 |
| Patches - Tail #362 |
McMinnville OregonOctober 2, 2012
Honorable Eric K. Shinseki
Secretary
Department of Veterans Affairs
810 Vermont Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20420
Dear Mr. Secretary,
On September 25, 2012 my application for Agent Orangeexposure benefits was denied by Mr. Thomas Murphy of the Compensation Service.The fundamental basis for the denial was his suggestion that, while the C-123aircraft which I flew were contaminated with TCDD remaining from their VietnamWar missions, there likely wasn’t enough dioxin remaining to expose aircrews. Iask that you make a decision that C-123 aircrews have indeed been exposed.
Disputed by VA in my application were independentscientific opinions about me presented by Dr. Tom Sinks, Deputy Director of theCDC Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Dr. Jeanne Stellman,Professor Emerita of Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, Dr.Fred Berman of Oregon Health Sciences University’s Toxicology Department, andDr. Joe Goeppner, an independent toxicologist and retired senior officer of theUS Army Chemical Corps.
Mr. Murphy’s basic reason for disputing these opinionsis that they were proffered by scientists, and not physicians. However, theVA’s earlier materials were themselves mostly prepared by scientists,themselves not physicians. Further, Dr. Stellman is perhaps one of the top twopersons in the world most expert on the subject of Agent Orange, whose researchand opinions have been accepted widely.
I have repeatedly asked my civilian and VA physicians tocomment on the possibility of my own exposure to Agent Orange. In everyinstance I have been told that such a possibility is best evaluated bytoxicologists or epidemiologists, not physicians. As has been stated bynumerous witnesses before the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, includingyou, individuals almost always would find it impossible to establish anycertainty of medical nexus, and such a nexus is best established by consideringa larger population. In our case, with only about 1500 aircrew and flightnurses involved, Dr. Stellman has concluded we are too small a population forany epidemiological conclusions.
Yesterday I again sought medical opinions fromphysicians in the Oregon Health Sciences University Orthopedics Departmentwhere I am a current patient for hip replacements. Even my own hospital andphysician have stated that they lack any professional grounds to evaluate sucha situation. Dr. Bill Hersh, head of OHSU’s Clinical Epidemiology Department,apologized yesterday, saying he cannotbe involved with this issue as it is not his area of expertise…it seems to benobody’s. Even my own primary care provider and other physicians treating me atthe Portland VAMC will not comment, perhaps because they are prohibited fromdiscussing Agent Orange issues. Clearly, “exposure” is an issue best judged bytoxicologists.
As I read the 1991 Agent Orange Act, veterans like mewho have strong evidence we’ve been exposed are to be given severalconsiderations, although not presumptions as for the “boots on the ground”Vietnam veterans. On an individual level, as you have stated, it is unlikelythat any veteran can establish a medical nexus with absolute certainty. Howeverthe act, as explained in your testimony before the Committee in 2010, states:
The statute specifiesthat a "positive association" exists whenever the Secretarydetermines that the credible evidence for an association is equal to oroutweighs the credible evidence against an association. The language andlegislative history of this act made clear that it did not require evidence ofa causal association, but only credible evidence that herbicide exposurewas statistically associated with increased incurrence of the disease. The Act further specified that, in determining whether a positive associationexists, VA must consider the IOM’s report and any other sound scientific andmedical evidence available to VA.Mr. Secretary, we maintain that we have satisfactorilyestablished sound scientific evidence that our contaminated C-123 aircraftexposed us to dioxin. The VA’s Public Health released their review ofliterature, which led to their conclusion that while our crews may have beenexposed, it likely wasn’t enough exposure to cause long-term health effects. Ignoredin their research, not cited as references in any of their announcements, werethe opinions from experts like Dr. Stellman, Dr. Sinks, Dr. Goeppner and Dr.Berman. Are these not experts qualified to present sound scientific evidence? IsMr. Murphy suggesting a VA threshold of five more more PhD opinions, or eventhatno number of PhD opinions would be adequate to sway him?
As the Air Force destroyed all the C-123 aircraft in2010 specifically because of their contamination, no further study of them is possible…onlyliterature reviews. The only tests done were begun in 1994 and even though thatairplane hadn’t sprayed Agent Orange for over 23 years, it was tested as“heavily contaminated on all test surfaces, interior and exterior.” Latertests, completed after more decades stored in Davis-Monthan AFB’s Boneyard,also showed contamination but in decreasing levels…reasonable, considering thehalf-life of dioxin. In 1972-1982, as Dr. Sinks maintains, contamination andalso exposure were much more intense.
The scientific experts consulted and from whom we sought independent scientific opinions evaluated the same source materials asdid the VA’s Public Health. Like the CDC/Agency for Toxic Substances andDisease Registry, their conclusions regarding C-123 aircrew exposures were:
The only available environmental samples indicate that the sampledaircraft was contaminated with TCDD at a levelgreatly exceeding current screening levels established by the Department ofDefense. Given the available information. I believethat aircrew operating in this, and similar, environmentswere exposed to TCDD.
Ifind it amazing that Dr. Stellman’s and Dr. Sink’s opinions are dismissed inparticular because neither is a physician, yet the principal authors of theVA’s materials is herself not a physician but a PhD toxicologist graduated in2011 who has never seen the inside of a C-123.
Aftercareful weighing of our situation, both the Vietnam Veterans of America and theAmerican Legion have passed national resolutions addressed to you, asking thatour veterans receive service connection for Agent Orange exposure.
Theissue ultimately will be resolved by you under authority of the Agent OrangeAct of 1991 or by appeals channels within the VA, or by eventual court action.It is unimaginable that a fair-minded scientist, jurist or other reviewer ofthis situation wouldn’t find that, at the very minimum, I as a C-123 veteranand the men and women I flew with, clearly meet the statutory requirements ofthe law, as well as of justice and common sense.
Iask, therefore, for both common sense and justice from you.
Respectfully,
WesleyT. Carter, Major USAF Retired
Chair, C-123 Veterans Association
wes@c123agentorange.com
www.c123agentorange.com & www.c123kcancer.blogspot.com
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder