Oregon Director of Veterans Affairs - Avoids Helping Veterans??

In a letter from the Administrator of Oregon's Department of Veterans Affairs, Director Jim Willis reports that scientific proofs of C-123 Agent Orange exposure somehow have not moved him to add his voice to our support. I guess the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Columbia University, Oregon's own Oregon Health Sciences University and others lack the veracity he seeks to be swayed.

He refers us to others such as the VA itself which obviously cuts us off from his otherwise very effective assistance in bringing the issue before Congress, the Department of Defense, and Secretary Shinseki.

I don't know about other C-123 veterans, but I'm weary of political or administrative wonks sloughing us off to the next useless, bored and disinterested wonk. His not getting involved in our support certainly saves Director Willis (himself a Vietnam veteran) several precious minutes writing a letter or phoning someone on our behalf - I guess those minutes are more important to him than our health and welfare, but as an Oregon veteran I thought it was part of his job! I better read his department's mission statement once more.
   Wes Carter

Mission Statement

Where EVERY DAY Is Veterans Day! The Oregon Department of Veterans’ Affairs (ODVA), with the support of our citizens, recognizes and honors Oregon’s veterans and their families by providing the highest quality programs, service and benefits. "We take great pride in our role as advocates for Oregon’s veterans, their families and survivors. Oregon has a long and well-established history of respect for those who have served our state and nation with courage, dedication and honor." --Director Jim Willis

Official: VA Begins Denying Veterans' C-123 Agent Orange Claims!

June 12 - A C-123K veteran just received the VA's denial of his Agent Orange disability claim! Every ailment specified was denied with the identical wording in lockstep with the VA's Public Health posting:

"--The evidence does not show an event, disease or injury in service
 --We did not find a link between your medical condition and military service
 --The evidence does not show the location(s) of your military service, or the events you experienced therein, qualify for the presumption of service connection for your disease"

The explanation in each ailment denial was also identical, and word-for-word in line with the VA's published C-123 Agent Orange exposure denial as penned by VHA for their SOT poster display:

"We are unable to verify or document that aircrew members were exposed to Agent Orange, resulting from Agent Orange residue or dioxin contaminated aircraft or aircraft parts. Although residual TCDD, the toxic substance in Agent Orange, may be detected in C-123 aircraft by sophisticated laboratory techniques many years after its use, the Office of Public Health concluded that the existing scientific studies and reports support a low probability that TCDD was biologically available in these aircraft. Therefore, the potential for exposure to TCDD from flying or working in contaminated C-123 aircraft years after the Vietnam War is unlikely to have occurred at levels that could affect health."

So much for the VA's promise that "every C-123 veteran's claim will be considered individually." Despite the opinion of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry that exposure was likely, despite supporting opinions of four highly esteemed PhD's, despite support from the American Legion and Vietnam Veterans of America, despite their own common sense. The VA's the Portland Veterans Service Manager, timid K. Kalama, caved to political pressure and weird science to dash our hopes of justice.  The VA's "duty to assist" seems to have been restricted to providing me the address to send the claim to, and the mailing back of their denial after more than a year of "careful" consideration. 

Next step, an appeal and then the Board of Veterans Appeals, and finally federal courts. We will not let this rest!

--
    Wes Carter

American Legion Resolution - Agent Orange Benefits for C-123 Crews!

Our thanks for this support from the Nation's largest veterans organization!

   NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF

                                 THE AMERICAN LEGION
                                INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA
                                      MAY 9 – 10, 2012

Resolution No. 20: Designate United States Air Force C-123 K Transport Aircraft as Agent Orange Exposure Sites


Origin: Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission Submitted by: Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Commission


WHEREAS, The American Legion has long been at the forefront of advocacy for veterans exposed to the military herbicides used in Vietnam, as well as those veterans with exposures in locations outside Vietnam itself during and after the Vietnam era; and
WHEREAS, The United States Air Force (USAF) used its fleets of C-123K transport aircraft in more than 9,100 missions, for aerial application of nearly twenty million gallons of toxic herbicides between 1961 and 1971 in Vietnam; and
WHEREAS, The aircraft were returned to the United States for continued use in airlift missions by USAF squadrons at Westover Air Force Base (AFB), Massachusetts, Pittsburgh Air Reserve Station, Pennsylvania and Rickenbacker Air Reserve Base, Ohio between 1972-1982 and were then retired from service and placed in storage; and
WHEREAS, The United States Air Force (USAF) in 1979, in response to the presence of noxious fumes, conducted scientific tests on unit aircraft and identified and determined that significant levels of military herbicides and insecticides used in Vietnam still contaminated the aircraft; and
WHEREAS, Additional tests carried out again in 1994 by USAF Armstrong Laboratories still showed the presence of herbicides, and in particular, the presence of highly toxic Agent Orange contaminant dioxin; and
WHEREAS, The contamination was consideration sufficient by the USAF to require the use of HAZMAT protective equipment when carrying out tests or otherwise entering the aircraft; and WHEREAS, As late as 2009, further USAF tests conducted at Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona
demonstrated continued contamination of aircraft; and
WHEREAS, USAF toxicology staff has testified in federal proceedings that toxic levels of
contamination due to the herbicides were a danger to public health; and
WHEREAS, The levels observed in the aircraft greatly exceed the Department of Defense’s
(DoD) own standards for maximum permissible exposure to any dioxin contaminating interior surfaces; and
WHEREAS, Other federal agencies have reviewed the data and concurred that exposures to personnel at levels exceeding DoD recommendations are likely to have occurred; and
WHEREAS, In response to the State of Arizona and US Environmental Protection Agency environmental concerns, the USAF withdrew the aircraft from commercial resale, quarantined them and, in April 2010, ultimately took extraordinary disposal measures and smelted the remaining fleet; and

WHEREAS, It is estimated that approximately 1,500 service members, including aircrews and maintenance personnel were exposed to military herbicide-contaminated conditions on the C-123 aircraft; and
WHEREAS, Many of these personnel, still surviving, now have health problems commonly associated with herbicide exposure and have endured lengthy legal struggles to prove these problems are service-related; and
WHEREAS, The Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs has statutory responsibility to accurately designate situations and locations that caused veterans to have been exposed to military herbicides used in Vietnam, as well as their contaminants; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, By the National Executive Committee of The American Legion in regular meeting assembled in Indianapolis, Indiana, on May 9-10, 2012, That The American Legion urges the Department of Veterans Affairs to promptly designate the C-123K aircraft, used after the Vietnam War in the United States during 1972 to 1982, as having been Agent Orange exposure sites to permit veterans who were aircrew or maintenance personnel to be eligible for Agent Orange-related benefits.

VA Reneges on Promised C-123 Agent Orange Study!

Once again breaking faith with veterans, the VA's Public Health organization caved to political pressure and brought dishonor to their organization by canceling arrangements for an Institute of Medicine study of C-123 TCDD contamination. Promised to leaders of the C-123 Veterans Organization at their April meeting hosted by Senator Burr's staff, the study was to assess the contamination of C-123 aircraft and the exposure by aircrew, maintenance and aerial port personnel.

But last week the VA's Senate Liaison Office (Mr. Carter Moore) informed senators that the study is canceled in view of the very mild conclusions reached by the recent USAF School of Aerospace Medicine study. That study claimed that, while many tests established C-123 contamination by Agent Orange, somehow veterans weren't exposed to "enough" TCDD to cause long-term health damage. This is despite tests establishing "heavily contaminated" aircraft which scientists testified were "a danger to public health."

Lucky veterans. Perhaps the VA suggests our famous Nomex green bag flight suit and BDUs, like Superman's costume, stop speeding bullets as well as dioxin contamination.

