THIS INFORMATION IS FOR: THOSE WHO HAVE FOUND IT DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN THE TRUTH, FROM THEIR GOVERNMENT.

IF YOU WERE EXPOSED TO AGENT ORANGE READ THIS!

Are these the same conditions listed in the prior examples? If not why?_______________

ACTIONS

As you know, there is a great turmoil regarding Agent Orange and the decision of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. When the National Academy of Science released the report this created a "reason" for the VA to take action on Agent Orange. It has allowed the VA to "claim" they have taken positive action to assist the Vietnam Veteran victim in their quest for justice, when they have not.

Using an old political ploy, they have helped less than 1% denied 99% and stated they have addressed the issue. They have not addressed the issue at all. They have accepted 7 of 166 known cancers related to dioxin exposure. It is true that all 166 will not be found to be direct results of dioxin exposure. HOWEVER, the balance is not even close to being proper at this time.

We will continue to press the issues as fast as possible. Letters to your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives complaining of the inaction will help. As you know the Agent Orange issue was addressed by the Department of Veteran Affairs in 1994. Over the past few years, we have had much talk from our politicians with little action. They have tossed a few bones at the veteran; but, no substantial regulations to address the overwhelming majority of affected veterans.

The 1994 disaster brought about acceptance of seven conditions that were cited by the National Academy of Science as possible or probable residuals of exposure to Agent Orange. There were many other conditions in the same category; but were not accepted by the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs. As a result of his political decision to grant only seven of those considered. Hundreds of thousands of veterans were arbitrarily eliminated from the claims process. A cunning move on the part of the Department of Veterans Affairs to avoid addressing the issues that have plagued the Vietnam Veteran since 1970.

Many other studies will continue. If the Department of Veterans Affairs denied a claim, even though the issue was not yet resolved; the one year clock started. According to the Department of Veteran Affairs' regulations, we have one year from the date of the denial to perfect the appeal. If you have filed a claim and were denied, your issue more than likely will not be addressed until after the time limit has expired. This is bureaucracy at it's worst.

If you received a letter of denial from the Department of Veteran Affairs, please call your veterans representative to arrange a time to address the case.

As far as I understand, if an Agent Orange case is not involving the seven cancers selected by the Department of Veterans Affairs, or chloracne or PCT; the VA is listing the claim on a special set of tapes called SIRS. When each issue is later addressed the tapes will be reviewed and veterans with those conditions will be considered.

A few things you have heard before need repeated. Several million Vietnam veterans will be lost in the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs. We saw the Secretary find a sure way to end the problem of Agent Orange plaguing the VA system. He arbitrarily denied all claims except those few which fell into a selected small area of cancers. Even at its very best of limited cancers, the secretary struck out conditions in the middle of a sentence. He removed the words linking prostate cancer to Agent Orange. The National Academy of Science had carefully placed those words in the center of a sentence. They were protected by a comma on each side. Alas, to no avail, the secretary saw them and knowing thousands would benefit, he struck them away.

His decision early in 1994 started a clock ticking away the hopes of millions of Vietnam veterans gaining any justice. It seems as if the VA can stretch the time enough, the veterans will lose interest. It is working. The veterans are losing interest. Many have given up hope; even worse many have died. The VA has denied thousands of cancer claims because they do not fit into that very narrow definition as listed.

If you had a claim filed for residuals of Agent Orange prior to February 1994. You must realize, there is a one year period in which to appeal. If you didn't file the appeal, you didn't necessarily lose it. If yours was other than one of the select few, you still have an opportunity to pursue the claim and/or appeal. You can reopen with new and material evidence. This evidence will be forthcoming from the National Academy of Science. The VA agreed to use their research on decisions.

The spraying of Agent Orange ceased in 1971; the untimely deaths of Vietnam veterans continues. A quarter of a century has passed since the spray stopped. The VA has done very little in the meantime to soothe the terrible pain.

As an example some asked about diabetes. The National Academy of Science (NAS) has not released information in regards to their studies on diabetes. They were scheduled to release information in July of 1995. As you can see July came and went with no sign of a release of information. July of 1996 and 1997 also came and went, with still no answer! In the system we are in, it is difficult to predict any time period of action. I hope we shall soon receive a new report from the NAS. This has been a very difficult time in the history of our struggle on the Agent Orange issue. For so many years the government simply said no. Suddenly we found ourselves winning a major court action in the San Francisco District Court. Then Secretary Derwinski agreed to recognize Agent Orange as a dangerous chemical with devastating residuals. That was in 1988. Then "the famed settlement" with the seven chemical companies, it looked like the total victory was in sight. The chemical companies settled in May 1984 for $180,000,000.00 and that amount was deposited at interest. Over eleven plus years, that money was distributed through the District Court in Brooklyn, New York. Thus, we have a Federal District Court decision on both coasts, over a decade ago, with little change. As I told my friend the hang glider rider, hang in there!

Did the end of the Agent Orange era arrive? Obviously the answer was no. It was not the end of Agent Orange, only the end of the hopes of several million Vietnam veterans who will be lost in the fast deals of some politicians. It seems as if the former Secretary found a sure way to end the problem of Agent Orange plaguing the VA systems. Arbitrarily deny all claims except those few which fell into a selected, by him, a small area of cancers.

If you had a claim filed for any residuals of Agent Orange prior to February 1994, today is the day to review that claim to make sure you are not being arbitrarily denied your rights. To delay is to automatically lose. It is time to call for a review of your claim. To wait will eliminate your chances of receiving justice after a quarter of a century or more. The spraying of Agent Orange ceased in 1971; the untimely deaths of Vietnam veterans continues.

UPDATE, VAO-96

Friday morning, the Ides of March, 1996 I received a ten page fax of long awaited news. The National Academy of Science had released its newest studies. These were of course not the finals, just the newest. Although to some it may seem like very little. But, to others such as I, it was big ground being broken: Spina Bifida, Peripheral Neuropathy and PCT a rare skin disease, often associated with the liver. Still predominate conditions such as Cerebral Palsy were untouched.

If you have followed my writings since 1983, you will remember this ground was covered in the late 80's. In my writings, there was an essay: The Verdict is in: Guilty which is chapter five of my book IN SEARCH OF THE TRUTH FOR THE VIETNAM COMBAT VETERAN. In that essay it was stated the proof had surfaced regarding birth defects in children of exposed veterans. As a matter of fact in 1984, I had attempted to do a survey of Vietnam veterans exposed to herbicides, and their offspring. This project was through the VFW MAGAZINE. It was not a successful venture as I only received 103 responses out of approximately 250,000 Vietnam veterans who were members at that time. Not getting exactly what I wanted from that project, I sought other sources. Those sources included the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Occupational Health Safety Administration (OSHA), Battelle Institute, the Ohio State University Medical and Biochemistry Department, and the Center for Disease Control (CDC). Those resources were far better than mine, with the exception of the CDC. I challenged the CDC in early 1988 when they claimed they could not find 1,100 exposed Vietnam veterans for sample studies. My critique then, as it is now, I had personally filed that many claims by 1988 in one county. How could the CDC, claim they could not find 1,100 exposed Vietnam veterans in the whole country? However, I did find much valuable information from the other mentioned sources. In the chapter, Poison: Agent Orange (published in 1983) damage in unborn rats was indicated. The latest report released from the NAS now states the possibility of a link of those exposed to dioxin veterans, to increased risk of Spina Bifida in their offspring. The case studies give support to that position. I still maintain there are many other birth defects as a result of the exposure. I also understand, this is a step by step process and for the first time in our history, it seems as if, we actually have a champion in our corner. It is important for all of us to remember, it is not over until the final decisions are made into the rules the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) operates under.

It must be said to all interested, two years before, when the first study was released, watered down rules came into effect. Secretary of the VA, Mr. Jesse Brown removed the words prostate cancer from the middle of a sentence. To add irony to the newest report the prostate cancer words were retained by the NAS. It seems as if those doctors know more about cancer than Secretary Brown. I had personally written Secretary Brown of that foul decision. I would hope others would have done the same. It seemed as if the leaders of the veteran organizations did not want to show any critique towards Secretary Brown. During his term he has made many speeches and received many accolades. He did fall short of being the veterans advocate he was in 1991, when employed by the Disabled American Veterans.

The papers I did review from the NAS show, without doubt, prostate cancer should not have been dropped by Secretary Brown in 1994-95. Again, prostate cancer is extremely rare in men under age 55. Yet we have buried hundreds of Vietnam veterans, dying as a result of that dreaded condition.

April 10, 1996 I received the PREPUBLICATION COPY Uncorrected Proofs VETERANS AND AGENT ORANGE-Update 1996, in other words the newest report on Agent Orange. I read the report and studied it most carefully. I gave you an update on this study. Of course there was more to come. All issues have not been addressed. I wish for you to remember, when we started in the 70's there was zero recognition. Now we have issues approved and issues being favorably considered. What a difference a generation makes. The aforementioned book was supplied to me by Congressman John Kasich, who supported our local studies in the beginning. His former veterans aide Pat Tiberi, now Congressman Tiberi, continues to support the studies.

The announcement by the President was no surprise to those of us who have followed the saga of Agent Orange over the years. This was a great opportunity to act as if suddenly we were upon new ideas. To make a point, these are not new issues. We have discussed Prostate cancer many times since it was excluded in 1994. The Vietnam veterans were well aware that this condition generally did not affect younger men. Yet it was high in incidence among Vietnam veterans. Over the years we have discussed birth defects. As written to you before, we have reviewed much evidence to conclude there is a severe problem with many Vietnam veterans children. This in fact, does show a much higher incident rate of birth defects than all other categories of veterans surveyed. When the President announced the inclusion of Spina Bifida in the Vietnam veterans offspring, as a condition contributed to Agent Orange exposure, we broke big ground in truth. Additionally, placed into recognition was porphyria cutanea tarda (PCT), a rare skin disease that can involve blistering the skin in areas exposed to the sun. Many studies have linked it to the liver as well. Also, recognized is acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy. We have discussed this issue before and will again discuss it now.

It has been suggested by the National Academy of Science through the committee who reviewed the evidence in the following. The committee found limited or suggestive evidence that herbicide or dioxin exposure may be associated with the acute, transient form of peripheral neuropathy, a nerve disorder which can (and usually does) lead to pain, numbness, and weakness in the limbs. Many of those veterans affected have indicated tingling in the extremities as well.

The studies found in the review of scientific literature have suggested that acute or subacute peripheral neuropathies can be associated with occupational exposure to herbicides (Ashe and Suskind, 1950); Baader and Bauer, 1951; Goldstein et al., 1959; Todd, 1962; Berkley and Magee, 1963; Poland et al., 1971 Jirasek et al., 1974). As you can plainly see through our writings over the years, compared to the above dates. They have known it all along! While they were telling the Vietnam veteran "it won't hurt you!" It was hurting you and science knew it.

In the 1996 report VETERANS AND AGENT ORANGE, it states clearly, "Todd (1962) reported a sprayer of 2,4-D weed killer who developed a gastrointestinal disturbance and, within days, a severe sensory/motor polyneuropathy after contact with the chemical." This was reported to you through my article The VERDICT IS IN: GUILTY! and POISON: AGENT ORANGE both essays which are incorporated in the book IN SEARCH OF THE TRUTH FOR VIETNAM COMBAT VETERANS. There are many more references to the condition that has been well documented in the 1996 report of the NAS. An important issue that has not been addressed is the factor of related conditions. There is to be imposed a one year time limit from leaving Vietnam, to being diagnosed with the condition. Yet other conditions have as much as a seven year presumptive period, such as Multiple Sclerosis. Are we now looking at a one year time frame to impose on the already afflicted Vietnam Veteran?

The President stated in his radio and television broadcast that before the rules were implemented they would be processed with the veteran organizations. Then placed in the Federal Register. It is time to write to the leadership of the veterans organizations and inform them you wish to have time frames eliminated in any conditions related to peripheral neuropathy. When the veteran first notices the symptoms he or she may discount the symptoms. In some cases it has taken the doctor several years to determine the diagnosis. In most cases the condition is diagnosed by eliminating all other types of neurological conditions.

RESEARCH

I did an article "ARE THEY SERIOUS?" in 1989. The article mentioned, I had filed 1,100 claims by the date the CDC decided they could not find 1,100 exposed veterans. This article became a chapter in my book "IN SEARCH OF THE TRUTH FOR THE VIETNAM COMBAT VETERAN" always available at no charge. Wisely, the VA moved its research hopes to the Institute of Medicine, the National Academy of Science.

My mother used to tell me when I needed something that "a half a loaf is better than none." This is a great quote that fits very well, into the VA scheme of things pertaining to Agent Orange; most especially the issue of BIRTH DEFECTS. My position is "a half a loaf may be better than none, but we will not accept crumbs!"

In the Veterans and Agent Orange: Update 1996 (VAO-96) the door was opened with SPINA BIFIDA being accepted as a residual of Agent Orange exposure in offspring, of veterans exposed to herbicides. The VAO-96 states "There is limited/suggestive evidence of an association between exposure to the herbicides considered in this report and spina bifida. There is inadequate or insufficient evidence to determine whether an association exists between exposure to herbicides and all other birth defects." There is no comment to say there is no association. It is obvious the information is at this time not complete. Research must and will go on. The VAO-96 further states: "Biologic Plausibility- Laboratory studies of the potential developmental toxicity, specifically birth defects, of TCDD and herbicides as a result of exposure to adult male animals are too limited to permit conclusions."

During the CDC research and review of available data, several areas were covered. There was a telephone poll conducted that gave limited studies. The CDC attempted to use this as "validated research" and created some clouds over the Agent Orange issues. The data gathered by CDC in 1989 was restudied in VAO-96 and placed in apparent correct status. The VAO-96 states in part "As part of the CDC Vietnam Experience Study (1989), the reproductive outcomes and the health of children of male veterans were examined. The VES assessment included a telephone interview, a review of hospital birth defect records for a subsample of veterans who underwent a medical examination, and a review of the medical records of selected birth defects for all study subjects." This report actually revealed a significantly higher birth defect rate among the Vietnam veterans offspring 64.6 per 1,000 total births vs. Non Vietnam veterans rate of 49.5 per 1,000 total births. It is important for you to know, there were several different areas of birth defects! Not only spina bifida; also, birth defects of the nervous system, ear, face neck, and integument (skin). About half of the health problems were respiratory, as in asthma; also, otitis media. In general the Vietnam veterans reported more health problems than non Vietnam veterans. This was 1989 and prior! Please remember, many birth defects were not reported. Those defects not showing until the child reached age three for example were usually lost issues. Think about this for example: speech problems, hearing disorders, tooth and gum problems. Problems that would not appear for a few years. So again a factor worked against the Vietnam veteran and even worse, their children. There is no possibility the CDC would have followed up, on what was thought to be a normal healthy child , concerning two million plus, Vietnam veterans. Seven years later VAO-96 allowed one birth defect, spina bifida. With a much higher ratio, we have Cerebral Palsy which has been all but ignored.

So in a nutshell, the birth defect issue is still a major issue, to be resolved later! If we hold our ground and continue to press our issues we will eventually be victorious. If we stand idle, we will lose. There are untouched issues such as learning disabilities.

SOME VICTORY

The announcement by the President was no surprise to those of us who have followed the saga of Agent Orange over the years. This was a great opportunity to act as if suddenly we were upon new ideas. To make a point, these are not new issues. We have discussed Prostate cancer many times since it was excluded in 1994. The Vietnam veterans were well aware that this condition generally did not affect younger men. Yet it was high in incidence among Vietnam veterans. Over the years we have discussed birth defects. As written to you before, we have reviewed much evidence to conclude there is a severe problem with many Vietnam veterans children. This in fact, does show a much higher incident rate of birth defects than all other categories of veterans surveyed. When the President announced the inclusion of Spina Bifida in the Vietnam veterans offspring, as a condition contributed to Agent Orange exposure, we broke big ground in truth. Additionally, placed into recognition was porphyria cutanea tarda (PCT), a rare skin disease that can involve blistering the skin in areas exposed to the sun. Many studies have linked it to the liver as well. Also, recognized is acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy. We have discussed this issue before and will again discuss it now.

It has been suggested by the National Academy of Science through the committee who reviewed the evidence in the following. The committee found limited or suggestive evidence that herbicide or dioxin exposure may be associated with the acute, transient form of peripheral neuropathy, a nerve disorder which can (and usually does) lead to pain, numbness, and weakness in the limbs. Many of those veterans affected have indicated tingling in the extremities as well.

The studies found in the review of scientific literature have suggested that acute or subacute peripheral neuropathies can be associated with occupational exposure to herbicides (Ashe and Suskind, 1950); Baader and Bauer, 1951; Goldstein et al., 1959; Todd, 1962; Berkley and Magee, 1963; Poland et al., 1971 Jirasek et al., 1974). As you can plainly see through our writings over the years, compared to the above dates. They have known it all along! While they were telling the Vietnam veteran "it won't hurt you!" It was hurting you and science knew it.

In the 1996 report VETERANS AND AGENT ORANGE, it states clearly, "Todd (1962) reported a sprayer of 2,4-D weed killer who developed a gastrointestinal disturbance and, within days, a severe sensory/motor polyneuropathy after contact with the chemical." This was reported to you through my article The VERDICT IS IN: GUILTY! and POISON: AGENT ORANGE both essays which are incorporated in the book IN SEARCH OF THE TRUTH FOR VIETNAM COMBAT VETERANS. There are many more references to the condition that has been well documented in the 1996 report of the NAS. An important issue that has not been addressed is the factor of related conditions. There is to be imposed a one year time limit from leaving Vietnam, to being diagnosed with the condition. Yet other conditions have as much as a seven year presumptive period, such as Multiple Sclerosis. Are we now looking at a one year time frame to impose on the already afflicted Vietnam Veteran?

The President stated in his radio and television broadcast that before the rules were implemented they would be processed with the veteran organizations. Then placed in the Federal Register. It is time to write to the leadership of this veterans organization and inform them you wish to have time frames eliminated in any conditions related to peripheral neuropathy. When the veteran first notices the symptoms he or she may discount the symptoms. In some cases it has taken the doctor several years to determine the diagnosis. In most cases the condition is diagnosed by eliminating all other types of neurological conditions.

PERIPHERAL NEUROPATHY

The National Academy of Science (NAS) completed the second set of objectives in March 1996. The comprehensive report was published within days. On March 15th we heard the news of several new conditions being accepted as residuals of Agent Orange. We also watched the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) finally accept prostate cancer after two tries by the NAS. It would seem as if the VA feels they are more knowledgeable in these affairs than the world's greatest doctors and scientists.

This strangely brings us to peripheral neuropathy. In that same edition dealing with Agent Orange residuals we see the NAS is dealing with issues and the VA is misdealing with issues. To be exact is the Neurobehavioral Disorders. The section (10) clearly defines the various disorders and their studies. It gives an excellent chart representation of the studies used. In this study the NAS clearly shows some inconclusive results. The VA of course takes these comments to: deny the claim. The NAS states: Neurologic dysfunction can be further classified, based on anatomic distribution, as either global or focal; temporal onset, as acute, subacute, or chronic; or temporal course, as transient or persistent." Thus, we must look at the overall view of the question at hand, did Agent Orange contribute to the condition? The NAS states "Case identification in neurology is often difficult. Despite advances in neuroimaging, many types of Neurologic alterations are biochemical and show no abnormalities on scanning tests." The NAS also states: "timing is important in assessing the effect of chemical exposures of Neurologic function. Some symptoms of Neurologic importance will appear acutely but be short-lived. Others will appear slowly but be detectable for extended periods." The report specifically states: "the potential neurotoxicity of TCDD and herbicides in animal studies has not been thoroughly investigated." It is small wonder we find fault in VA decisions. Instead of advising the veteran his study is not completed. The VA denies the case and often the veteran will forget the issue. The Veterans and Agent Orange (VAO) committee recommended later in life studies on all occupational cases reviewed. The report stated with no reservation: "theoretically, exposure to neurotoxin could produce "accelerated aging" of the brain due to premature neuronal loss, which could then result in neurobehavioral deficits.

The report from the VAO did give some facts the veteran community needs to be familiar with. First in VAO, the committee was concluded that there are no definitive studies to determine whether exposure to dioxin or related herbicides is associated with (Central Nervous System) CNS motor/coordination problems. Follow up should be assessed further in exposed subjects. Second in VAO it is clearly stated the Chronic Persistent Peripheral Neuropathy summary the evidence was inadequate or insufficient of an association in exposure to be considered. It nowhere said it should be ruled out, as the VA did rule out this condition. It will not be considered, at this time. I will add however, as veterans present themselves to the VA doctors and press the issue of Chronic Persistent Peripheral Neuropathy we will see changes. It must be remembered by all of us. Many of the VA doctors will still have doubt when the work with the veterans neurobehavioral disorders. Many doctors are not going to be familiar with the condition being a residual of exposure to chemicals. Thus the condition may be over looked for years! When the NAS releases its next report we will hopefully see the various other ignored neurobehavioral disorders addressed.

We need to observe the actions of our government in all respects. With the cuts in budgets and the reduction of services the Vietnam victim is certain to suffer even further.

PERIPHERAL NEUROPATHY II

We have been working on the conditions known as NEUROBEHAVIORAL DISORDERS. We last addressed the Acute and Subacute transient peripheral neuropathy. The VA has accepted this as a service connectable condition as a residual of exposure to Agent Orange. This was based on the summary statement "there is some evidence to suggest that neuropathy of acute or subacute onset may be associated with herbicide exposure." The question of this hour is how could the VA choose these conditions and omit the more common condition of CHRONIC PERSISTENT PERIPHERAL NEUROPATHY.

In the VETERANS AND AGENT ORANGE: UPDATE 1996 (VAO-96), these conditions were addressed. The VA had agreed several years ago to work with the National Academy of Science (NAS) in order to determine the conditions which would be accepted as service connectable in relation to Agent Orange exposure. Often we have problems dealing with facts and often the facts may disprove that which we most desire. Other times the facts are not conclusive and the issue must rest until more significant data is considered. Such may be the case of chronic persistent peripheral neuropathy. It must be emphasized that because we must wait upon additional evidence, the issue is not resolved. It simply means further study may be required in order to obtain the absolute.

I will quote from the VAO-96 "although some of the case reports reviewed in VAO suggested that an acute or subacute peripheral can develop with exposure to TCDD and related products, other reports with comparison groups did not offer clear evidence that TCDD exposure is associated with chronic peripheral neuropathy. The most rigorously conducted studies argued against a relationship between TCDD or herbicides and chronic persistent neuropathy." Now, we must place the statement in perspective.

In placing perspective, I will quote the next paragraph from VAO-96 "as a group, the studies concerning peripheral neuropathy have been conducted with highly varying methodologies and have lacked uniformity of operational definitions of neuropathy. They have not applied consistent methods to define a comparison population or to determine exposure or clinical deficits. Timing of follow-up may be important, since

many, but not all, reports that find neuropathy were based on assessments made only a short time after exposure. It was concluded that careful definition of neuropathy and standardization of protocols will be essential to future evaluations." Is this to mean the end of the discussion? The answer is no. It is not an end, only a point. In every journey there are points. A point to start, a point to review and a point resume. We are now at the point to review. Often many experts have stated the blood tests are very important in determination. The blood test required are very expensive. There has been great reluctance on the part of government to research through the blood test method.

In the VAO-96 in the UPDATE OF THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE the issue is clarified in the following "The exposure index depended entirely on the subjects reports and no confirmatory documentation or blood levels of TCDD were obtained." In light of prior studies (CDC 1988,1989) that documented no relationship between this self-reported herbicide exposure index and a biological marker of actual dioxin exposure among Vietnam veterans, this study neither confirmed nor refuted a relationship between neuropathy and dioxin exposure among Vietnam veterans.

This leaves a powerful question with us, when will the issue be resolved? The answer lies in a future report to be made by the NAS. It has certainly not been resolved as of yet.

BIRTH DEFECTS

It is time for a study to be made comparing birth defects in the non veteran population born between 1946 and 1955 and compare it to veterans exposed to Agent Orange of the exact same age group. I am positive you will see a much higher incident of birth defects among the Vietnam veterans group.

Currently there is a bill in Congress to compensate a select few Vietnam veterans. This would recognize spina bifida and several other problems related to exposure to Agent Orange. The other conditions were discussed in previous writings. It is important to remember the logic behind the actions of our government and its relationship to the veteran. No matter how frustrated we become with the VA, we must remember it is the Congress and President who have the final say in the allowable conditions that are to be service connected. If Congress and the President do not take the appropriate action, absolutely nothing will happen. Until VA regulations are included, as far as the VA is concerned the condition is not going to be considered for compensation.

