbicide with the nomenclature Agent White (2,4-D) also had other dioxin isomers as well as closely related furans, which was also used separately and as a 50/50 mixture with Agent Orange.
If Agent White was used separately as a herbicide and as a 50/50 mixture with Agent Orange, then mathematically which of the toxic chemicals actually had the most wide spread usage. (2,4-D or 2,4,5-T)
In 1989, scientists who reviewed Dow’s documentation stated … that there are significant concentrations of potentially carcinogenic materials present in 2,4-D, which have never been made known to the EPA, FDA, or to any other agency. Thus, in addition to the problem of the TCDD which, more likely than not, was present in the 2,4,5-T component of Agent Orange, the finding of other dioxins and closely related furans and xanthones in the 2,4-D formulation….”
We have science arguing about whether these isomers can cross the brain protein blood barrier.
We have photographic images of dioxins crossing this brain barrier and if the Veteran inhales these isomers through his nose does that not go directly to the brain anyway, almost like sniffing glue. Remembering that some of these Veterans were so young, their brains were not fully developed, according to science.
28-year government controlled flawed studies and flawed assessments used to deny service connection and death and disability compensations.
This all started in 1979 with the VACEH that had no process or procedures for establishing what constitutes a presumptive disorder. When eventually prestigious scientists and prestigious research groups looked at or where allowed to look at their processes, they were appalled. Statements were made that nothing this committee had done should be used for anything. For 15 years, this was nothing but a government sham used to deny service connection. Many on this committee had already publicly committed that dioxins were like orange juice and good for you.
After this fiasco of deciding by pure subjectivity, the courts ruled that this VACEH go back and review all its findings and decisions against the courts new rulings of “increased risk of incidence or a significant correlation.” Of course, that never happened and in stepped the NAS/IOM in 1991.
In 2000, from Dr. David Butler under oath it was obvious the IOM also had no concrete measurable established fault tree or decision matrix that concludes a presumptive or even a possible presumption. Lets see a show of hands, which is not scientific. Including it must be pointed out; that any studies done in comparison must equate to the Veterans experience on the ground not what the DoD has advertised was the experience and then compare civilian studies which no way are reprehensive of the cohorts in Vietnam and what they experienced daily.
In 2007 even more evidence came from the IOM they had no real transparent established and defined measurable fault tree or decision matrix as to what constitutes an increased risk of incidence or increased risk of odds ratios – p-values or the like. Once again leaving it open to subjectivity which cannot be challenged by Veterans, family, and widows. …. Do more on that one from your meeting!
The DoD and Veterans Affairs working in conjunction has denied and denied until the evidence is no longer plausible in denial of the Vietnam Veteran Era exposure to such toxic chemicals.
Once again, thanks to the Teas Tech Archives we know DoD lies were stated on the spraying in Cambodia and Thailand with spraying actually commencing in 1964. We now know the denials of usage in Thailand, Guam, Korean DMZ, training areas in Canada, and bases throughout CONUS were nothing but DoD government lies. Which by the way I will demonstrate they are allowed to do and our Congress does nothing to stop it.
In these cases, it is all but criminal that Veterans Affairs can change the laws of chemistry of “world recognized half life issues” in various ground environments in denying those Veterans that may have served two months after the DoD said it quit the usage of such toxic chemicals. With the track record above of the DoD, whom can we really believe except science itself? Certainly not the DoD.
How can Veterans Affairs deny a Veteran with two government pronounced associated cancers and when he left the Korean DMZ, he was diagnosed with a hallmark sign of exposures - pustular acne? Because congress has given them such power is how. They know there are no ramifications for such nonsensical decisions by the Veterans Affairs and/or their omnipotent raters.
IMMUNE SYSTEM FINDINGS INCLUDING INTERLUKINS CREATING CANCERS AS WELL AS IMMUNE SYSTEM ISSUES THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED HEREDITARY WHEN THERE IS NO HEREDITARY. CANCERS, AUTOIMMUNE, SMOLDERING CANCERS, ETC. (FAILURE MATRIX)
RANCH HAND FLAWED ADMISSIONS AND THE IMPACTS
SYSTEMIC AMYLOIDAL DEPOSITS ON PANCREAS ISLETS
DNA DAMAGE FINDINGS
PATERNAL BIRTH DEFECTS
No fair assessment in many MEDICAL issues - list those issues.
Find law that allows DoD to test Veterans as lab rats in BCW
Question
allan
TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY LECTURE
DRAFT LECTURE
Most of you already know this history of denial but let’s review this section anyway
VA’s distancing themselves from the problem early on and meeting behind closed doors with medical directors from Monsanto and Dow. Rewards where then handed out.
VA’s chastising its own employees and telling them to cease and desist in trying figure out what was going on with our dying and disabled veterans.
The many ways Vietnam Veterans were exposed and that form of exposure makes a difference as to what will and can develop.
· Water in the environment in bomb craters and/or artillery craters or wherever the Veteran could find it – using a cloth over the canteen to keep out the large chucks of dioxin laden sediment
· Stored food - such as potatoes in drums
· Mixed with gas - creating a dioxin aerosol (Reference Fort Detrick Emergency Memo to MACV in 1969)
· Boiling water in dioxin drums for drinking because of the numerous dead bodies
· Using Herbicide 55 gallon drums to bath, shower, or cook food
· Operation Ranch Hand target-areas were in a 4.8 mile radius
· Operation Ranch Hand drift rate areas were an 11.2 mile radius
· Helicopter and firebase spraying by individual tank sprayers were not recorded nor done by properly trained personnel.
· B-52 arc lights in I Corps that within minutes it was hard to breathe in the dioxin laden soil sediment. (Show picture of B-52 strike on cut-off Camp Carroll taken by me)
· Then we have these chemical weapons used as tactical weapons with calls from Marine HQ to have areas of ground operations saturated three days prior to commencement of ground sweeps in a particular area.
The bias of Veterans Affairs was clearly demonstrated in 1985 when the director, of the Office of Environmental Medicine, Veterans Health Services and Research Administration, claimed that TCDD "presents no threat from the exposures experienced by the veterans and the public at large,” and accused scientists who find that such health effects do exist to be nothing more than witch doctors
Lets not forget at the same exact time Veterans Affairs and our government was denying any and all medical impacts of our herbicide issues they bought out homes in Times Beach, Missouri and Love Canal, New York. (Slight double standard)
Then lets not forget, that during the war, to reduce cost to the government and improve productivity for the needs in Vietnam and elsewhere, the government allowed the chemical companies to change the processes. Where these new chemicals that were produced studied at all or tested? Probably not!
As far as analysis goes we have no idea what was sprayed by manufacturer or by lot date codes. Therefore, even the toxicity is in question.
Do the scientific studies “used to deny” our disability compensations and service connection from herbicide death and disability take all of this into account when comparing Vietnam Veterans to civilian studies? Probably NOT! Do the scientists tasked with direct legal action and decisions used against we Veterans and our families even consider these facts? Probably NOT!
Does Congress consider these misstated facts when they hear from Veterans Affairs officials and IOM? Probably NOT!
Does Congress take an active role in this issue? The answer is no! They leave it up to the Secretary of the Veterans Affairs. This is like Adolph Hitler saying that that all the courts in Germany in 1939 should have no appointed Jewish Judges to the courts of the land. Veterans receive about that much fairness from these appointed executive branch puppets.
Vietnam Veterans are unique in their form of exposures including many multiplicity forms of exposures to include both chronic and acute and many different forms of dioxins and dioxin like furan isomers, and PCB’s. In addition, a totally different form of toxic chemical was used in arsenic acid (Agent Blue) that has its own set of medical issues in both chronic and acute exposures of which many overlap what is said; to be only caused by the dioxin, TCDD by our government and Veterans Affairs.
