Fund Raising for C-123 Veterans' Exposure Efforts

John Riley, Joe Curley and  Andy Lown and are the pointy ends of a fantastically disorganized effort to better fund our C-123 advocacy efforts. My thanks. And my wife's thanks. And my thanks for getting my wife off my back!

Our objective is to spread the $$ pain a bit beyond our house in Fort Collins and share the joy with

others. The funds will be accounted for in a memo to those three august gentlemen, but what is not raised I'll continue to cover myself. It will feel nice to have your help.

What does the money cover? Travel is the single largest bill. One foundation paid for one trip to DC, and the Vietnam Veterans of America paid for another special, last-minute trip which was important, and the rest I covered with the generous help of John, Harris, Arch, Legere, Clancy, Butler and other gentlemen...and a sweet lady from the Rickenbacker outfit. This year will have at least four trips: the Society of Toxicology in Phoenix last week, and three to Washington DC.

The DC trips are a big deal for us. Two will be to meet with the Agent Orange Committee of the Institute of Medicine. Although promised us two years ago at another meeting, this IOM project is underway with formal invitations out to the committee, and their work will be finished by the end of September. I meet with them early on in their deliberations, and again at the very end. The third known meeting is one organized by several senators' staffers who want the VA Compensation and Pension in the same room as the scientists who have been telling them we're exposed and should be treated.

And asking VA serious scientific and legal questions they've been dodging for three years!

Our immediate objective is to at least gain VA concession to approve valid claims between now and the release of the IOM report and the Secretary's reaction, probably around November. Too many of our men and women are in need of VA care now, need their VA disability compensation now, and eight more months waiting is eight more months in greater misery than can be permitted. C&P has to be stopped in their tracks for sending out boilerplate denials, dooming perfectly valid claims.

We also spend bucks on postage, printing, lots of ink and paper, small office equipment like label makers and paper binders...if something logical comes up I spend and if there are no group funds, I'm okay covering the gap. Fact of the matter is: I had my family's partnership in time, attention and money but they signed on for a year or two, but it is now a couple months into the fourth year. I want this wrapped up, you want it wrapped up, and the VA wants us to go away.

With a few bucks in the till, the C-123 veterans won't go quietly into the sunset!

BTW...we need a new chair for The C-123 Veterans Association. Maybe somebody from the flight deck or CAM, and maybe an NCO this time!! The officers aren't used to hard work and we really need a strong back and great mind leading us for a change!

El Jefe's Chores include:
1. creativity...how to move Congress and the VA by pretending to be the mouse that roared, even with fifty cents left in our pockets. For instance, gaining pro bono legal representation for last week's FOIA lawsuits against VA & USAF, and continuing my own claim as our poster child, hoping to get more than just Paul Bailey's to cite as awards short of BVA action. Getting a claim worked before the Court of Claims for Veterans Appeals will be foundational and that help has been offered us by a wonderful group of attorneys!
2. budget...pretending there is some money to do something useful
3. writing...maintain a blog and web presence, plus print items as needed such as speeches, white papers. Keep updating our C-123 iPad book
4. alliance building...we have the VVA, VFW and American Legion behind us, with less formal support from The Reserve Officer Association. Those folks have lobbyists, tacticians, attorneys, experience, we need to tap
5. support gathering...throw a net to get federal and state agencies to issue findings and opinions supporting us, as well as experts from universities; work with researchers
8. work with Senate and House staffs as they pressure VA and USAF for us. Big point...we need more veterans to urge more action from their senators as presently only six gentlemen are carrying our battle in the US Senate and they've asked why others aren't helping, especially from NH, CT and MA where most of our vets retired.

We need somebody besides an AME rep to lead us. Think about it...can you trust this project to an MSC officer, somebody who sleeps the entire mission?  Horrors!

Don't you want to lead our motley crew to victory in this exciting guerilla advocacy program? Someday, this will make very exciting reading in the Washington Post, right Josh?

Man up, somebody, and volunteer to take the helm.

Dr Linda Birnbaum Interview: What is Dioxin? (video)

Dr. Linda Birnbaum, now Director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, recorded a video addressing dioxin (TCDD) topics in 2004. While the research has continued for these past ten years, her report remains correct in every respect. Watch by clicking HERE.

Although Dr. Birnbaum explains why the National Institutes of Health and the CDC and the EPA consider dioxin a human carcinogen, over at VA's Compensation and Pension Service C-123 veterans must draw comfort from the Director Compensation and Pension's personal assurances that "in summary, there are no long term adverse health effects from TCDD." That's how he denies all C-123 exposure claims.

No evidence to the contrary from anybody, anywhere will ever change his mind, he told us...no matter what university, world-renowned scientist, federal agency, VA physician...never!

We sure need C&P to update less knowledgeable folks in science and medicine about his startling discoveries.

Agent Orange & C-123: The VA Ignores its Own Documentary Evidence

"JOB ONE: Prevent Claims" should read the bronze plaque at 810 Vermont, the VA's headquarters, rather than Lincoln's famous, more compassionate words from his poetic Second Inaugural.

