Posted on 07/01/2008 10:22:46 AM PDT by Right Winged American
For ten years, between 1965 and 1975, three million young Americans, many of them still boys, answered their country’s call and served as soldiers, sailors, airman, and marines in Vietnam. Some were drafted, but many volunteered, and at the time the cause seemed clear: stop the spread of communism. By the late 1960’s the goal became obscure. The war fell out of favor as Americans began to question our involvement in a conflict that drained both human and financial resources and seemed to bring few tangible results. In the end Vietnam became a symbol of the limits of American power and influence. Sadly, a foreign policy and military set back became a national tragedy as the denunciation of the war at home evolved into a rejection of those who fought. Over fifty-eight thousand never returned and those who did brought back scars, both physical and emotional, that never healed. Overt ridicule gradually dissipated, only to be replaced with a callous indifference to the sacrifice these men made. It would only get worse for many of these veterans because what no one knew at the time was that they had carried back the seeds of their own destruction, seeds sown not by their enemy, but by their own country.
Known as “Operation Ranch Hand” the defoliation of Vietnam’s jungles exposed American servicemen to a toxic and deadly chemical. Spread over 3.6 million acres, Agent Orange not only killed the jungle down to the root, but by the 1980’s it was permanently disabling and killing Vietnam veterans by the tens of thousands. In 1984 Dow Chemical, Monsanto, and other chemical companies involved in the manufacture of Agent Orange agreed to a 180 million dollar class action settlement to be paid to Vietnam Veterans. However, when spread out over the hundreds of thousands of eligible vets the amount was woefully inadequate. In many cases, the money provided the means to bury them as they succumbed to the diseases caused by the toxin. In 1995 this author’s uncle, William P. Weitz, was laid to rest in Phoenix, Arizona after losing his battle with lung cancer. His part of the settlement afforded him a small box in which his cremated remains were placed and then interned in a barren, sun scorched portion of a cemetery close to his home, leaving only a few thousand dollars for his widow.
In an effort to address this deadly legacy of the war that had become an epidemic, the United States Congress passed the Agent Orange Act of 1991. Section 2 of the Act contains one of the most important aspects of the legislation. It provides for a presumption of a service related connection between the diseases and conditions identified in the Act and the spraying of Agent Orange. In other words, if one served in Vietnam, it is presumed that the cancer or other condition he or she suffered from was caused by Agent Orange. Legally this presumption is crucial. Without it, the veteran bears the burden of proving his or her condition was caused by Agent Orange. The cost alone would destroy a vet’s ability to prove his claim. Even if he or she could afford to pay the experts necessary to argue the claim, showing the direct connection would in many cases be impossible.
The Veterans Administration (VA) was directed to implement a program under the Act whereby veterans would be compensated for the effects of exposure. The VA directed that any service man or woman who “served in Vietnam” would be presumed to have been exposed for purposes of receiving compensation. In many cases the receipt of a Vietnam Service Medal was all that was required. As one might expect hundreds of thousands of claims poured in, and the VA began paying. Among those who filed claims were the sailors of the United States “Blue Water Navy.”
There were essentially two navies serving in Vietnam. The “Brown Water Navy” patrolled the rivers and inlet waterways of Vietnam, while the “Blue Water Navy” served offshore, both inside and beyond Vietnam’s twelve mile territorial limit. Many of the countless air strikes both on North Vietnam and in close air support of U.S. soldiers fighting in the south and the DMZ came from carrier based aircraft. U.S. Destroyers provided myriads of combat related services, including close artillery support for land-based operations, and transporting troops and supplies, often close to shore and under enemy fire. It is virtually inconceivable that anyone could ever doubt that the men who served in the “Blue Water Navy” fought in Vietnam. In addition to receiving the Vietnam Service Medal, many were decorated for valor. Sadly, the inconceivable occurred.
Shortly after George W. Bush took office in 2001 the VA redefined “serving in Vietnam.” In a directive issued in 2001 the VA took the position that service in Vietnam now required “foot on land.” If a veteran could not show that he or she actually set foot in-country, they would not be afforded the presumption that their medical condition or disease was caused by Agent Orange. In one bold stroke the sailors of the “Blue Water Navy” lost their ability to successfully prosecute their claims for benefits. The VA offered no study or empirical evidence for this complete reversal of policy other than the assertion that direct exposure to Agent Orange required being on land.
Not only did the VA alter its policy without any reasonable basis, but it also ignored the fact that “Blue Water” sailors were suffering and dying from the same diseases that their land-based comrades experienced. However, without the presumption afforded by the Agent Orange Act they could not prove their claims for benefits. By 2003 the benefits that “Blue Water” sailors had been receiving stopped completely. Today many are owed almost five years of back benefits that for many vets totals well into the six-figure range. The goal of the 1991 Act was to make it easier for veterans to prove their claims and receive compensation. The VA’s position flies directly in the face of that goal. But while the U.S. government found a way to punish its sailors for their service, other nations took a closer look, and their approach makes the VA’s actions toward the “Blue Water Navy” all the more disgraceful.
Sailors from Australia also served in Vietnam. As time passed Australia began to notice that veterans of its Royal Australian Navy (RAN) were dying at a rate greater than the land-based Aussies who fought in Vietnam. The conditions that were killing these men were the diseases associated with Agent Orange. Food for the RAN came directly from Australia, there was no record of a RAN ship ever being directly sprayed, and few of the sailors ever set foot on land. However, rather than conclude that members of the RAN were not exposed and thus were not entitled to benefits, the Australian government probed deeper. Australia’s investigation generated a report that explained how its sailors were exposed.
Warships require a constant supply of freshwater and that supply is replenished by distilling sea water. The sea water is fed into an evaporator where it is boiled, condensed, and then fed into holding tanks. While the process removed the salt from the water, it did not filter out the toxins associated with Agent Orange. This process routinely took place within close proximity to shore as military operations did not allow a ship to cease its mission, travel out to sea, replenish its water supply, and then return. The Australian study concluded that Agent Orange sprayed in the jungles close to shore found its way into the ocean and that when the RAN ships replenished their water supply, they unknowingly contaminated their sailors and exposed them to Agent Orange.
The VA is aware of this study, but rather than use it as a basis to help the “Blue Water Navy” sailors, it has chosen to discount the findings and deny that these men served in Vietnam for purposes of the 1991 Act. In August 2001, Jonathan Haas, a veteran who served on the U.S.S. Katmai, filed his claim for benefits under the 1991 Agent Orange Act. Consistent with their change in policy the VA rejected his claims because it was undisputed that Haas never set foot in Vietnam. Mr. Haas appealed to the Veterans Court where a three-judge panel reversed the Veterans Board decision, holding that the VA definition of service that required “foot on land” was too restrictive and was unreasonable. The Court concluded that Mr. Hass was entitled to the presumption. In most instances that would have ended the debate; Mr. Haas and the other veterans could have advanced their claims with the benefit of the presumption they were rightfully entitled to claim. However, that is not what happened.
On May 8, 2008, in a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Veterans Court and upheld the VA’s definition that “service in Vietnam” required foot on land. Admitting that they “ordinarily will not hear appeals from the Veterans Court in cases the Veterans Court remands to the Board of Veteran’s Appeals,” the Court not only made an exception, but used the exception to destroy the ability of the “Blue Water Navy” veterans to prove their Agent Orange claims. In holding that the VA’s definition was “reasonable” the Federal Circuit in effect completely discounted the sacrifices made by this branch of the U.S. military, sacrifices that they continue to suffer for today.
The “Blue Water Navy” vets are literally lost at sea, adrift on an ocean of legal technicalities and administrative burden that most if not all will never overcome if this situation is allowed to stand. Recently these veterans began to return their Vietnam Service Medals in protest of the treatment they are receiving at the hands of the very government that sent them off to war. Mr. Haas has requested an en banc review of his case before the entire panel of the Federal Circuit. That request is pending. If denied it is contemplated he will appeal to the Supreme Court. Right now the most important thing that can be done for these men is to publicize the details of their plight. At this juncture access to media outlets is crucial to educating the public as to what is transpiring, which is one reason we chose to publish this edition of the newsletter solely on this topic. Time is running out for these Vietnam veterans. Many are dying from their diseases, while others are taking their own lives as their conditions worsen and any hope for a favorable resolution diminishes. There is still a chance for America to meet its obligations to its veterans. Remember, all that is needed for wrong to prevail is for righteous people to do nothing.
From "Legal Alert Newsletter", June 2008, a monthly publication of the Weitz Morgan Law Firm, of Austin, Texas. www.weitzmorgan.com
Dr. Mark Weitz is a practicing attorney and an historian who has joined the Blue Water Navy fight.
Thank you Mark. Well done [Bravo Zulu].
Maybe because it wasn’t Agent Orange that you used on your driveway?
A couple of bills have been introduced that may help, assuming you guys (Blue Water Navy) aren’t excluded from the class. And vets in general. They would be:
H.R. 6798-Service connects ALL gastro-intestinal cancers to those who served in VN as a result of exposure to herbicides. Introduced Aug. 1, 2008.
H.R.5595-Extends dental coverage to all vets getting 10% or more compensation.Introduced April 1, 2008.
And of course all will be watching for Courts ruling on Haas.
If Navy took on water from inland waterways, by whatever means, then you may wish to research cholangio cancer. ramifications are many of exposure to such water.
Lastly, (Army here-know little about Navy), I wonder if research of ships such as Tioga County, used in Operation Shad/Project 112, then later used to transport troops as well as ship’s compliment off coast of VN would have any causative effects? Cancers, etc. as such ships were used in tests of Sarin, etc. earlier. Just a thought....
The Chunky-Monkey Study:
Malloy and Gough measured all the chemical costituents that could be classified as "Dioxins". Scientists use the term 'dioxin' to refer to a group of compounds that share certain similar chemical structures and biological characteristics.
Several hundred of these compounds exist and are members of three closely related families: the polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs); the polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs or furans); and co-planar polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Malloy and Gough counted any compound that fell in these groups. Not surprisingly all of the compounds found in Chunky Monkey were in the non-toxic group of these compounds. Something they also neglected to mention
Dioxins in General:
Most Dioxins are generated from natural sources such as bushfires, and most particularly volcanoes. Man made Dioxins are not deliberately produced, but are released into the environment as a result of combustion and other chemical processes. Human activities involving these processes include power generation and waste incineration, and the manufacture of metals and some chemicals. The amount of Dioxins that are man-made approach the amount produced by brush and forest fires. Volcanic action is the prime source of Dioxins in the environment.
Twenty-nine of these compounds are believed to be very harmful or toxic to humans and animals. For a given dioxin, furan or PCB it is both the number of chlorine atoms, and their position in the molecule, that determine their physical and chemical properties, as well as their toxicity. The most studied and most toxic PCDD is 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (or TCDD).
To help measure the toxicity of dioxins and dioxins-like substances in the environment the concept of toxic equivalents (TEQs) has been developed. This concept allows the toxicity of a complex mixture to be estimated and expressed as a single number. TCDD is the most toxic dioxin and is assigned a weighting factor (or toxic equivalency factor, TEF) of 1; all other dioxins have a TEF of less than 1. Multiplication of the mass of a specific dioxin by its TEF yields the corresponding TCDD mass (or TEQ). The total toxicity of any mixture is then simply the sum of the individual dioxin TEQs.
TCDD Contamination of 'Agent Orange':
Again, the herbicidal organophosphates known as 2,4,D (2,4, dichlorophenoxyacetic acid) and 2,4,5,T (2,4,5 trichlorophenoxyacetic acid) were contaminated in the manufacturing process and produced TCDD (2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin) among other Dioxins. These herbicides are still manufactured and used today, but in chemical processes which do not produce TCDD. Thus, while 2,4,D and 2,4,5,T are still made and used, you aren't going to get cancer from spraying Roundup around your fence or on your driveway.
Further; the Royal Australian Navy's study concluded that the steam flash-distillers of naval vessels off Vietnam not only concentrated the TCDD from runoff, it also converted non- or less toxic dioxin compounds into TCDD in the distilling process by adding chlorine atoms. The presence of chlorine or chlorine compounds (like say, sea water!) and a temperature range between 200-400°C provide the optimum conditions for the formation of TCDD.
As a personal example, I served on a World War II era Aircraft Carrier, the USS Intrepid. Day in and day out, Intrepid produced about 200,000 gallons of 'potable' water. Most of that water was used to power the ship, and to operate 2 steam catapults. Think about that, 200,000 gallons of water, every day, per 180 day deployment. And Intrepid was there from '64 to '69; you think she sucked up enough contaminated sea water to 'expose' those of us in her crew? And newer 4 catapult carriers produced a half-million gallons per day during flight operations.
Cancer and TCDD — The Mitochondrial Connection:
And, I just found this while researching this answer:
Elevated blood TCDD concentrations have been implicated in many cancers, skin rashes, and other health problems experienced by Vietnam veterans. Although TCDD is carcinogenic, it is not directly genotoxic. A report in the 8 January 2008 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences now demonstrates one of the ways that TCDD may promote cancer's growth and spread.
The new study describes a novel mechanism of TCDD action that focuses on the mitochondria: "We found that TCDD induces tumor cell proliferation and invasion by directly acting on mitochondrial transcription machinery and inducing mitochondrial respiratory stress," says principal investigator Narayan G. Avadhani, a biochemistry professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Such mitochondrial dysfunction inhibits apoptosis in malignant cells and increases the invasive potential of cancer. Mitochondrial dysfunction is also associated with conditions such as heart disease, diabetes, obesity, blindness, deafness, kidney disease, and neurodegenerative disorders, as well as with aging.
"[The respiratory stress-signaling] cascade culminates in the activation of a large number of nuclear genes that affect various cellular processes including cell metabolism, proliferation, and apoptosis," says lead author Gopa Biswas, a researcher in Avadhani's lab. "We have now established that TCDD alters cellular morphology and physiology through a similar mechanism."
It is generally accepted that adverse effects of TCDD result from its activation of the Ah receptor, with effects occurring at very low exposures. In the presence of TCDD, the Ah receptor has been shown to either induce or suppress the transcription of numerous genes that have been linked with cancer development via changes in tumor suppressor proteins, oncogenes, growth factors, and cell cycle proteins, among other factors.
Mitochondrial dysfunction may entail a more fundamental mechanism. It appears that TCDD-induced mitochondrial stress signaling in cancer cells is propagated in part through the Ah receptor but also acts through mechanisms that are independent of the Ah receptor, such as by inducing protein kinase C and extracellular signal–regulated kinases.
"Our findings show that at subtoxic levels of ten to fifty nanomolar, TCDD is sufficient to cause mitochondrial dysfunction and induce the signaling cascade," says Avadhani. "These results raise concerns over the adverse health implications of dioxins and PCBs even at very low levels."
In both animal and human studies (notably epidemiologic analyses of cancer rates following the 1976 industrial accident in Seveso, Italy), TCDD exposure has increased cancer incidence and mortality at all cancer sites rather than at a few specific sites. In 1997, the International Agency for Research on Cancer upgraded TCDD to a Group 1 human carcinogen on the basis of mechanistic data. Considering subsequent dose–response assessments for TCDD and cancer, Kyle Steenland, a professor of environmental and occupational health at Emory University, and colleagues argued in the September 2004 issue of EHP that "TCDD exposure levels close to those in the general population may be carcinogenic and argue for caution in setting the upper ranges of long-term permissible exposure to dioxins."
Not to mention blood, bone marrow, and lymphatic cancers like Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and other Non-Hodgkins Lymphomas.
Two of which I have.
Note: While CLL can run in familys, no one else in mine (3 siblings, 2 parents, 6 uncles/aunts, 4 grandparents with 10 siblings between them) have had any type of cancer.
People in my family die of falls, alcohol, or bad age. In their 80's or 90's...
I hope this primer on Agent Orange helps you understand why I'm so passionate on this subject.
P.S. Unrepentant, there's another bill you might want to check out: HR 6562 - The Agent Orange Equity Act of 2008. Another time sink I've been buried in. More about this shortly.
No point in reading past this whopper.
Ok, for fun, read the post above yours.
And maybe the rest of them.
The VA sets NAVY AO related claims at 25,000 to 35,000 right now.
That doesn’t include claims that died with the vet.
See my Post 20. What is your figure on actual # of VN Vets currently living? Someone must know. Gov. seems to not know...If census figures are correct, then VN vets have a very, very serious problem....
When these discussions come up, no one ever mentions the fact that Steven Malloy was a registered lobbyist for Monsanto.
Monsanto paid $$ to another “expert”, Michael Fumento in the form of grants.
Not implying anything here./
bttt
Kinda makes me wonder who Ron Jeremy is.
Nah ...
Considering the data my VA Dr. has on me in the computer, I've got to believe somebody's lying here. Then again, how are you going to prove it?
Late thought...Interesting to note IOM has yet to state Parkinson’s Disease associated with herbicide exposure in VN, yet DVA has recently set up six medical centers to study and treat patients with Parkinsons. Does DVA see a present need? A coming need?
Some studies have shown a much higher incidence of Parkinsons in VN vets than pop. at large. Again, inconclusive to date...or are they? Perhaps VA preparing for future announcement from IOM’s next “Agent Orange Update 2008?”
Late thought...Interesting to note IOM has yet to state Parkinson’s Disease associated with herbicide exposure in VN, yet DVA has recently set up six medical centers to study and treat patients with Parkinsons. Does DVA see a present need? A coming need?
Some studies have shown a much higher incidence of Parkinsons in VN vets than pop. at large. Again, inconclusive to date...or are they? Perhaps VA preparing for future announcement from IOM’s next “Agent Orange Update 2008?”
The problem is that none of us got the memo when we went RELACDU.
Well, it wasn’t written down, so I’ll just list the high points for you.
1) Go home, keep your mouth shut and don’t make any waves.
2) Vote the way you’re told, pay your taxes and fees when you’re told and don’t make any waves.
3) We’ll pay some money for schooling, a mortgage and the plot and tombstone when you die (if the space is still available). Don’t disappoint everybody here by living too long.
4) Don’t make any waves.
True enough, but here's a clue; Adm. Zumwalt nailed'em with the Agent Orange Act of 1991 back when there wasn't an internet. Just a bunch of guys who broke their hearts doing it with just a phone, typewriter, and old fashioned shoe leather.
We've got it a lot easier getting the info, and getting it out.
And we owe it to Zoomie and the guys who started it, to bring it home.
Roger that.
Got to excuse the bad attitude; I’ve just been Mk I Mod 0 royally pi$$ed at the sandcrabs and all their works since...oh, anywhere from ‘66 or so. (That’s when we lost a bunch of student pilots I’d trained to crappy aircraft that some of McNamera’s Band had just solemnly declared to be Fit for Flight Forever.) Have to have a verbal outburst like that every once in a while to keep from snapping some pencilneck’s head off and blowing my cover.
Just because I’m bit**in’ don’t mean I’m anywhere near quittin’. Far from it. Got a BIL (blackshoe Tonk Yacht Club) and an ex-infantry friend of mine; both prostate cases, both five years younger and lookin’ ten years older than me and gotta use a bleepin’ crowbar to get ‘em to crawl out of that Zone of Silence that I was ranting about.
Well, I guess my ability to motivate people was a better reason for making Chief than my sunny disposition anyway.
Let’s go kick some butt.
Sure you both are now aware, but yesterday the US Court of Appeals denied the Blue Water Nay’s petition for a re-hearing on this matter. One judge would grant a petition and requests en banc (all judges) at hearing.
Just wanted to put it “out there.”
[****]
Got a link on that?
www.vawatch.org or the Blue Water Navy web site.
Judge Moorman has shown bias in this case all along, and has permitted the perversion of the Cheveron Defense here to the point that it might be actionable. Judge Fogel has been calling him on it for a while now, and depending on the rest of the members of the 12th Circuit Court may just decide to hear this 'en banc' to correct the problem.
Further, HR6265, which would in one fell swoop moot the Court's decisions, has been gaining sponsors. (from both parties!)
I don't think we're out of the woods yet, but both candidates have committed to supporting veterans as a first priority in public.
And, though he doesn't advertise it, McCain IS a Blue Water Navy veteran. (Which we have been reminding him of for some time now, and we wish he'd SAY so, you McCain campaign guys...)
—ExIntrepid
By way of correction, that bill should be H.R.6562. (6265 is another of the “Name The Postoffice” legislative triumphs that the pelosi congress produced.)
BTW, my very own Denny Rehberg (R-MT) is one of the early cosponsors.
Now, if they’d just get the da** thing out of committee....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.