War Plans from this point:
1. FOIA the VA materials re: earlier meetings
2. FOIA the USAFSAM materials in depth to establish VA-directred false results
3. Peer review of USAFSAM report by outside experts
4. Continued individual submission of Agent Orange exposure claims by all C-123 veterans followed by BVA appeals of denied claims
5. Re-visit American Legion, Vietnam Veterans of America & Disabled American Veterans leaders
6. Editorial coverage (thanks, J. Harris, for MOAA article!)
7. Congressional pressure
8. Essay in Journal of the Society of Toxicology regarding VA's phony poster display in San Francisco, and twisting of the situation to prevent veterans' claims

USAF School of Aerospace Medicine Releases C-123 Agent Orange Letter

The Commander, USAF School of Aerospace Medicine has finally released the long-awaited examination of the C-123 Agent Orange contamination issue and it is totally lackluster! A buck-passer. Actually, a stab in the back of all C-123 veterans! (update: on 18 Jun 2015 VA agreed with the Institute of Medicine that this USAF report was scientifically and mathematically flawed)

The USAFSAM spent several months looking over earlier toxicologist's testing of the C-123 fleet, particularly Patches (Tail #362) which had the most documented contamination by dioxin left over from Operation Ranch Hand in Vietnam. Released by the unit's commander, a physician, no note is made of the individual researchers who worked on the study, unlike most other such reports. 
For our veterans, this is a tremendous disappointment. The errors abound and are certain to be brought up in other forums, particularly the Senate and the VA itself.
Here's our take on the report. First, it is not new science or research, but rather an examination of earlier tests and reports because all the subject aircraft have been destroyed - because they were toxic! The report is written by a physician, not a scientist. If there were professional toxicologists or other scientists, their names were left off the report. Our points are:

1. The report fails to state that the ten years exposure inside the aircraft for the crews would be more harmful than levels of TCDD as detected twelve and 27 years after the airplanes retired - one should assume, though here they did not, that contamination was more intense in the years before authoritative testing was done

2. The report does give some wiggle room, if they'd use it, for the VA and the IOM to provide benefit of the doubt for crews. In the Blue Water Navy situation the VA went with the IOM simply because of the IOM statement that sailor's exposure couldn't be ruled out - here, the contamination is confirmed but a misleading conclusion invented out of the true facts to offer a pretense that exposure, miraculously, wasn't likely to be damaging in the long-term. This will be interesting news to the world's toxicologists!

3. Great weight is given the results of the 2009 tests conducted at Davis-Monthan, yet the author of that report told veterans that no conclusions should be drawn regarding dioxin exposure from his data. Further, even those tests confirm TCDD presence - 27 years after the aircraft were stored in the Arizona desert. Again, one reasonable conclusion would be that those 27 years in storage, preceded by ten years of our flying, allowed TCDD to degrade and allowed the TCDD to be released via wind and rain (which freely enters this old aircraft - famously, the crews wore raincoats flying it especially in the cargo area!) No report specifies the degree of contamination which existed in 1972 when stateside crews started flying these aircraft - no attempt was made to provide a retrospective analysis of the earlier levels of our exposure

4. The 1994 and 1996 Air Force tests, done by the military's own toxicologists, are mentioned but dismissed. Here, an excuse to discard these early results was the cautious statement by the researchers that further testing would be necessary to fully characterize the contamination - logical enough but not an excuse to dismiss the results! These original 1994 researchers did, very clearly, establish to their professional satisfaction the fact that the cabin and flight deck were "heavily contaminated" on 100% of their test surfaces, and this damning characterization was noted in today's release - then dismissed without justification

5. No mention is given of the testimony of Dr. Ron Porter, AF toxicologist from the AF Armstrong Labs who also co-authored the 1994 and 1996 tests, where he swore under oath the C-123 fleet was "a danger to public health" such that they couldn't be used or sold

6. No mention is made of the fact that Patches at the Air Force Museum took three separate decontamination procedures before it was reasonably safe to place inside the facility - but crews flew this specific aircraft for a decade, over twelve years before this testing - and others in the fleet were even more contaminated!