Chart VHA used to sneak in redefinition of "exposure"

VA's dedication to preventing C-123 Agent Orange claims is one of their particular objectives. Actually, as veterans know too well, the VA its its own worst speed bump in the road to service connection! To better insure denial of these dioxin-exposed veterans who are clearly entitled to care, personnel from VA's Veterans Health Administration's Post-Deployment Health section delivered a poster display at t
he San Francisco gathering of the Society of Toxicology (SOT). Entitled "Agent Orange: The 50 Year History & The Newest Chapter of Concerns," the poster was not subjected to the usual scientific scrutany expected of professional articles. VA simply had their poster designed and put it on a stand.

And then they used it to make sure C-123 veterans are denied Agent Orange exposure claims! 

Our two most recent posts addressed the VA's creation of a special, in-house definition of the scientific concept of "exposure," one created by VA to skirt the law's requirements. VA simply added qualifiers to that word to prevent C-123 veterans from being considered as exposed, even though other federal agencies such as the CDC and NIH have argued otherwise...C-123 veterans were indeed exposed...except in the VA's definition.

But there's more. VA realized that the C-123s were used for spraying Agent Orange during the Vietnam War between 1961-1971 and began service with stateside Air Force units in 1972. The aircraft returned to the US and most had the spray tanks and pipes removed by a contractor at Dothan, Alabama to return to their original C-123K configuration. Many, however, remained in their UC-123K configuration and were assigned to insect control operations at Rickenbacker Field.

VA also realized that dioxin remains toxic and biologically available for quite some time once sprayed in the military herbicide, and VA knew the liquid settled throughout the fuselage and especially, below the cargo deck. Air Force tests even decades later confirmed the toxicity and in 2010 the AF took an extraordinary step of shredding and smelting all remaining C-123 warplanes as toxic waste.

VA acknowledged this lingering contamination, at least recognizing a year's worth of it, in their SOT poster. The fourth paragraph clearly states"

"Inhalation – the least likely contributing route one year after spraying missions due to rapid drying of Agent Orange droplets, movement via wind, and removal of contaminated dust via decontamination efforts after returning from Vietnam."

Spray operations stopped in 1971. Stateside, C-123 veterans began flying the airplanes in 1972. Seems within that "one year after spraying missions" and includes our service, doesn't it?

Toxicology experts familiar with the Air Force research on C-123 operations have examined the issue of C-123 dioxin contamination and exposure via the inhalation route, and argue that it was absolutely a significant risk for aircrews! Vibration and the dirt and dust characteristic of cargo flight operations resulted in crew exposure because dioxin readily binds to dust. 

Flight after flight, breath after breath, aircrews continued to be exposed. Not just the year even VA recognizes, but over the full decade of operations until the C-123 fleet was finally all retired in 1982. IT only remained for the crews to grow ill, and for the VA to formulate policy-driven excuses to deny them care for the full range of Agent Orange-presumptive illnesses.

And that's why a new plaque should be ordered for 810 Vermont Street NW, Washington, D.C.

Dermal Route of Dioxin Exposure Confirmed

To better prevent qualified C-123 veterans' Agent Orange exposure claims, the VA's Public Health unit suggests that the skin of aviators is a near-perfect barrier to dioxin exposure. Thus, because the VA (but not science) suggests skin keeps dioxin from exposing us, we veterans were not exposed.

This is a concept new to science, and one valid only in the instance of the VA denying service our connection. Elsewhere in toxicology, dioxin exposure occurs via inhalation, ingestion...and dermal routes! Elsewhere in science, medicine, law and logic, and in the opinions of other federal agencies such as the NIH, CDC, EPA and DOD, C-123 veterans were exposed. But not according to the VA, because their mission is to prevent, not approve, Agent Orange exposure claims.

This article from the scientific publication "Organohalogen Compounds" was found in my own "C' file at the VA Regional Office, with a notation made "spraying in Vietnam resulted in absorbed TCDD on dust" which suggests somebody in the VA decided crews were exposed via inhalation, as well as dermal, routes.

The key part of the article is a simple sentence.."The available literature suggests that dermal uptake of dioxin in the workplace may be the primary source of occupational exposure."

The sentence directly refutes the VA's pretense that we were not exposed via skin contact with dioxin contaminated surfaces. But then, science is not a part of the VA's toolkit for preventing VA claims, is it?

We're Going to aToxicology Conference!

We're taking our case to the experts! The Society of Toxicology meets in 2012 and we'll be there, or at another professional gathering if better suited to our needs. This week arrangements were investigated for a tabletop display of our C-123 Agent Orange contamination, focusing on the VA explanation that aircrews serving aboard the Provider weren't exposed to dioxin. Basic "flavor" is how could the VA twist contamination studies to conclude against the interest of its veterans and the ethical implications. That last part is under discussion as it might not be territory which the Society wants to address...their call, not ours.

The Society also publishes a journal and we're waiting to see if our one page add will be accepted...it has to meet their editorial approval. As for a professional juried article...that's in the works also with interest expressed by different researchers and their institutions.

Wow...a terrific storm of support for the FACT that C-123 aircrews were MOST LIKELY (we don't say absolutely but use the VA phrase "more likely to than not") exposed to Agent Orange. The planning on the article outline is underway, and we also hope to have a ethical, not just technical perspective.

Ideas, all you budding toxicologists and bioenvironmental scientists?