It is hard to be strongly possessed of an opinion contrary to that of these gentlemen, and I'm certain they appreciate the fervor which which we must pursue details about the dioxin contamination of our C-123 aircraft and our potential exposure. Both the VA and AF have taken years of test data, nearly all of which labeled our aircraft "heavily contaminated" and "a danger to public health," yet concluded crews somehow avoided harmful exposure.
We can be (and are) respectful of USAFSAM and its leaders. Yet we must advocate for an interpretation of FACTS which leads to VA allowing service connection for our veterans who be believe have been exposed to harmful TCDD via inhalation, dermal and ingestion methods of exposure.
It is impossible to conclude that we are not due at least the benefit of the doubt on this issue.
-It is impossible to understand why no accounting was given of the 2000 GSA testimony of Dr. Ron Porter, the Air Force toxicologist who determined our airplanes to be "a danger to public health."
-It is impossible to understand why the AF spent $57,000 to decontaminate Patches in 1997, only to reinterpret data to find it wasn't contaminated after all
-It is impossible to understand why the AF at Davis-Monthan spent $120,000 to "quarantine" the contaminated C-123 fleet if it wasn't contaminated after all
-It is impossible to understand why the AF canceled formal sales contracts for C-123s, opting to instead destroy them all, if they weren't contaminated after all
-It is imposible to understand why the AF report ignored input from Army TG312, the ATSDR, Columbia University, Boston University, Oregon Health Sciences University and others - all of which argued our aircrews were exposed