7. No weight is given to the fact that contamination of the C-123 would have to be more intense as post-Vietnam crews began flying them in 1972, and more intense before the veterans' own repeated efforts to decontaminate the airplane - many AF documents detail the early scrapping and washing of Patches and the other aircraft, removing gooey black substances, scrubbing with Dawn detergent as directed by AFMC Warner-Robbins - the airplanes would necessarily then have been more contaminated in 1972 before any testing which was first done in 1979 (and that was not a test for dioxin, only military herbicides which were confirmed to be present)

8. No mention is made of the ATSDR letter nor are the points of Dr. Sink's letter dealt with. He says the AF and VA have both contacted him and wishes the C-123 veterans "good luck", and stands behind his letter

9. And the big point: The report says not enough data could be located to draw a conclusion about aircrew exposure, but still it draws the conclusion that the aircrews were not exposed to enough for long-term health problems. This is a set of statements 180 degrees apart from one another
10. Various laws dealing with exposure to agents used in Vietnam generally group them as "military herbicides" - every single test done on these aged airplanes has confirmed the contamination of them by "military herbicides" - a fact not even touched upon in today's reports

C-123 veterans believe the AF is justifiably concerned about earlier sales of the C-123s to Disney Films and to South Korea and Thailand through the AF Security Assistance Center at Wright-Patterson. A bit embarrassing to tell another government we sold them dioxin-contaminated airplanes. This report has chewed over what old data could be uncovered, dismissed the military's own test conclusions, and constructed a denial of the aircraft even being contaminated!

Why didn't they simply say enough doubt exists to extend the benefit of the doubt, or clearly state there is a possibility, through remote to some degree, of aircrew exposure?

C-123 veterans agree with the report's conclusions that it would be virtually impossible for patients, paratroops, cargo attendants, and other passengers to have had any exposure. Veterans, however, feel strongly that the aircrews, maintainers and aerial port personnel absolutely were exposed.

Colonel Christian Benjamin, USAF MC CFS

Tell us, Colonel Benjamin. If these aircraft were being delivered to AFMC today, would you find them airworthy and safe for flight? Would any of these veterans' illnesses today been less likely to manifest themselves if they hadn't been exposed to such long-term duties aboard this "danger to public health?"

Frankly, this report smells of VA editing all over the place. Unwarranted assumptions are injected to construct an artifice that denies aircrew exposure, and obvious facts are ignored.  Maybe USAFSAM and AFMC leadership should have added their signatures to Colonel Benjamin's. Should USAFSAM welcome VA into to the Wright-Patterson blue-suit "Band of Brothers?"

USAF Report Due out Friday May 4

The long-anticipated report prepared by scientists at the USAF School of Aerospace Medicine should be released Friday. Prepared in response to veteran aircrew concerns, the report is to deal with the exposure by aircrew, aerial port and maintainers to dioxin remaining in the C-123 aircraft we flew between 1972-1982.

The VA's position is that we were likely not exposed to dioxin, or if we were exposed, we were not likely exposed to enough dioxin to cause long-term health concerns. In itself, an amazing statement. The VA agreed during our October 17 teleconference that they'd weigh very carefully the Air Force report. So, should the AF confirm what other researchers and toxicologists already have confirmed, we have a chance at convincing the VA to allow access to essential medical care for our Agent Orange-presumptive illnesses.

Without the report's support, we are again cast adrift, left to our own devices about seeking medical attention. Speaking for our Committee, we'd find any hesitation to support the fact of aircrew dioxin exposure to be absolutely amazing - and clearly, in studied defiance of the facts provided in their 1994, 1996 and 2009 studies of the contaminated fleet.

