I was contacted by Congressman Kagen's Office yesterday and they assured me that Congressman Kagen is going to introduce the additional cancer bill once again. I do not think I misled anyone saying he was not going to reintroduce the bill but it seems they considered that I did convey that.
Since I do not have the information on the constraints of what is needed or the timeline if any of when this is going to happen then "my opinion only" was it is dying a slow death.
This is especially true if our VSO's at national level have now involved themselves on behalf of the Veterans Administration of that I have no doubt.
So there you have it straight out of the Congressional Office.
There will be a bill introduced by Congressman Kagen. When and what is needed to get this bill going I have no idea so please do not ask me.
I would suggest if it is submitted in the middle of next year with the mid-terms coming up that once again this is just a game at least in my opinion only.
I met Congressman Kagen and liked him and his staff but this is after all politics at its best or worst depending on your point of view I guess.
I also received an e-mail from one of the former Ranch Hand scientists on some comments by Congressman Filner on the Agent Orange Equity Bill.
"These guys have suffered long enough," Filner said. "It's going to cost money. But that's the cost of going to war. We're spending trillions bailing out everybody else. Let's bail out Vietnam veterans."
I would suggest to the Congressman a poor choice of words was used. If he thinks any Veteran falls into a bail out category then he is not the man I thought he was; nor does he stand for what I thought he stood for.
Vietnam Veterans or Herbicide Veterans or any Veteran has put black into the nation's coffers with service to the nation. Service in some of the most dreadful conditions one can imagine. Not red as in a bail out where no one did anything for the nation other than take taxpayer money as if they earned it.
Congressional offices always talk about the time it takes but yet if you look back at the 9/11 families I think it was seven or eight billion dollars was given out to less than 3000 families; in record time I might add. What service besides paying taxes had these families done for the nation? Yes, a tragedy but no more a tragedy than what this government has done to way more than just 3,000 families in the form of corruption and lies against those that have rendered service; including denial of death and disability service connection.
I would also add until the military went 'all volunteer' this service rendered to the nation was at a bargain basement prices. I recall when I made PFC; I broke over the $100.00 a month salary. Not by much but over $100.00. Just six months prior to that I was making $185.00 a week and paying off my social security with any overtime at all in September or October.
So no; our Veterans do not need a bailout but the truth of what the government did to us and our children. Congress stand up and be counted like so many Veterans have in the past and quit covering up and playing dumb like you do not know what is going on within VA and these issues.
It is not very becoming even for a congressperson in DC.
The presentation of the Ford foundation stuff in Congress and the Congressional questions asked sounded like (and if no kids or women I would tell you what it sounded like); but you fellows know how to fill in the blank, a CLUSTER ______. Talking about parts per billion when parts per trillion or even quadrillion in some folks is enough to set the immune system off for future development of issues no different than exposure to a virus that we know is associated to many cancers, autoimmune disorders, neurological disorders, etc.
Just more money for more studies and on and on and on not about the facts as we know it today.
Not one person brought up the fact that the now awarded to maternal exposures and denied paternal exposure birth defects were almost the same when a study comparison was made with the Ranch Handers.
Quote in sworn testimony before Congress in 2000 just prior to the Secretary of the VA announcing the additional maternal birth defects.
"Dr. Albanese. Congressman Shays, I think it's very important for me to say, based on what Dr. Schwartz just said; I studied that report on the birth defects to female veterans.
The pattern in the Ranch Handers is nearly identical to the pattern in that study. But because they didn't meet the standard of a linear increase with dioxin, the fact of that difference hasn't been further pursued. That's the tragedy of it."
Besides Ranch Hand even though the data does reflect additional, if not all site, cancers of the Army Chemical Corps studies who sprayed the herbicides both in Vietnam and stateside as well as other geographical areas was somewhat of misguided study. The study was supposed to be a study of Army Chemical Corps workers versus clean Veterans that were not in Vietnam and not associated with spraying the toxic agents. Yet when asked why they did not; the answer was, "there was no IOM mandate to do so." More money and time to death and disability wasted. In fact, the Vietnam Veteran was double the cancer rate than the non-Vietnam rate. But as usual in these studies we do not get the entire information. As even some Congressmen, believe it or not, railed on VA's Dr. Kang for his assumptions and not proof regarding Gulf War issues and his bogus study. What we get is oh by the way it did not reach significance and we get the > p – 0.05. Given that dioxin and dioxin creations are life long issues and are medical issues in development and these studies are a snap shot in time would it not make more sense to tell the reader the actual p value achieved such as did not reach significance of <p - 0.05 but did reach p - 0.065 and let the reader or other scientists interrupt the findings based on found developing trends and the many study limitations and of course who is conducting the study? Of course it would; but then that would be the truth and our government wants no part of the truth.
In fact, the Ranch Hand scientist that contacted me yesterday I remember reading in the transcripts the question by that Ranch Hand scientist if the VA study had done so on the cohort selection and comparison. The answer from the VA rep there was not a yes or no answer; which was all that was required but excuse after excuse.
Let's see you study everyone that handled the chemicals and sprayed them but you do not compare to any single group outside of that cohort. It is true some issues may come up more prevalent of those that served in Vietnam and it did in the form of Hepatitis C but the question is; given the known massive exposure in many methods and ingestion rates and compound exposures are the Vietnam Veterans worse off and if so in what areas. Not whether the Army Chemical Corps workers are worse off. We already know they are. And one would expect those that served in the combat theatre to be worse off due to many many differences of use in Vietnam versus use in the states or elsewhere overseas. Evening assuming that the same thing was sprayed and the same methodology with safety factors and personal hygiene was used which is very doubtful!
Yesterday in reviewing the meeting transcripts of the Ford Foundation stuff I did see a reference to what was used in Nam was NOT the normal everyday commercial toxic chemical but a much stronger version. Now someone, I forget who now, stated it was because the chemical companies got sloppy and more of the byproduct of dioxins was created and inclusive in the product.
Well that is not exactly true either.
In fact, it was our government that allowed process changes in order to reduce the cost to the government and to expedite production as the demand in Southeast Asia rapidly increased. The chemical companies so stated that when TCDD dioxin exceeded production process specs they did see a problem in not only systemic organ damages but also neuropsychological problems. You think this is all PTSD and all the suicides after Nam were only PTSD. Think again.
Putting the blame and some of it does belong on the chemical companies but our government had a hand in this also. If they think the product was defective and known to be defective and did not meet specifications it is up to them to recuperate monies lost in death and disability and not protect them for the sake of Congressional/Presidential lobby money. If some DOD program manager allowed the process changes then put the blame on him or her not the chemical companies. I have been around the DOD and the contracts too long to not know these decisions are made everyday at DOD Program Level. In fact, in many cases I would stand up and say that is not what the contract says. You see I had seen and documented too many guns blow up in action and knew the value of quality assurance, lot sampling, 'real operational' qualification factors, de-rating, and failure modes while in action; not on some practice field.
A good example of not doing this was the first M16 and we will never know how many of our fellows were killed by the enemy because that assault rifle became nothing but a club.
Once again I see no end to these government lies and government study lies.
And I reject the notion that any Veteran is asking for a bailout!
How many Veterans/Widows/Offspring could this money spent on studies that are then corrupted/manipulated by the government have helped?
The world knows what dioxin does and it is time to recognize the fact of what dioxins do and that yes most Vietnam Veterans plus others in service were exposed and will experience some form of medical issues. Even normal disorders that would be considered hereditary but for the Veteran no one in his family has had such anomalies.
The real tragedy of this whole thing is that Herbicide Veterans were already exposed and the world, if not for the United States Government, had so much to learn in the development at cellular level of all cancers, autoimmune disorders, thyroid issues, degenerating neurological issues, birth defects, lymphomas, gastro disorders, hematological disorders, lipid metabolism disorders along with diabetes both types and increased insulin resistance, tumor promotion and growth factor changes, damaged homeostasis in Interleukins, Macrophages, Monocytes, and Cytokines, etc.
It is unlikely the world will ever again have a chance to study at length how dioxin does this and compare that to what a virus does over life in creating these medical anomalies.
Question
allan
Congressman Kagen AO Cancer Bill
Hi to all,
I was contacted by Congressman Kagen's Office yesterday and they assured me that Congressman Kagen is going to introduce the additional cancer bill once again. I do not think I misled anyone saying he was not going to reintroduce the bill but it seems they considered that I did convey that.
Since I do not have the information on the constraints of what is needed or the timeline if any of when this is going to happen then "my opinion only" was it is dying a slow death.
This is especially true if our VSO's at national level have now involved themselves on behalf of the Veterans Administration of that I have no doubt.
So there you have it straight out of the Congressional Office.
There will be a bill introduced by Congressman Kagen. When and what is needed to get this bill going I have no idea so please do not ask me.
I would suggest if it is submitted in the middle of next year with the mid-terms coming up that once again this is just a game at least in my opinion only.
I met Congressman Kagen and liked him and his staff but this is after all politics at its best or worst depending on your point of view I guess.
I also received an e-mail from one of the former Ranch Hand scientists on some comments by Congressman Filner on the Agent Orange Equity Bill.
"These guys have suffered long enough," Filner said. "It's going to cost money. But that's the cost of going to war. We're spending trillions bailing out everybody else. Let's bail out Vietnam veterans."
I would suggest to the Congressman a poor choice of words was used. If he thinks any Veteran falls into a bail out category then he is not the man I thought he was; nor does he stand for what I thought he stood for.
Vietnam Veterans or Herbicide Veterans or any Veteran has put black into the nation's coffers with service to the nation. Service in some of the most dreadful conditions one can imagine. Not red as in a bail out where no one did anything for the nation other than take taxpayer money as if they earned it.
Congressional offices always talk about the time it takes but yet if you look back at the 9/11 families I think it was seven or eight billion dollars was given out to less than 3000 families; in record time I might add. What service besides paying taxes had these families done for the nation? Yes, a tragedy but no more a tragedy than what this government has done to way more than just 3,000 families in the form of corruption and lies against those that have rendered service; including denial of death and disability service connection.
I would also add until the military went 'all volunteer' this service rendered to the nation was at a bargain basement prices. I recall when I made PFC; I broke over the $100.00 a month salary. Not by much but over $100.00. Just six months prior to that I was making $185.00 a week and paying off my social security with any overtime at all in September or October.
So no; our Veterans do not need a bailout but the truth of what the government did to us and our children. Congress stand up and be counted like so many Veterans have in the past and quit covering up and playing dumb like you do not know what is going on within VA and these issues.
It is not very becoming even for a congressperson in DC.
The presentation of the Ford foundation stuff in Congress and the Congressional questions asked sounded like (and if no kids or women I would tell you what it sounded like); but you fellows know how to fill in the blank, a CLUSTER ______. Talking about parts per billion when parts per trillion or even quadrillion in some folks is enough to set the immune system off for future development of issues no different than exposure to a virus that we know is associated to many cancers, autoimmune disorders, neurological disorders, etc.
Just more money for more studies and on and on and on not about the facts as we know it today.
Not one person brought up the fact that the now awarded to maternal exposures and denied paternal exposure birth defects were almost the same when a study comparison was made with the Ranch Handers.
Quote in sworn testimony before Congress in 2000 just prior to the Secretary of the VA announcing the additional maternal birth defects.
"Dr. Albanese. Congressman Shays, I think it's very important for me to say, based on what Dr. Schwartz just said; I studied that report on the birth defects to female veterans.
The pattern in the Ranch Handers is nearly identical to the pattern in that study. But because they didn't meet the standard of a linear increase with dioxin, the fact of that difference hasn't been further pursued. That's the tragedy of it."
Besides Ranch Hand even though the data does reflect additional, if not all site, cancers of the Army Chemical Corps studies who sprayed the herbicides both in Vietnam and stateside as well as other geographical areas was somewhat of misguided study. The study was supposed to be a study of Army Chemical Corps workers versus clean Veterans that were not in Vietnam and not associated with spraying the toxic agents. Yet when asked why they did not; the answer was, "there was no IOM mandate to do so." More money and time to death and disability wasted. In fact, the Vietnam Veteran was double the cancer rate than the non-Vietnam rate. But as usual in these studies we do not get the entire information. As even some Congressmen, believe it or not, railed on VA's Dr. Kang for his assumptions and not proof regarding Gulf War issues and his bogus study. What we get is oh by the way it did not reach significance and we get the > p – 0.05. Given that dioxin and dioxin creations are life long issues and are medical issues in development and these studies are a snap shot in time would it not make more sense to tell the reader the actual p value achieved such as did not reach significance of <p - 0.05 but did reach p - 0.065 and let the reader or other scientists interrupt the findings based on found developing trends and the many study limitations and of course who is conducting the study? Of course it would; but then that would be the truth and our government wants no part of the truth.
In fact, the Ranch Hand scientist that contacted me yesterday I remember reading in the transcripts the question by that Ranch Hand scientist if the VA study had done so on the cohort selection and comparison. The answer from the VA rep there was not a yes or no answer; which was all that was required but excuse after excuse.
Let's see you study everyone that handled the chemicals and sprayed them but you do not compare to any single group outside of that cohort. It is true some issues may come up more prevalent of those that served in Vietnam and it did in the form of Hepatitis C but the question is; given the known massive exposure in many methods and ingestion rates and compound exposures are the Vietnam Veterans worse off and if so in what areas. Not whether the Army Chemical Corps workers are worse off. We already know they are. And one would expect those that served in the combat theatre to be worse off due to many many differences of use in Vietnam versus use in the states or elsewhere overseas. Evening assuming that the same thing was sprayed and the same methodology with safety factors and personal hygiene was used which is very doubtful!
Yesterday in reviewing the meeting transcripts of the Ford Foundation stuff I did see a reference to what was used in Nam was NOT the normal everyday commercial toxic chemical but a much stronger version. Now someone, I forget who now, stated it was because the chemical companies got sloppy and more of the byproduct of dioxins was created and inclusive in the product.
Well that is not exactly true either.
In fact, it was our government that allowed process changes in order to reduce the cost to the government and to expedite production as the demand in Southeast Asia rapidly increased. The chemical companies so stated that when TCDD dioxin exceeded production process specs they did see a problem in not only systemic organ damages but also neuropsychological problems. You think this is all PTSD and all the suicides after Nam were only PTSD. Think again.
Putting the blame and some of it does belong on the chemical companies but our government had a hand in this also. If they think the product was defective and known to be defective and did not meet specifications it is up to them to recuperate monies lost in death and disability and not protect them for the sake of Congressional/Presidential lobby money. If some DOD program manager allowed the process changes then put the blame on him or her not the chemical companies. I have been around the DOD and the contracts too long to not know these decisions are made everyday at DOD Program Level. In fact, in many cases I would stand up and say that is not what the contract says. You see I had seen and documented too many guns blow up in action and knew the value of quality assurance, lot sampling, 'real operational' qualification factors, de-rating, and failure modes while in action; not on some practice field.
A good example of not doing this was the first M16 and we will never know how many of our fellows were killed by the enemy because that assault rifle became nothing but a club.
Once again I see no end to these government lies and government study lies.
And I reject the notion that any Veteran is asking for a bailout!
How many Veterans/Widows/Offspring could this money spent on studies that are then corrupted/manipulated by the government have helped?
The world knows what dioxin does and it is time to recognize the fact of what dioxins do and that yes most Vietnam Veterans plus others in service were exposed and will experience some form of medical issues. Even normal disorders that would be considered hereditary but for the Veteran no one in his family has had such anomalies.
The real tragedy of this whole thing is that Herbicide Veterans were already exposed and the world, if not for the United States Government, had so much to learn in the development at cellular level of all cancers, autoimmune disorders, thyroid issues, degenerating neurological issues, birth defects, lymphomas, gastro disorders, hematological disorders, lipid metabolism disorders along with diabetes both types and increased insulin resistance, tumor promotion and growth factor changes, damaged homeostasis in Interleukins, Macrophages, Monocytes, and Cytokines, etc.
It is unlikely the world will ever again have a chance to study at length how dioxin does this and compare that to what a virus does over life in creating these medical anomalies.
Kelley
http://www.2ndbattalion94thartillery.com:8...s/aoupdated.htm
Edited by allanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
1
Popular Days
Jun 10
1
Top Posters For This Question
allan 1 post
Popular Days
Jun 10 2009
1 post
0 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now