Thanks to Texas Tech and their archives, we now find that there was a physical reaction between Agent Orange and Agent Blue. What did this do in our bodies? Is anyone considering this fact that a synergy effect may be at work in our Veterans. We have testing for inclusion but no testing for exclusion, which by the even the novice investigator is paramount to the science conclusions itself.
____________________________________________________________________________
Do the studies done by our government and the comparison of other studies
that were exposed to some single isomer make any sense to anyone?
Other than Veterans Affairs budget control for the Executive Branch?
Probably NOT!
Science compares the carcinogenic severity of other dioxins, dibenzofurans, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s) to the dioxin, TCDD that “IS” quantified and qualified as the world’s worst. The key words are “carcinogenic severity of other carcinogens in this family of toxic chemicals.” Therefore, it is logical the Veteran would not only be exposed to the single toxicant of one component but many toxicants of the many components that made up the “Herbicides” (plural).
Does it make any sense to only verify inclusion of the dioxin, TCDD when Veterans were exposed in many different ways to many different toxic chemical isomers? Probably NOT!
What are dioxins? The term dioxin or dioxins is generic. Used as such it typically refers to a compound or group of compounds from the dibenzodioxin or dibenzofuran classifications. The classification names suggest that the basic structure is of two benzene rings connected in one class by a dioxane structure and a furan structure in the other. The basic structure is tricyclic or three-ringed. Further, the compounds generically referred to as dioxins have one or more chlorine or bromine atoms added to this basic structure. Many different numbers and configurations of these halogen atoms around the basic structure are possible.
Those compounds with chlorine are referred to as polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs). By chemical definition, they are broadly classified as halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons. Structurally they are tricyclic aromatic compounds that are chlorinated or brominated.
One compound of the PCDD class is 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. This compound has undergone extensive study and is sometimes called simply dioxin. The toxicity of this compound and those similar to it are of concern. To provide a way to measure the relative concern for those similar compounds this compound has been assigned a toxicity equivalence factor (TEF) of 1.0. This is based on laboratory studies, which measured its toxic effect. It has thus become the reference compound for this class of compounds. The similar compounds, which have been assigned a TEF value, are those with chorines substituted in at least the 2,3,7, and 8 positions. Additionally, the brominated dioxins and furans of the same substitution patterns and some polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) have been included in the definition of dioxin-like compounds.
Clearly, this data indicates our governments stand and many other studies have been fraudulent in their assessments and conclusions that only the by-product dioxin, TCDD could have caused the wide spread uncompensated death and disability in our returning Veterans. Any known impacts of dioxins and furans of the same substitution patterns and some polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) should have been included in the Vietnam Experience and toxic chemical outcomes.
Yet, because of this misguided, government directed, search for an unproven linear dose response to only the dioxin, TCDD and its relationship to medical findings in our Veterans this simply must be called a government hoax of the largest magnitude.
The Herbicide with the nomenclature Agent White (2,4-D) also had other dioxin isomers as well as closely related furans, which was also used separately and as a 50/50 mixture with Agent Orange.
If Agent White was used separately as a herbicide and as a 50/50 mixture with Agent Orange, then mathematically which of the toxic chemicals actually had the most wide spread usage. (2,4-D or 2,4,5-T)
In 1989, scientists who reviewed Dow’s documentation stated … that there are significant concentrations of potentially carcinogenic materials present in 2,4-D, which have never been made known to the EPA, FDA, or to any other agency. Thus, in addition to the problem of the TCDD which, more likely than not, was present in the 2,4,5-T component of Agent Orange, the finding of other dioxins and closely related furans and xanthones in the 2,4-D formulation….”
____________________________________________________________________________
We have science arguing about whether these isomers can cross the brain protein blood barrier.