Any aircraft flown brings risk to the personnel aboard. In this case the risk came to be known only after the fact of our exposure to dioxin, but I'm sure we can count on the support of the flight surgeons involved in the report preparation and editing

After all, flight surgeons are the aircrew's personal physicians, right? Right? Certainly they'll place our needs above any political or financial influence which might be floating around the system! We can expect that they will remember their oaths as officers and physicians and not twist the facts against us, and let the truth come out.

Let's hope that OSD's influence doesn't reach into the bowels of the 711th Human Performance Wing!

VA Charges Outrageous Fees to Block Release of Documents!

Some time ago our association (through LtCol Paul Bailey) filed a very detailed FOIA with the VA, seeking documents relating to the VA's preparation for, participation in, and results following the conference with them, hosted by Senator Burr's staff on March 8 in Washington DC.

In a timely manner, the VA responded, and wow! The VA responded slammed us hard!

First was their refusal to expedite delivery of the documents requested and a refusal to provide them at no charge, the government's usual position in releasing materials to the public. Then, yesterday, we received a bill for $4,800, required for them to proceed with the document search and necessary before any materials can be released to us!

This clearly amounts to construction of a barrier against our access to public documents...documents vital to establishing our claim to service-connection for our Agent Orange-preseumptive illnesses.

Our next step will be an appeal of their decisions, and we hope to be joined in this with several researchers, journalists and other veterans' organizations.

Stay tuned...we're not giving up!

Victory for US-based Agent Orange Veterans

The US Board of Veterans Appeals in 2011 remanded a veteran's claim which had been denied by the VA, ordering the VA to reexamine immediately, very likely to finally be in favor of the veteran given the language used by the BVA. The vet was a photographer stationed at Ft McClellan, and claimed to have been in areas where Agent Orange was used. VA denied his Agent Orange-presumtive illnesses claim with their usual position that this vet hadn't been in Vietnam and couldn't prove either proximity to military herbicides or exposure to them. Supporting his claim were statements from his supervisor that they'd both been in areas of Agent Orange spraying, such as the golf course, even though the Department of Defense denied such herbicides were used. Further, several details letters from his doctors confirmed the likely association of the illnesses with exposure to Agent Orange, and these were not rebutted by the VA.

VA inquired of DOD about stateside use of herbicides. In their denial of Agent Orange use at Ft. McClellan, DOD stated it MAY have been possible some small areas MAY have been treated with Agent Orange. That wiggle-room was enough to convince the Board of Veterans Appeals that the VA must resolve any question about exposure in favor of the veteran, and the fellow's claim was sent back with specific instructions for expedited investigation.

This is great news. It breaks through the VA's barrier of flat prohibition against successful AO claims outside Vietnam. For C-123 vets, it means even more careful attention must be given our claims by local rating officers.

One solid suggestion from this particular case is that our claims need to be supported with physician statements that our Agent Orange-presumptive illness are indeed, "more likely than not" associated with exposure to Agent Orange. Without such a statement, the doctor's letter merely has weight as to whether or not you have a particular malady.

Click HERE to download a copy of this landmark decision.

Where is the Promised USAF C-123 Report?

The USAF School of Aerospace Medicine at Wright-Patterson AFB began their examination of the C-123 Agent Orange contamination and aircrew exposure in November. We were told of an expected release in April, yet here we are, nearly at the end of the month, with no report on the horizon.

What's happening? What role, if any, is the VA playing in the Air Force report? So far as I know, none of the aircrew, maintenance or aerial port personnel have been contacted about their expert input - why not?

In the October teleconference with VA officials, we were told that if the AF reported the C-123s to have exposed the aircrews to TCDD, the VA would accept that decision. Is the VA now working to make sure the AF releases an "approved" finding?

Famed Doolittle Raiders Honored at Wright-Patterson AFB

by Gabriel Myers 88th Air Base Wing Public Affairs

4/20/2010 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio -- Four of the remaining eight famed Doolittle Raiders, known for their nearly impossible bombing raid on Japan, reunited for the 68th year at the National Museum of the United States Air Force, April 16-18.

Retired Lt. Col. Richard E. Cole, 94 of Comfort, Texas; Major Thomas C. Griffin, 92 of Cincinnati, Ohio; Lt. Col. Robert L. Hite, 90, Nashville, Tenn., and Master Sgt. David J. Thatcher, 88, Missoula, Mont., came together again to share memories, sign autographs and be recognized once again as an iconic piece of American history that helped propel the allies to victory in WWII.

On April 18, 1942 Colonel Jimmy Doolittle led a group of 80 men to fly B-25 Bombers from the deck of an aircraft carrier more than 600 miles to drop bombs on Japan. At the time getting a bomber airborne from an aircraft carrier's deck had barely been tested.

Wings Over Ohio!

The bold and rebellious nature of the mission personified the nation's will to fight and lifted the American spirit.

The reunion kicked off Friday afternoon with the men at the museum signing autographs on books, airplanes, photos and even clothing with hundreds waiting their turn to meet the famed aviators in the modern airpower gallery. Those who attended were eager to hear their story and talk about the importance or their mission in shaping the outcome of WWII.

"Well I'm an aviation historian and it's also an opportunity to meet the great heroes of American history," said Bob Jaques who drove to the event from Alabama.

Air Force Secretary Michael B. Donley, who attended a dinner in their honor Friday night, said the men continue to be an inspiration to Airmen today.

"The Doolittle Raiders have a very special place in the history of the Air Force," Secretary Donley said prior to the dinner, "They've provided such great examples to us of leadership, of audacity, of innovation and personal courage, in some of the darkest days of WWII." The men were honored on Saturday by a fly-in of 17 replica B-25 Mitchell bombers privately owned from all over the country onto the museum runway to help celebrate the occasion. Officials say it was one of the largest gatherings of B-25's since WWII.

Also on Saturday the Raiders participated in a ceremony to toast and honor their fellow colleagues who have died. Following the toast the last survivors overturned the goblets of those who have died since the last reunion.

Throughout the weekend the men signed hundreds of autographs and spoke with well wishers who were eager to see, honor and be a part of American History.

The event concluded with the B-25's taking off on a beautiful day from the Museum runways with thousands of patrons lining the streets and fence lines to attempt to get a glimpse of the aircraft and ensuing fly over by all 17 aircraft for a memorial service in the early afternoon.

The word "hero" is over-used in this country and broadly applied to sports figures, rock stars and others, museum director Retired Major General Charles Metcalf told the crown at the Memorial Service.
"Today, in the truest sense of the word, we are among heroes," said Metcalf.


Note: Recommended Warrior Reading:

I Could Never Be So Lucky Again, General Jimmy Doolittle, USAFR

(Highest ranking Reserve office since General of the Armies George Washington)

 

Military Language Conversion Chart

This is one of the things in life I've found to be true. Also true, however much Marines get teased (and they love it), if I were ever hiding in a trash bin down a dark alley in some foreign city that just started going violent with crazy gangs roving looking for Americans to torture, the sound of boots running to get me down that alley had better be United States Marine Corps boots! And they probably would be.

Having been through four separate enlisted and officer variations of US military basic training, I will put this list down to lessons learned at my drill sergeant's gentle urging, but I add a new one:

"Fix bayonets! Charge!" Army     "Who, me? Is there an app for that?" - Air Force

