Talking points draft

these talking points I intend to put forth (please do not ask where yet) are documented in more detail in my published book “Vietnam’s Rain Agents Orange, White and blue, (weapons of mass destruction) available at corps productions (http://www.corpsproductions.com/)

For book reviews please see (http://www.2ndbattalion94thartillery.com/Chas/AOBookReviews.htm)

 These talking points address evident bias against Veterans, Widows, and Offspring by our Executive Branch, its federal agency and agency leaders, and what congress clearly knew and did little if anything regarding identifying, punishment, and stopping the total government collusion against the “Herbicide Veteran and family”?

How much more can Veterans take and how much longer can this nation and its media remain silent?

Scientists objected to the use of herbicide defoliants early in the war….  The American Association for the Advancement of Science petitioned Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara to initiate a study on the short-term and long-term consequences of Agent Orange.

Other scientists urged President Johnson to adhere to the international ban on chemical warfare. 

Early in 1967, more than 5,000 scientists a number of them Nobel laureates delivered a second petition asking Johnson to end Agent Orange usage in Vietnam.

The war was over…veterans appeared in VA hospitals and outpatient clinics blaming Agent Orange for their illnesses.  VA’s top-level officials rejected any claims that Agent Orange made Veterans sick.  Their illnesses were not recognized; their claims rendered no compensation of care in treatment, disability, and death.

What appeared to matter most to our government was that the unexplained illnesses to our Veterans not be linked to Vietnam or to Agent Orange.

For Agent Orange studies, VA found scientists who could be expected by their prior work to conclude that Agent Orange or herbicides at unknown toxicity of dioxins and unknown dose rates had not harmed veterans.

VA leaders began to worry and met behind closed doors with two consultants, Drs. Walter Melvin and Ben Holder.  Melvin was a former scientific director for the Air Force.  Holder was a medical director for Dow Chemical, the major manufacture of Agent Orange.

VA rewarded Melvin’s support by appointing him to do a study on an industrial disaster involving dioxin. 

Dr. Gerrit Schepers of VA’s Washington office, a former researcher for Monsanto Chemical (one of the Agent Orange manufactures), was chosen to lead the VA’s new Agent Orange Group.

The denial of herbicide involvement of these Veterans and their widows or soon to be widows began in earnest at this time and still exists today discussed in the following topics.

At one time even with the known millions of gallons of Agents Orange, White, Blue, Green, Purple, Pink and other commercially named herbicides with experimentation on going with the mixing and with dose rate applications per acre the Veteran had to somehow prove he or she was exposed.  Even with the known millions of gallons sprayed by OPERATION Ranch Hand in a 40 mile wide by about 20 miles deep Veterans had to prove exposure.  Never mind the known EPA half-life of these dioxins on the soil, in the soil, or in water with high sediment.  Never mind the unrecorded perimeter spraying by tank, tanker, and helicopter.  (More on this half-life issue later in a despicable VA case against Tennessee Veteran David Hill now deceased.)

Our Special Operation Groups or SOG teams reported to VA being sprayed in both Cambodia and Laos.  DoD as it has in so many issues lied through its teeth apparently with the blessings of our congress that no such spraying had taken place.  DoD as it has in the past with Nuclear, LSD, Project 112, SHAD testing, etc. seemingly with the concurrence of the congress in session at the time allows this to go on and on until evidence is so strong that plausible deniable can no longer be tenable.  In fact, as the denials of our SOG teams by DoD/VA where taking place; DoD without question knew OPERATION Ranch Hand in those countries had commenced in 1964.  (Formerly secret document report Corona Harvest – Defoliation in Southeast Asia)

You hear stories of our Commanders and Chief with tears in their eyes when talking to a wounded veteran.  These are not tears for the Veteran but tears of being ashamed of themselves of how "their agencies" have treated the Veterans.  No we are not naïve and certainly we are not the "dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns for Foreign Policy" as touted by the former head of the State Department Mr. Henry Kissinger.  (Reported by Post reporters Woodward and Bernstein.)    

·        As concerns grew following the studies of human exposure to dioxins, Congress commissioned a large-scale epidemiological study to determine the potential health effects for Vietnam Veterans exposed to Agent Orange. Initially, this study was to be conducted by the VA itself. Evidence surfaced, however, of the VA’s foot dragging in commencing the study (and initial disavowal of any potential harm from exposure to Agent Orange), Congress transferred the responsibility for the study to the CDC in 1983.

VA’s continuous disavowal of any harm was accompanied by using chemical company studies by such as Dow, Monsanto, BASF, Diamond Alkali's, etc. in their claims of no harm was ever done.  These studies were proven fraudulent studies intent on masking the damages being done.  VA continued this disavowal of any damages being done on behalf of our Executive Branch.  To this day VA continues to minimize the scientific facts.  VA allowed their director of the Office of Environmental Medicine, Veterans Health Services and Research Administration go out into the public arena in 1985 and state with no real knowledge TCDD "presents no threat from the exposures experienced by the veterans and the public at large,” and virtually accuses any scientists who find that such health effects do exist to be nothing more than witchdoctors.  (I think we know who was actually wearing the mask and waving a dead chicken over his head as he danced around on behalf of the Executive Branch.)

Note 1:  1979, toxicology scientist Mike Dellargo found holes and lies in what the chemical companies were touting, wrote a scathing 60 page report on the evils of dioxin, identifying what most of 1992 so called “dioxin reassessment report” finally concluded.  At the time of his rebuttal report release, White House interference forced the EPA to shelve the report and not release it. 

Note 2:  Toxicology scientist Dr. Cate Jenkins, from the newly formed Environmental Protection Agency, who exposed the fraudulent studies by chemical companies and demanded the EPA enforcement branch take action was summarily removed from her position and had to fight a legal battle to even get her job back.

·        Hearings before the Human Resources and Intergovernmental Relations Subcommittee on July 11, 1989 revealed, the design, implementation and conclusions of the CDC study were so ill conceived as to suggest that political pressures once again interfered with the kind of professional, unbiased review Congress had sought to obtain. 

·        CDC used "negative" findings to conclude that not only could an exposure study not even be done, but that the "study" which was never conducted proves that Vietnam Veterans were never exposed to harmful doses of Agent Orange.

It should be mentioned here that just prior to this impact study the CDC itself had authorized/endorsed the lessening of the dioxin dumping standard in the State of Georgia at a rate 500 times more lenient than EPA recommended guidelines. (See Letter from Dr. Vernon N. Houk to Leonard Ledbetteber, Commissioner Georgia Department of Natural Resources (November 27, 1989).

·        Dr. Philip Landrigan, a former Director of the Environmental Hazards branch at the CDC, upon discovering the various irregularities in CDC procedures concluded that the errors were so egregious as to warrant an independent investigation not only of the methodology employed by the CDC in its validation study, but also a specific inquiry into what actually transpired at the Center for Environmental Health of the CDC.

·        1984, the Ranch Hand Study commissioned and funded by congress designed to generate significant scientific data and analysis to be used by the Department of Veterans Affairs [VA], and others in making health care and compensation decisions regarding Vietnam veterans’ issued the initial scientific draft of findings; stated facts found of a ratio of five to one the Ranch Hand Veterans where medically less well off than the comparison group.  After the Ranch Hand Advisory Committee, which operates under the White House Agent Orange Working Group of the Domestic Policy Council changed the initial scientific draft; the report eliminated those findings as well as the findings of a double increase in birth defects for the Ranch Hand Veterans.  When Senator Daschle questioned the scientists about the differences, their answers became clear this was not just a disagreement in data, but also the “perpetration of fraudulent conclusions by the policy council.”

Note 1:  In any persistent toxic chemical such as dioxins or other close isomers considered “dioxin like” we are talking about created failures over life.  All these studies do is find trends in the study snapshot over that life and depending on what protocols are used and the interpretations of that protocol perhaps an association to a dose can be found but that is purely speculative.  (See Link for denial of presumptive disorders based on flawed dose rate or threshold responses.) http://www.2ndbattalion94thartillery.com/Chas/DoseResponse.htm

One using these studies can only predict an “increased risk of incidence” using Odds Ratios or Risk Ratios which are similar considering the time line of study comparisons.  The significant correlation is obviously those that served in Vietnam and/or exposed to the DoD herbicides elsewhere.  In other words in the comparison if it is found an increase in risk greater than null then the trend is expected to diverge even further over time.   Assuming the study and calculations are done with integrity and no introduced biasing factors towards null.  Yet, we have studies that show increased risk of Vietnam Veterans from 2.6 to 6.9 compared to other cohorts and are still being denied by science (VA/IOM) as associated to wartime service in a known toxic chemical(s) environment.

Note 2.   In the initial Ranch Hand Study redacted by the White House group evidence of increased degenerating neurological issues, skin cancers found not normally exposed to the sun, daily chronic debilitating fatigue, painful joint and muscle movements, as well as mental disorders (similar to PTSD in combatants) found were not and still not addressed.   This is not only despicable and immoral but in most cases given the scientific misconduct both civil as well as criminal laws would apply to those deceivers.   However Veterans, Widows, and damaged Offspring are not allowed redress to those that have perpetrated scientific misconduct against them.  (More on violation of federal integrity laws in reporting later.)  I wonder how many of our present Veterans know that they have no constitutional rights for justice once they become a Veteran and how the Executive Branch and its federal agencies talk out of both sides of their mouth.

Note 3:   It should be noted that as early as 1977 information about Agent Orange’s potential for genetic damage was known to the VA. For example, a "NOT FOR RELEASE" VA document expressly noted Agent Orange’s "high toxicity" and "its effect on newborn, deformed children ... similar to the thalidomide situation." (See L. Casten, Patterns of Secrecy note 73 supra at Department of Veteran Affairs p.4.)

Note 4:   In March of 1980, Senator Tom Daschle and Rep. David Bonior received an anonymous memorandum written on VA stationery which stated: "chemical agents 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D commonly known as Agent Orange and Agent Blue, are mutagenic and teratogenic. This means they intercept the genetic DNA message processed to an unborn fetus, thereby resulting in deformed children being born. Therefore, the veteran would appear to have no ill effects from the exposure but he would produce deformed children due to this breakage in his genetic chain.... . .Agent Orange is 150,000 times more toxic than organic arsenic.

Note 5:  On February 23, 1990, the Air Force released a follow-up morbidity report on the Ranch Handers. That report, "1987 Follow-up Examination Results," described "statistically significant increases in health problems among Ranch Handers including:: "all cancers", skin and systemic combined, both verified and suspected; skin cancers alone; hereditary and degenerative neurological diseases and other problems. The Air Force-concluded, however, that these and other problems were not necessarily be related to Agent Orange/dioxin exposure, as they do not always show a "dose-response" relationship — particularly since the exposure index used in the data analysis "is not a good measure of actual dioxin exposure." In other words, the Air Force could just as easily have concluded that the health problems associated with the Ranch Handers were not necessarily related to eating beer nuts or drinking "grape kool aid" even though the testing demonstrated dioxin exposures at various levels  within the cohorts.  (See Link for fallacy of dioxin dose response.) http://www.2ndbattalion94thartillery.com/Chas/DoseResponse.htm

·   Ranch Hand was never in compliance with Public Law Public Law 100-687 requiring the study-monitoring group to conform to the study protocol “with one-third veterans representation.”

·   Ranch Hand was apparently grossly under funded by congress who either did not know about it or turned a blind eye the research committees who had decided to meet every six month did not meet for at least three years while Veterans died not service connected and widows languished with no financial support.

·        1986, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Energy and Commerce documented how untutored officials of the “Office of Management and Budget (0MB)” interfered with and second-guessed the professional judgments of agency scientists and multidisciplinary panels of outside peer review experts.

·        1989, during his pro bono assignment as special assistant to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Admiral Elmo Zumwalt uncovers “Office of Management and Budget (0MB)” memo to all the agencies of government in essence not to find a correlation between Agent Orange and health affects.  Stating that it would be most unfortunate for two reasons:

A) The cost of supporting the Veterans.

B) The court liability to which corporations would be exposed.

You would think that all of this would have forced Congress to do something would you not?  You would be wrong.   Congress has done nothing to counter the Executive Branch collaboration and perpetration of fraud that in some venues, folks would be in prison or major fines or both or at least they would have lost their job.  There is much more as follows!

• 1989, VA using a biased committee called the Scientific Council of the Veterans Advisory Committee on Environmental Hazards (VACEH) continued to deny and association since 1979 to dioxin and the empirical data increase in medical issues the Vietnam Veteran and family were associated.   When several prestigious cancer research groups, prestigious research scientists were finally allowed to review the workings and minutes of meetings of the so-called committee (many members has previously worked for or represented the chemical companies themselves); statements were made as follows:

·        The detection of overt anti-veteran’s bias was noted.

·        It was unclear exactly what this committee was trying to do.

·        Nothing this committee had done should be used for anything, much less the determination of service connection.

·        The Committee’s work was "not sensible" and "rather unsatisfactory" in its review and classification of the various studies it reviewed.

·        The reviewing scientists regarded Dr. Lathrop’s views as "less than objective" and felt that the possibility exists that "his extreme views (e.g., in respect to the role of dose--response testing) may have unduly affected the Committee’s work.

·        The issue of chemical-specific effects, in which animal studies have been sufficient to demonstrate the carcinogenic effects of dioxin, is an important factor "not well considered by the Committee."

·        …The Committee was so tied by the process, that a decision, which should have been based on scientific data, was reduced to “vague impressions...”

·        A reviewer detailed annotated bibliography and assessment of numerous cancer studies relevant to herbicide exposure presents a stunning indictment of the Advisory Committee’s scientific interpretation and policy judgments regarding the link between Agent Orange and Vietnam.

·        November 2, 1989 transcript, has little or no scientific merit, and should not serve as a basis for compensation or regulatory decisions of any sort...

• 1989, Veterans took the VA process to court and won a major battle for presumption of service connection.  The court ruled the VA process using VACEH and their requirement for causation created undue hardship for the Veteran and family.   The court ruling …the process for association need only demonstrate “an increased risk of incidence” or “a significant correlation” versus the “causation” being demanded by VA and VACEH.  The court also ruled that the VACEH review all of its previous work based on the new court ordered protocol for “presumptive service connection.”  None of which was ever done in accordance with the ruling.

Note 1.  The VACEH operated from 1979 to 1991 denying all but a few medical issues.  Even when the VACEH concluded a positive association to neurological issues in the form of neuropathy; the Secretary of the VA from his position on Mount Olympus added such requirements of manifestation and time to resolution on the presumption that no Veteran could qualify for the obvious associated medical disorder.

Note 2.  VA/IOM still does not honor the court ruling and never has.

Note 3.  President Bill Clinton when he announced the disorder as service connected called this disorder a “degenerating neurological disorder.”  Yet, we can see from Note 1 that the head of the VA changed the etiology of the disorder from chronic to temporary only, with a two-year period of complete nerve damage resolution.  I.E. apples and oranges.  Yet, no one at VA can say how dioxin, a neurotoxic chemical, will cause only temporary nerve damages as well as no one at the IOM can say how this will occur and the direct causation and how axonal nerve regrowth will be achieved after removal from the dioxin environment.  While the body burden of dioxin is persistent, which means that the VA’s/IOM’s interpretation of the dioxin caused medical disorder makes no scientific or medical sense.

In 1991 the NAS/IOM took over the the role of the now disbanded VACEH with recommendations as to Service Connection in death and disability from Herbicide exposures.  The NAS/IOM had denied many associations based on some process that stake holders, the Veterans are not privy to nor are allowed to challenge whatever it is they are doing.  The issue is, once again in spite of the court ruling denouncing a requirement for "causations", the government contract stated the finding of "causation" or "biological plausibility", not an increased risk of incidence either using Odds Ratios or Risk Ratios and predicted over life issues with the data collected at a study snap shot in time of the on-going damages.  IOM does not even address "biological plausibility" and seems to be once again tied to some dose level requirement per disorder/disease per person.

Bearing in mind science does not know what caused the various cancers in dinosaurs but we are supposed to know causations of how dioxin created "all site cancers."  Sort of a double standard by our political leaders in their contract requirements to the IOM while they smile and wink at the IOM.

In other words, the contract to the IOM by Congress could and should have clarified what it is "they want" for the Veteran and Widow not some scientific project that could go on till the end of days.

Even in "causation" where the IOM has agreed to some form of "causation" it is bogus if they only did studies that used a single dioxin, TCDD study evaluation.  There is nothing in this world that does not say that it took at least two or three of the toxic chemicals to cause a particular disorder(s).

On the other hand Congress could have just as easily described what they wanted by direct statements and not such ambiguous and subjective requirements.

Such as: (from definitions)

"By either direct causation requirements or herbicide associated disorders that meet the requirements of seemingly or apparently valid, likely, or acceptable; credible increased risk of incidence by herbicides creating biological changes; regardless of what biological system or systems that appear to merit belief or acceptance as associated and regardless of which toxic chemical or chemicals is suspected as the ultimate causation."

I would also add here that even the biased IOM indicates it has no idea of the VA processes in determining presumptive disorders.  I would also bet your paycheck that neither does anyone on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee or the House Veterans Affairs Committee.

20 more years of deception to go. ....