More Agent Orange Update

Copr6
Senior Chief Moderator III
Posts: 122
(5/7/01 10:29:32 pm)
| Del All More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was sent to me today by my brother. He had received this in the mail on Saturday from the VA. If this IS NOT new will someone please advise me.


Federal Register: January 11, 2001 {Volume 66, Number 8}
[Proposed Rules]
{Page 2376-2380}
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11ja01-35]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

38 CFR Part 3

RIN 2900-AK63


Disease Associated With Exposure to Certain Herbicide Agents:
Type 2 Diabetes

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is proposing to amend
its adjudication regulations concerning presumptive service connection
for certain diseases for which there is no record during service. This
proposed amendment is necessary to implement a decision of the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs under the authority granted by the Agent
Orange Act of 1991 that there is a positive association between
exposure to herbicides used in the Republic of Vietnam during the
Vietnam era and the subsequent development of Type 2 diabetes. The
intended effect of this proposed amendment is to establish presumptive
service connection for that condition based on herbicide exposure.

[[Page 2377]]


DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 12, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand-deliver written comments to: Director, Office
of Regulations Management (02D), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810
Vermont Ave., NW., Room 1154, Washington, DC 20420; or fax comments to
(202) 273-9289; or e-mail comments to OGCRegulations@mail.va.gov.
Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to ``RIN
2900-AK63.'' All comments received will be available for public
inspection in the Office of Regulations Management, Room 1158, between
the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except
holidays).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Russo, Regulations Staff,
Compensation and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits Administration,
Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20420, telephone (202) 273-7210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3 of the Agent Orange Act of 1991,
Pub. L. 102-4, 105 Stat. 11, directed the Secretary to seek to enter
into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to review
and summarize the scientific evidence concerning the association
between exposure to herbicides used in support of military operations
in the Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam era and each disease
suspected to be associated with such exposure. Congress mandated that
NAS determine, to the extent possible: (1) Whether there is a
statistical association between the suspect diseases and herbicide
exposure, taking into account the strength of the scientific evidence
and the appropriateness of the methods used to detect the association;
(2) the increased risk of disease among individuals exposed to
herbicides during service in the Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam
era; and (3) whether there is a plausible biological mechanism or other
evidence of a causal relationship between herbicide exposure and the
suspect disease. Section 3 of Pub. L. 102-4 also required that NAS
submit reports on its activities every two years (as measured from the
date of the first report) for a ten-year period.
Section 2 of Pub. L. 102-4 provides that whenever the Secretary
determines, based on sound medical and scientific evidence, that a
positive association (i.e., the credible evidence for the association
is equal to or outweighs the credible evidence against the association)
exists between exposure of humans to an herbicide agent (i.e., a
chemical in an herbicide used in support of the United States and
allied military operations in the Republic of Vietnam during the
Vietnam era) and a disease, the Secretary will publish regulations
establishing a presumptive service connection for that disease.
Presumptive service connection relaxes the evidentiary burden, so that
the claimant need not provide direct evidence of a link between his or
her disease and the claimant's exposure to Agent Orange. Instead, such
a link is presumed and may be rebutted only if there is affirmative
evidence to the contrary.
If the Secretary determines that a presumption of service
connection is not warranted, he is to publish a notice of that
determination, including an explanation of the scientific basis for
that determination. The Secretary's determination must be based on
consideration of the NAS reports and all other sound medical and
scientific information and analysis available to the Secretary.
(Under Section 2 of Pub. L. 102-4, any veteran who served in
Vietnam during the Vietnam Era and has one of the diseases on the
presumptive list codified at 38 CFR 3.309(e), is presumed to have been
exposed to herbicides. Under current law, the Vietnam Era is defined as
January 9, 1962 through May 7, 1975, for the purposes of such
presumptions. 38 U.S.C. 1116.)
Although Pub. L. 102-4 does not define ``credible,'' it does
instruct the Secretary to ``take into consideration whether the results
[of any study] are statistically significant, are capable of
replication, and withstand peer review.'' Simply comparing the number
of studies which report a positive relative risk to the number of
studies which report a negative relative risk for a particular
condition is not a valid method for determining whether the weight of
evidence overall supports a finding that there is or is not a positive
association between herbicide exposure and the subsequent development
of the particular condition. Because of differences in statistical
significance, confidence levels, control for confounding factors, bias,
and other pertinent characteristics, some studies are clearly more
credible than others, and the Secretary has given the more credible
studies more weight in evaluating the overall weight of the evidence
concerning specific diseases.

I. History of Agent Orange Presumptions

NAS issued its initial report, entitled ``Veterans and Agent
Orange: Health Effects of Herbicides Used in Vietnam,'' (VAO) on July
27, 1993. The Secretary subsequently determined that a positive
association exists between exposure to herbicides used in the Republic
of Vietnam and the subsequent development of Hodgkin's disease,
porphyria cutanea tarda, multiple myeloma, and certain respiratory
cancers; and that there was no positive association between herbicide
exposure and any other condition, other than chloracne, non-Hodgkin's
lymphoma, and soft-tissue sarcomas, for which presumptions already
existed. A notice of the diseases that the Secretary determined were
not associated with exposure to herbicide agents was published on
January 4, 1994 (see 59 FR 341-46).
NAS issued its second report, entitled ``Veterans and Agent Orange:
Update 1996'' (Update 1996), on March 14, 1996. The Secretary
subsequently determined that a positive association exists between
exposure to herbicides used in the Republic of Vietnam and the
subsequent development of prostate cancer and acute and subacute
peripheral neuropathy in exposed persons. The Secretary further
determined that there was no positive association between herbicide
exposure and any other condition, other than those for which
presumptions already existed. A notice of the diseases that the
Secretary determined were not associated with exposure to herbicide
agents was published on August 8, 1996 (see 61 FR 41442-49).
NAS issued a third report, entitled ``Veterans and Agent Orange:
Update 1998'' {Update 1998} , on February 11, 1999. The focus of this
updated review was on new scientific studies published since the
release of Update 1996 and updates of scientific studies previously
reviewed. The Secretary determined that there was no positive
association between herbicide exposure and any condition other than
those for which presumptions already existed. A notice of this
determination was published on November 2, 1999 (see 64 FR 59232-
59243).

II. History of NAS Review of Type 2 Diabetes

In VAO, Update 1996, and Update 1998, NAS placed metabolic and
digestive disorders (including Type 2 diabetes) in the category labeled
``Inadequate/Insufficient Evidence to Determine Whether an Association
Exists.'' According to NAS, this means that the available studies are
of insufficient quality, consistency, or statistical power to permit a
conclusion regarding the presence or absence of an association. For
example, studies fail to

[[Page 2378]]

control for confounding factors, have inadequate exposure assessments,
or fail to address latency.
However, after NAS released Update 1998 the National Institute of
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) published a report that detects
an association, though not a strong association, between Type 2
diabetes and dioxin exposure. The study does suggest a dose response
relationship because of excess cases of Type 2 diabetes found in
workers having the highest serum-lipid levels of dioxin (Calvert GM,
Sweeney MH, Deddens J, Wall DK. 1999. Evaluation of Type 2 diabetes,
Serum Glucose and Thyroid Function Among U.S. Workers Exposed to
2,3,7,8 tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. Occupational and Environmental
Medicine 56:270-276). The Secretary concluded that the NIOSH study was
potentially important enough that it warranted a full review by NAS as
soon as possible, and he directed VA to amend its contract with NAS for
the third biennial update to require a special report on herbicide
exposure and Type 2 diabetes, as a separate deliverable.
In February 2000, before NAS released its report on herbicide
exposure and Type 2 diabetes, the U.S. Air Force released data from its
study of participants in operation Ranch Hand (the crews assigned to
spray Agent Orange from aircraft in Vietnam) (AFHS. 2000. Air Force
Health Study: An Epidemiologic Investigation of Health Effects in Air
Force Personnel Following Exposure to Herbicides. 1997 Follow-up
Examination Results. Brook AFB, TX: Air Force Research Laboratory.
AFRL-HE-BR-TR-2000-02.) On April 10, 2000, VA asked NAS to include an
analysis of the new Ranch Hand data in its report on Type 2 diabetes.
NAS agreed to do so.