US MILITARY LANGUAGE CONVERSION CHART NAVY / USMC /USCG ARMY AIR FORCE Head Latrine Powder Room Rack Bunk Single with ruffle and duvet Mess Deck / Chow Hall Mess Hall / Mess Tent Dining Facility or  if nearby, The Outback 'Cookie', stew burner Mess Cook Sous Chef or Barista Coffee / Mud Cup of Joe Vanilla Skim Latte Bug Juice Kool-Aid Shirley Temple Utilities / Digitals BDUs / ACUs Casual Wear Seaman / Private Private Bobby / Jimmy Chief / Gunny Sergeant Bob / Jim Captain / Skipper Colonel Robert / James Captain's Mast Article 15 Time Out Berthing / Barracks Barracks Apartment Skivvies / U-Trau Underwear Undies Thrown in the Brig Put in Confinement Grounded Zoom Bag Flight Suit Business Casual Cover / Head Gear Beret Optional Ship's Store / NEX PX  (PX Trailer) AAFES  Shopping Mall TAD TDY PCS with family Cruise / Afloat Deploy Huh? Ground Grabbers Athletic Shoes Flip-Flops Die for your Country Die for your Battle Buddy Die for Air Conditioning Shipmate / Marine Battle Buddy Cubical Associate Terminate /  Kill Take Out Back on Base for Happy Hour Boon Dockers Jump Boots Birkenstocks Low Quarters Low Quarters Patent Leather Pumps SEAL SF/Ranger Librarian Shore Patrol / MPs MPs Hall Monitors Oouh-Rah! Hoo-ah! Hip-Hip hurray! MRE MRE Happy Meal To Go Salute Salute Wave Obstacle Course Confidence Course BX Parking Lot Grinder / Drill Field Parade Field What? Ge-Dunk Snack Bar Chuck E. Cheese PT Test APFT 'No conversion available' Dept. Of the Navy DoD DoD Lite Midshipman Cadet Debutante Hard-Core Strak  Chill, man. Like, way too serious

News Coverage - project still underway

We have been discussing coverage of our C-123 Agent Orange issues with a well-known broadcaster. At first, their report was expected in the first days of April, but delays have crept up...project is still underway. Please don't wait in front of your TV sets in great anticipation...just yet!

On a personal issue, I have been trying since 1999 to correct a major issue involving my medical retirement from the Air Force, with appeals to the Air Force Board of Correction of Military Records to address the error. Yesterday the happy news came that the appeal was approved and my retirement corrected, with a back-dated adjustment to 1996. Couldn't be better!! Thank you, Air Force!

VA Offers New Perspective on Veterans Agent Orange Exposure Issues!

Yesterday the VA's Public Health folks released a new perspective on C-123 veterans' Agent Orange exposure at this month's San Francisco meeting of the Society of Toxicology. While they still maintain exposure was unlikely, the door seems slightly ajar - they state C-123 veterans' claims will be judged individually. This is much more positive than the impression we were left with following the March 8 meeting hosted by Senator Burr in Washington DC, where they reported that all our claims "would probably" be denied. If this is so (oh, dare we hope?)...thank you, VA, for a more open mind on this issue!
What I find highly disappointing is their report's reliance on the 1991 data from one scientist (who took leave from the AF and accepted money from the chemical industry for writing articles implying the harmlessness of Agent Orange!) The VA data are in conflict with contemporary ATSDR toxicological profile for TCDD dermal absorption, as well as reports from the Institute on Medicine.
Isn't it reasonable to conclude that the Department of Veterans Affairs is committed to their position that Agent Orange contamination of our aircraft was unlikely, rather than being willing to consider newer and more authoritative research which agrees with our exposure? Every new discovery, every new opinion from non-VA sources which says aircrews were exposed the VA automatically rejects, rather than looking for a good possibility of a path to provide our veterans earned benefits.
These people are supposed to be scientists. The whole evolution of modern science started with, and still depends upon, scientists being eager to accept findings which both argue with and argue against their initial thesis. I can't find "science" in what they are doing...only political obstruction.
These people should remember true science was born only when Western civilization stopped trying to shape observations upon researchers' predetermined beliefs.

Here's the link to their release, entitled
                 "Agent Orange: The 50-Year History & the Newest Chapter of Concerns: