Thanks to the watchful eyes at the Institute of Medicine, we have both the opportunity and responsibility to correct a mistaken impression: The IOM C-123 study will be included with other issues in the cost we reported earlier: The C-123 study only costs a portion of what we first claimed.
Repeat: the actual IOM contract is for $1.7 million, and the C-123 study was tagged onto an existing contract and doesn't cost the public the higher figure we stated in earlier posts.
As for the utility of the study. The issue moves towards resolution and that's obviously a good thing from our perspective, as we insist we have science, medicine and law behind our claims.
Because the question of our exposure claims is, after all, resolved per the law, in this case our concerns were expressed because the months consumed by the study means ill veterans will continue to be barred from VA medical care when there is no legal excuse for that VA restriction.
Further, the question boils down to one of the law, which clearly states exposure needs to be proven by non-Vietnam veterans, not medical nexus, for inclusion in the presumptive category.
Thanks to M.P. for the opportunity to correct our statement. We try to find facts, draw conclusions, report data as given us...and not make errors such as this which affect readers' impression of our reliability.
We are passionate, but we are also truthful.