We have photographic images of dioxins crossing this brain barrier and if the Veteran inhales these isomers through his nose does that not go directly to the brain anyway, almost like sniffing glue. Remembering that some of these Veterans were so young, their brains were not fully developed, according to science.
____________________________________________________________________________
28-year government controlled flawed studies and flawed assessments used to deny service connection and death and disability compensations.
This all started in 1979 with the VACEH that had no process or procedures for establishing what constitutes a presumptive disorder. When eventually prestigious scientists and prestigious research groups looked at or where allowed to look at their processes, they were appalled. Statements were made that nothing this committee had done should be used for anything. For 15 years, this was nothing but a government sham used to deny service connection. Many on this committee had already publicly committed that dioxins were like orange juice and good for you.
After this fiasco of deciding by pure subjectivity, the courts ruled that this VACEH go back and review all its findings and decisions against the courts new rulings of “increased risk of incidence or a significant correlation.” Of course, that never happened and in stepped the NAS/IOM in 1991.
In 2000, from Dr. David Butler under oath it was obvious the IOM also had no concrete measurable established fault tree or decision matrix that concludes a presumptive or even a possible presumption. Lets see a show of hands, which is not scientific. Including it must be pointed out; that any studies done in comparison must equate to the Veterans experience on the ground not what the DoD has advertised was the experience and then compare civilian studies which no way are reprehensive of the cohorts in Vietnam and what they experienced daily.
In 2007 even more evidence came from the IOM they had no real transparent established and defined measurable fault tree or decision matrix as to what constitutes an increased risk of incidence or increased risk of odds ratios – p-values or the like. Once again leaving it open to subjectivity which cannot be challenged by Veterans, family, and widows. …. Do more on that one from your meeting!
The DoD and Veterans Affairs working in conjunction has denied and denied until the evidence is no longer plausible in denial of the Vietnam Veteran Era exposure to such toxic chemicals.
Once again, thanks to the Teas Tech Archives we know DoD lies were stated on the spraying in Cambodia and Thailand with spraying actually commencing in 1964. We now know the denials of usage in Thailand, Guam, Korean DMZ, training areas in Canada, and bases throughout CONUS were nothing but DoD government lies. Which by the way I will demonstrate they are allowed to do and our Congress does nothing to stop it.
In these cases, it is all but criminal that Veterans Affairs can change the laws of chemistry of “world recognized half life issues” in various ground environments in denying those Veterans that may have served two months after the DoD said it quit the usage of such toxic chemicals. With the track record above of the DoD, whom can we really believe except science itself? Certainly not the DoD.
How can Veterans Affairs deny a Veteran with two government pronounced associated cancers and when he left the Korean DMZ, he was diagnosed with a hallmark sign of exposures - pustular acne? Because congress has given them such power is how. They know there are no ramifications for such nonsensical decisions by the Veterans Affairs and/or their omnipotent raters.
IMMUNE SYSTEM FINDINGS INCLUDING INTERLUKINS CREATING CANCERS AS WELL AS IMMUNE SYSTEM ISSUES THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED HEREDITARY WHEN THERE IS NO HEREDITARY. CANCERS, AUTOIMMUNE, SMOLDERING CANCERS, ETC. (FAILURE MATRIX)
RANCH HAND FLAWED ADMISSIONS AND THE IMPACTS
SYSTEMIC AMYLOIDAL DEPOSITS ON PANCREAS ISLETS
DNA DAMAGE FINDINGS
PATERNAL BIRTH DEFECTS
No fair assessment in many MEDICAL issues - list those issues.
Find law that allows DoD to test Veterans as lab rats in BCW
Source: http://www.2ndbattalion94thartillery.com/Chas/tt.htm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
1
1
1
Popular Days
Dec 2
3
Top Posters For This Question
Pete53 1 post
Berta 1 post
allan 1 post
Popular Days
Dec 2 2007
3 posts
2 answers to this question
Recommended Posts