Below is a BVA finding which touched on a veteran's exposure claim. Look at the wording used by the BVA judges, especially "reviewed all available scientific information..."
But Post-Deployment Health didn't review all available information. Instead, they were charged with creating policy statements to block C-123 veterans' exposure claims. That meant they selected materials which opposed the basis for C-123 claims, and ignored materials which supported the claims.
If a scientific reference doesn't support the policy of preventing C-123 claims, VA doesn't mention it. Anything supporting a veteran's claim is disregarded in favor of materials selected by VA to deny claims.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9d539/9d539e6883b50c5ab3ba3a8fd7fb421ac4b195f4" alt=""
The paragraph below is from a recent veteran's claim denied by the Board of Veterans Appeals, citing boilerplate language about how Public Health reviewed "all scientific information" when, in fact, Public Health disregarding all information supporting C-123 veterans' claims and cited only those materials agreeing with VA policy. Further, the quote proves the BVA itself disregards any evidence favorable to C-123 veterans.
Furthermore, the Department of Veterans Affairs did address residual Agent Orange exposure concerns by post-Vietnam crews that later flew C-123 aircraft that had previously sprayed Agent Orange. VA's Office of Public Health is noted to have reviewed all available scientific information regarding the exposure potential to residual amounts of herbicides on the C-123 aircraft surfaces. It was concluded that the potential exposure for the post-Vietnam crews that flew or maintained the aircraft was extremely low and therefore it was concluded that the risk of long-term health effects was minimal. See http://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Got something to share? Nothing commercial or off-topic, please.