III. October 2000 NAS Review of Type 2 Diabetes

NAS issued its report, ``Veterans and Agent Orange: Herbicide/
Dioxin Exposure and Type 2 Diabetes'' (VAO: Diabetes) on October 11,
2000. NAS concluded that ``there is limited/suggestive evidence of an
association between exposure to the herbicides used in Vietnam or the
contaminant dioxin and Type 2 diabetes.'' (``Type 2 diabetes'' is also
referred to as ``Type II diabetes mellitus'' or ``adult-onset
diabetes.'') The term ``limited/suggestive evidence'' means ``evidence
is suggestive of an association between herbicides and the outcome, but
limited because chance, bias, and confounding could not be ruled out
with confidence.'' NAS based its conclusion on the totality of the
scientific evidence on this issue, not one particular study. (VAO:
Diabetes).

Mortality Studies on Type 2 Diabetes

In VAO: Diabetes, NAS noted that positive associations between
herbicides and Type 2 diabetes are reported in many mortality studies.
NAS stated that these may underestimate the incidence of Type 2
diabetes because: (1) It is not typically fatal; (2) its known
complications, as opposed to Type 2 diabetes itself, may be more likely
to be listed as the cause of death on the death certificate; and (3)
contributory causes of death are not routinely recorded on death
certificates. In one mortality study reviewed by NAS, people living
near the site of a 1976 industrial accident involving dioxin were found
to have a higher risk of death from Type 2 diabetes than a reference
population, in all exposure zones in which deaths were recorded.
(Pesatori AC, Zocchetti C, Guercilena S, Consonni D, Turrini D,
Bertazzi, PA. 1998. Dioxin exposure and non-malignant health effects: a
mortality study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 55:126-131.)
Two studies of a group of workers exposed to TCDD at 12 U.S. plants
found positive, but non-statistically significant associations between
measures of exposure and notations of Type 2 diabetes on death
certificates, although the later paper also found a significant
negative trend between Type 2 diabetes mortality and cumulative TCDD
exposure. (Steenland K, Nowlin S, Ryan B, Adams S. 1992. Use of
multiple-cause mortality data in epidemiological analyses: US rate and
proportion files developed by the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health and the National Cancer Institute. American Journal
of Epidemiology 136(7):855-862; Steenland K, Piacetelli L, Deddens J,
Fingerhut M, Chang LI. 1999. Cancer, heart disease and diabetes in
workers exposed to 2, 3, 7, 8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. Journal of
the National Cancer Institute 91(9):779-786.) Another study, which
examined workers who produced or sprayed phenoxy herbicides and
chlorophenols, reported an elevated relative risk of mortality from
Type 2 diabetes in exposed workers versus non-exposed referents. (Vena
J, Boffetta P, Becher H, Benn T, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Coggon D, Colin
D, Flesch-Janys D, Green L, Kauppinen T, Littorin M, Lynge E, Mathews
JD, Neuberger M, Pearce N, Pesatori AC, Saracci R, Steenland K,
Kogevinas M. 1998. Exposure to dioxin and nonneoplastic mortality in
the expanded IARC international cohort study of phenoxy herbicide and
chlorophenol production workers and sprayers. Environmental Health
Perspectives 106 (Supplement 2):645-653.) In addition, earlier studies
previously reviewed by NAS in and VAO, Update 1996, and Update 1998
showed an inconsistent but weakly positive association between exposure
measures and Type 2 diabetes.

Morbidity Studies on Type 2 Diabetes

In VAO: Diabetes, NAS noted that, ``Positive associations are
reported in most of the morbidity studies identified by the [NAS
Committee to Review the Evidence Regarding the Link Between Exposure to
Agent Orange and Diabetes].'' NAS discussed a number of epidemiological
studies. In a study of a population near an Arkansas plant that
manufactured pesticides, researchers found that insulin levels were
significantly higher in the group with high dioxin levels. The study
authors concluded that this was evidence that dioxin may cause insulin
resistance. (Cranmer M, Louie S, Kennedy RH, Kern PA, Fonseca VA. 2000.
Exposure to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) is associated
with hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance. Toxicological Sciences
56(2): 431-436.) A survey of Australian Vietnam veterans found a
statistically significant excess of self-reported Type 2 diabetes--
2,391 cases were reported when 1,780 were expected. (Commonwealth
Department of Veterans Affairs. 1998a. Morbidity of Vietnam Veterans: A
Study of the Health of Australia's Vietnam Veteran Community. Volume 1:
Male Vietnam Veterans Survey and Community Comparison Outcomes.
Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Veterans Affairs.)
The 1999 NIOSH study (Calvert et al., 1999) reported an elevated
incidence of Type 2 diabetes in individuals who had high levels of
serum dioxin relative to others examined in that study. A study of the
Ranch Hand comparison group, reported in 1999 and published in 2000,
showed similar findings. (Longnecker MP, Michalek JE. 2000. Serum
dioxin level in relation to Type 2 diabetes among Air Force veterans
with background levels of exposure. Epidemiology 11(1):44-48.) The Air
Force's subsequent analysis of Ranch Hand data (AFHS, 2000) showed
almost identical Type 2 diabetes incidence in Ranch Hand and the
matched comparison group. However, this study did show significant
dose-response relationships between dioxin levels and Type 2 diabetes
incidence, controlling for confounding variables.

[[Page 2379]]

Biological Plausibility

Regarding biologic plausibility, NAS concluded in VAO: Diabetes
that animal, laboratory, and human studies constitute ``reasonable
evidence that TCDD exposure could affect Type 2 diabetes risk in
humans.'' This conclusion is based mainly on three studies. (Michalek
JE. 1999. Oral presentation: Workshop on the Evidence Regarding a Link
Between Exposure to Agent Orange and Diabetes. Washington, DC:
Institute of Medicine, July 23; Longnecker MP and Michalek JE. 2000.
Serum Dioxin Level in relation to Type 2 diabetes among Air Force
veterans with background levels of exposure. Epidemiology 11(1):44-48;
Cranmer M, Louie S, Kennedy RH, Kern PA, Fonseca VA. 2000. Exposure to
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) is associated with
hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance. Toxicological Sciences 56(2):
431-436.)

IV. The Secretary's Determination on Diabetes

NAS reviewed all known relevant scientific and medical articles
published since Update 1998, and prior studies, as an integral part of
the process that resulted in VAO: Diabetes. In VAO: Diabetes, NAS
observed that, ``Although some of the risk estimates in the studies
examined by the committee are not statistically significant and,
individually, studies can be faulted for various methodological
reasons, the accumulation of positive evidence is suggestive.''
After considering all of the evidence, the Secretary has determined
that there is a positive association between exposure to herbicides and
Type 2 diabetes and, therefore, a presumption of service connection is
warranted.

V. Compliance With the Congressional Review Act, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, and Executive Order 12866

We estimate that the five-year cost of this proposed rule from
appropriated funds would be $3.3 billion in benefits costs and $62
million in government operating expenses. Since it is likely that the
adoption of the proposed rule may have an annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more, the Office of Management and Budget has
designated this proposed rule as a major rule under the Congressional
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 802, and a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. The following
information is provided pursuant to E.O. 12866.
This proposed rule is necessary to comply with the Agent Orange Act
of 1991, which requires VA to establish a presumption of service
connection if the Secretary finds that there is a positive association
between exposure to herbicides used in the Republic of Vietnam during
the Vietnam era and the subsequent development of any particular
disease. As explained above, the Acting Secretary has found that there
is such an association regarding Type 2 diabetes. There are no feasible
alternatives to this proposed rule, since the Agent Orange Act of 1991
requires the Secretary to promulgate it once he finds the positive
association described above. The adoption of the proposed rule would
not interfere with state, local or tribal governments in the exercise
of their governmental functions.

Benefits Costs

Historical statistics indicate that the total number of veterans
who served in the Republic of Vietnam or its surrounding waters was
about 2.6 million. We estimate that about 2.3 million of these veterans
are alive today. Using information gained from VAO: Diabetes and VA's
Office of Planning and Analysis, VA applied a prevalence rate of 9% to
the current population to determine the number of veterans who might
have Type 2 diabetes today. VA assumes that over five years, about 90%
of these same veterans would file a diabetes-related claim. We expect
that 8 out of 10 claims will be made by first time applicants
(original) and that 2 out of 10 will come from veterans already service
connected for some other issue (reopened). The average monthly award
made on account of diabetes or its ancillary conditions for original
and reopened claims is estimated to be $462 and $786, respectively.
These figures are based on average benefits to current beneficiaries
for all conditions and include dependents' benefits and unemployability
benefits where applicable. A moderate number of DIC and burial claims
have also been factored into this estimate.
VA estimates the cumulative totals of benefits awards to claimants
for years 2001-2005 as follows: 10,199, 80,526, 129,988, 159,198 and
178,356. Benefits costs (in $ million) for years 2001-2005 are as
follows: $16.6, $303, $720.1, $1,010.7, and $1,205.3, for a total cost
of $3.3 billion over five years. This cost estimate also provides for a
nominal number of DIC payments and burial awards. Anticipated cost-of-
living allowances (COLA's), per current economic assumptions, were
factored into this estimate; however, no retroactive payments were
considered.

Administrative Costs.

The administrative workload caused by this proposed rule is
expected to be 13,361 claims filed in 2001 and more than 220,000 over
five years. Full time employee resources devoted to processing claims
in years one through five would be 128, 378, 311, 185, and 123,
respectively. Administrative workloads assume that not all claims would
be granted; it is probable that diabetes related claims will be
received from veterans who never served in the Republic of Vietnam. GOE
costs (in $ million) for years 2001-2005 are as follows: $6.4, $18.6,
$16.5, $11.9, and $8.2, for a total GOE cost of $62 million over five
years.
The Secretary hereby certifies that this regulatory amendment will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 601-612. The reason for this certification is that these
amendments would not directly affect any small entities. Only VA
beneficiaries could be directly affected. Therefore, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 605(b), these amendments are exempt from the initial and final
regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance program numbers are
64.100, 64.101, 64.104, 64.105, 64.106, 64.109, and 64.110.

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3

Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Health care, Pensions, Veterans, Vietnam.

Approved: December 6, 2000.
Hershel W. Gober,
Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 38 CFR part 3 is
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 3--ADJUDICATION

Subpart A--Pension, Compensation, and Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation

1. The authority citation for part 3, subpart A continues to read
as follows:

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless otherwise noted.
2. In Sec. 3.309, paragraph (e), the listing of diseases is amended
by adding ``Type 2 diabetes (also known as Type II diabetes mellitus or
adult-onset diabetes)'' between ``Chloracne or other acneform disease
consistent with chloracne'' and ``Hodgkin's disease'' to read as
follows:

[{Page 2380} ]

Sec. 3.309 Diseases subject to presumptive service connection.

* * * * *
(e) * * *
Type 2 diabetes (also known as Type II diabetes mellitus or adult-
onset diabetes)
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-685 Filed 1-8-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P



Edited by: Indybear57 at: 5/8/01 3:59:16 pm

homer4
Moderator
Posts: 504
(5/8/01 1:40:21 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Larry.I don't know why it wouldn't come thru my email,but the posting of it here really helps bud.

I had assumed all along that the other Corps were the areas that received the mass defoilation to help expose troop movements thru such mountainous terrain and would spare the Delta due to it's vital rice,rubber and banana crop that was so important to their economy.

So I've never felt the need for testing.
...and two hard boiled eggs.

TShooters
Member
Posts: 119
(5/8/01 1:53:35 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"This map is a representation of herbicide spray
missions in Vietnam. The dark areas represent
concentrated spraying areas. This map only
represents fixed-wing aricraft spraying, and does
not include helicopter spraying of perimeters, or
other spray methods.

The III Corps area received the heaviest
concentations of spraying, followed by I Corps, II
Corps and IV Corps."


www.lewispublishing.com/map1.htm

homer4
Moderator
Posts: 509
(5/8/01 2:37:17 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Hope...what a relief that is.Nothing dark in my AO.WHEW!
...and two hard boiled eggs.

hope6970
Moderator
Posts: 206
(5/8/01 3:31:10 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sharon,

Thanks for the info. Looks like we got the real dose of the stuff. Probably because of all the headquarters that were located in that area. No wonder no one smelled very good all the time. and here I thought it was because they didn't take showers...lol - Hope

Copr6
Senior Chief Moderator III
Posts: 130
(5/8/01 4:40:12 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer...LISTEN UP!!!!

It don't matter whether you AO is in black or not. When there is ANY spraying winds can carry residue of that crap for miles. If you have Type II diabetes...GO TO THE VA!!!!!
File a claim!

TShooters
Member
Posts: 121
(5/8/01 7:53:59 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've suspected for some time that exposure to AO was why hubby and I could never have kids of our own. (Our kids are adopted, and his base was right on that line in II Corps.) His best AF buddy was at Nha Trang, and they both worked on the same aircraft. His buddy was from a large Catholic family, and my sisters and brother had lots of kids. (5-6-5). Yet, both his buddy and his wife, and hubby and I have kids through adoption.

Sharon


gene29223
Moderator
Posts: 97
(5/9/01 11:44:09 am)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer,
Listen to what has been said. Won't cost you anything but a little time. Where did you get your fruits and veggis from back then? We used local farmers sometimes. Don't know how long it would take the soil to allow plants to grow or how much dioxin was in the plants when they did grow.

Sharon, you have a very valid point and concern. That is almost beyond coincidence. Almost like the community of returning Reserve Gulf War Vets with a ten fold or higher ratio of birth defects showing up in their children.

Take care, Gene


Edited by: gene29223 at: 5/9/01 12:45:22 pm

homer4
Moderator
Posts: 544
(5/10/01 5:41:50 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK and Thanks.
...and two hard boiled eggs.

gene29223
Moderator
Posts: 101
(5/11/01 7:45:32 am)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I pulled this off of another academic ( espsun.space.swri.edu/vn101.index.html )) site. Enough to scare the crap out of you. Sharon you might find it interesting also. Re: effects of Agent Orange by
Dan Phariss


On Wed May 9, Cassie wrote
--------------------------
>I live in Australia and studing at present. I am trying to gain enough
information of the Vietnam War for a presentation I have to do. My question, I
am trying to find out the effects of Agent Orange on both the troops as well as
their children and childrens, children. Also my uncle served in Vietnam for
Australia and I just wanted to gain your thoughts on the Australian involvement?
Many people would agree that seeing that the Australian force was so small in
comparison to the American one it really was'nt necessary for us to be
there.Also if you are able to shed some light on the emotional effects, the
things troops did and saw. My uncle won't talk about it at all.I have found this
with alot of vet's. I commend you for being so open. I look forward to hearing
from you.
>Cassie
Go to this site for current info on long term effects in Viet Nam.
www.hatfieldgroup.com/featured/featured.htm
The following is a small part of The Pesticide Dilemma by Allan A Boraiko in the
Feb. 1980 National Geographic Magazine
......Some scientists perceive a patternin the kinds of birth defects among the
children of Vietnamese farmers, American veterans, and families near Seveso,
Italy, where in 1976 an exploding chemical plant broadcast TCDD by the pound.
They interpretlimited American and Italian studies and anecdotal reports from
Vietnam as evidence that malformed fingers and toes are unusually common among
these children, a conclusion not shared by most other experts. The Air Force
plans to investigate the health of airmen who flew spray missions in Vietnam;
other researchers are studying men who worked in now defunct 2,4,5-T plants in
West Virginia and Arkansas.
Dr. Lewis Shadoff doubts they will find much. He is senior research specialist
at Dow's analytical laboratory and showed me TCDD synthesized for research.
Wearing disposable plastic gloves, Dr. Shadoff gingerly held up a vial
containing one one-thousandth of an ounce of crystallineTCDD (page 180). It
looked like baking soda. It could probably kill 500 people.
"I may be one of only 15 people in the world," Dr. Shadoff said, "who have
handled pure TCDD. It makes me nervous every time. " After he had put away the
vial, he peeled off his gloves, packed them in a carton, and sent it by courier
to an incinerator to be burned at 1000°C.
Dr. Wilbur McNulty of the Oregon Regional Primate Research Center in Beaverton
also respects TCDD. He knows what tiny doses can do to rhesus monkeys.
The effects are striking. Production of sperm cells, red and white blood cells,
and thymocytes—cells that combat infection— stops. Pregnant monkeys abort;
important, Dr. McNulty says, because monkeys and humans share the same ovulation
cycle and hormonal phases. And at first their embryos develop at about the same
rate. From his monkey studies, Dr. McNulty concludes that a teaspoon—or even
less—of 2,4,5-Tmay be hazardous to women during some critical period in early
pregnancy.
Dr. Matthew Meselson and colleagues at the Harvard Biological Laboratories are
biochemists who have found TCDI) in beef fat and Vietnamese fish. Mother's milk
is also suspect. He believes TCDD may concentrate to dangerous levels in the
body.
"Dow's Dr. Shadoff says it's excreted," Dr. Meselson told me. "But more
important, is the damage it does cumulative? Can it be repaired? X rays pass
through a person with the speed of light, but it's ridiculous to say that
therefore there are no aftereffects. Each exposure works injury, and if TCDD
acts similarly, it's cumulative. Genes don't forget, though the chemical maybe
gone.....
A side bar reads:
TCDD: the perilous by-product
DEADLIEST of all man-made poisons, according to most scientists, TCDD—shorthand
for 2,3, 7,8-tetrachlorodibenzoparadioxin, freguently called simply dioxin—is
the inevitable byproduct of the manufacture of the herbicides 2,4,5-T and
silvex. TCDD crystals, synthesized by Dow Chemical U.S A., fleck a vial cradled
in protective gloves (le}`t). These 25 milligrams equal the
amountinatonof2,4,5-T. Someof the crystals, here magnified 45 times (lower
right), were given to the government for toxicological study. At Dow's Midland,
Michigan, plant, 2,4,5-T samples drawn to assay TCDD levels (right) register
between .02 and .03 parts per million—well below EPA's recommended limit of a
tenth of a part permillion.
Is the TCDD in 2,4,5-T a true menace to human health? "There's good scientific
basis for that concern; it's not something you can shrug off," says biochemist
Dr. Matthew Meselson, who has detected traces in beeffat. As little as five
parts per trillion (ppt) of TCDD in the dietcaused tumors in rats. Five hundred
ppt caused female monkeys to abortand die.
Though no one denies its toxicity to laboratory animals, TCDD's effect on human
beings is hotly debated. Avows James H. Hanes, a vice president of Dow USA.,
"There is not a single Dow scientist I know of who doesn't think that 2,4,5-T is
one of the safest products we make."




Sorry the photos are not included.


Agent Orange was a mix of 2,4,D and 2,4,5,T.
If 2,4,5,T is among their satest products it makes me wonder about the others.
The Dow scientist and the VP are just parroting the company line.
Mr Shadoff's treatment of his gloves after handling a sealed glass vial of
dioxin tells it all. Dioxin is the deadliest small molecule poison known.
Dan


Know it is kind of long but it does say it all.

You all take care, Gene



Edited by: Misterstan at: 5/11/01 10:27:27 am

Copr6
Senior Chief Moderator III
Posts: 149
(5/11/01 5:19:50 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a 21 yr old daughter who has a little finger that is not right. This is short of saying that it is deformed. Her Mother and I have always thought that maybe it was broken when she was a baby and we didn't know it. After reading Gene's post about birth defects caused by AO...I think I will talk to my ex-wife and daughter and see if maybe a x-ray is in order. She also has a very, very small skin tag on her ear. I am worried now.

TShooters
Member
Posts: 132
(5/12/01 6:08:04 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks, Gene. Appreciate the info!

Sharon

Rons Toys
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 40
(5/16/01 2:56:48 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Full story here:
www.foxnews.com./story/0,...68,00.html


EPA Agrees Dioxin Poses Cancer Risk

Wednesday, May 16, 2001


WASHINGTON - A
long-stalled government study that says dioxin
causes cancer in laboratory animals and
possibly in people finally will be sent to federal
regulators - and put another far-reaching
environmental issue in the Bush
administration's lap.

The study's conclusion that chlorinated dioxin is an
air pollutant that should be more tightly controlled
could affect everything from milk, beef and fish to
medical products and the chemical and paper
industries.

Dioxin also is a generic term for a group of
compounds, some of which are more toxic than
others.

The contaminant used in Agent Orange, a defoliant
sprayed during the Vietnam War, includes the most
toxic form of dioxin. Agent Orange exposure has
been associated with cancer, birth defects and
miscarriages, though a direct link to those health
problems remain unproven.

But a new study released Tuesday by American
researchers shows a high level of dioxin among
residents of a South Vietnamese city and suggests
that once it enters the environment, dioxin remains
a persistent source of contamination for
generations to come.

hope6970
Moderator
Posts: 253
(5/16/01 5:14:46 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the government wants to know about cancer, birth defects, miscarriages then why don't they get off their round browns and start asking more questions of the women that were stationed in that country?

Everyone has set around wondering just what in hell is happening to all the females that were there, but keeping it all on the quiet side.

We did not even get interviewed for all that crap untill just a few years ago and yet while they are asking us all those questions, they say it is too late for us, perhaps it will help others in future wars.

Yes, you men have problems, you are the ones that they are concentrating on and as you know, at least I hope you do, our anatomy is quite different.

I was contacted by the government, they wanted to know all about me from the day I was incountry up until they were contacting me. What am I suspose to say when I am told it is too late for us, perhaps it will help the future military?

Over half of the female vets that I was friends with there are (Deceased) from some form of cancer. Most of the offspring from these females have some sort of health problems that have not ever been in their families before. Quiet a few women are living with the cancer today and more keeps croping up.

Now they are just putting out that long stalled conclusion regarding dioxins. Wow, I guess we all better be on the look out for some sort of little rash or something to break out that they can give us some sort of salve to cure it, huh? I am afraid if I asked for the salve they would say it was my imagination that I didn't really have the rash.

Excuse me, whenever I see a report of this kind hit the news I get a bit agitated.

Hope

Copr6
Senior Chief Moderator III
Posts: 177
(5/16/01 5:41:20 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And rightfully so Hope!! Sounds like a well-organized group of female vets, with backing from Vet Organizations could bring this to the attention of the House and Senate.

Mesen
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 143
(5/17/01 7:19:42 am)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't blame you Hope for being agitated. Hell, I'd be pissed! I had heard some vets talking about being retested or having been notified of such, but I hadn't gotten too much info. (These were guys I just overheard so they were pretty guarded.)
My dad was a courier so he was EVERYWHERE and has a number of strange things going wrong with him now. When they return home I will make sure I enlighten him on the info here. Might be the "root of all evil" so to speak.
Bree
Find what you're good at and stick with it!

hope6970
Moderator
Posts: 259
(5/17/01 11:00:21 am)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copr6 and Bree,

All this has been round the block many times, believe me it has been given a good fight. However, as with anyone that was there, we were the ones that were susposed to have been out of our minds half the time from all the drugs that we had available to us, the men went out and hid in the bushes all stoned, the women were nothing but YOU KNOW WHATS and we are now making things up to cover our rears for loosing the war. We were lazy!

Now if anybody has not ever heard anything like this at anytime since you have been back, you are one of a few, would like very much to hear about your rosy return.

Hope

Copr6
Senior Chief Moderator III
Posts: 183
(5/17/01 5:33:34 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hope...nobody ever said anything to my face. But, I don't recall anything being rosy either. When I first got home I wanted to talk about where I had been, but it seemed like nobody give a **** so I just quit telling.

Mesen
V.I.P. Member
Posts: 144
(5/17/01 10:52:31 pm)
| Del Re: More Agent Orange Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When my stepdad's friend returned he used to talk quite a bit, but then he started drinking heavily and stopped. I asked questions and got blown off. That was no concern of women.
Main reason I hit this MB is to find out what happened and to understand what my family went through. I had posted before I was a protester but only for all the soldiers to come home safe. No political bullsh*t. Just a terrified little girl afraid for the people there. Little did I know some 30 years later Vietnam is still claiming victims and has been since the war ended.
I was SO glad when you all came home. If I haven't said it recently: WELCOME HOME!
AND more importantly: THANK YOU.