Since the last report from the National Academy of Science (NAS) we have observed much action. We also should have a few questions. The first question that comes to my mind is regarding birth defects. Is there an explanation to the theory of only one singular birth defect being a result of exposure to dioxin? As I had stated in a recent meeting with about 40 veterans and a few widows, if you have a gene that is damaged because you were soaked in poison, is it logical that spina bifida would be the only birth defect to come from that damaged gene? I think not. Logic would tell me that there is a myriad of conditions that may well be a direct result of genetic damage in a person so exposed.

Since early 1983 I have reviewed many articles from various scientific and medical publications. There have been several articles that would lead a layman to believe genetic damage can and does react differently depending upon the individuals involved. There are documented cases of twins being born one healthy, one not. I have read twin studies on several occasions and the studies have always differed. The only consistency is the marked variations.

Now is the time veterans groups pull together and form a unified effort to read, no study, the information that is supplied to the VA and other branches of our government. It is common knowledge that EPA reports of the 1960's and 1970's indicated concern regarding the toxic nature of the chemical we all call Agent Orange. Often critics of the Vietnam veteran compared the aerial spray

of right of ways in America to the alleged identical spray used in Vietnam. That was simply not a true statement in any form. The spray used in Vietnam was 30-40 parts per million (ppm) TCDD while the spray used in America was less than 1 ppm TCDD.

Over the past decade and one half, I have spoken with thousands of Vietnam veterans or their widows about their children with various birth defects. When I say thousands, let us place that in perspective. There are less than 115,000 veterans in Franklin County. I have spoken with well over a thousand veterans who have children born with birth defects. Although this is strictly non scientific, if we have thousands of children born to Vietnam veterans in Franklin County doesn't that indicate a serious problem?

We now have the "foot in the door" with spinal bifida. It is time to push for all birth defects to be compared. It should include those children who have learning disabilities as well. Let us press our congressional representatives to take positive action today!

BIRTH DEFECTS II

As Discussed in part I of this series on birth defects it was explained how the Vietnam veteran faced a hostile environment in obtaining fair and impartial review of the various birth defects appearing in their children. The government was reluctant to give that extra effort needed for recognition. Until less than a decade ago it was pounded into the minds of Americans that Agent Orange only caused chloracne, a skin disorder. There was constant governmental denial of any relationship to birth defects. In 1996, which was a quarter century after the last use of Agent Orange on American troops, it was publicly conceded that Agent Orange may be responsible for one solitary birth defect. The untold part of this story was the vast amount of evidence that shows a probable link to the largest killer of children in the United States. Other very common serious heath problems were also reported at an increase over parents not exposed to Agent Orange.

In the Veterans and Agent Orange: Update 1996 (VAO-96) the door was opened with SPINA BIFIDA being accepted as a residual of Agent Orange exposure in offspring, of veterans exposed to herbicides. A major problem still exists and seems to be swept under the mat. That problem is the other significant birth defects that Vietnam veteran offspring seem to have at a much higher rate than non Vietnam veterans. These include leukemia, the number one killer disease of children. Elevated odds were found for the nervous system, musculoskeletal defects, hydrocephalus (which ratio rivals Spina Bifida) and hypospadias, a developmental anomaly in the male in which the urethra opens on the underside of the penis or on the perineum. The VAO- 96 report continues with the following statement, "about half of the health conditions reported were respiratory disease (mostly asthma and pneumonia) and otitis media. For most of the conditions, the veterans reported more health conditions than non-Vietnam veterans." There are other conditions which have a less significant ratio, but still not to be ruled out as excessive. These include but are not limited to digestive disorders, learning disabilities and behavioral disorders.

I wish to make another important quote from VAO-96, "The second substudy, the Cerebrospinal Malformation (CSM) Study, involved the analysis of medical records for all cases of cerebrospinal malformations (spina bifida, anencephalus, hydrocephalus ) and still births reported by veterans in the interview study. The substudy found 26 cerebrospinal malformations (live and stillbirths) among children of Vietnam veterans and 12 among children of non Vietnam veterans."

These conditions may not seem important to the government officials who make the all important decisions that affect the lives of veterans. They certainly are important to many veterans who have children who have been crippled by the exposure of their parent to Agent Orange. These children suffer while the "good ol boys" continue to set agendas without consideration of the Vietnam veteran.

We must continue to demand the investigation of the birth defects in children. Our nations future is at stake. Our children are our future.

BIRTH DEFECTS III

After the successful publication of my first two Agent Orange articles in 1983, it was decided to attempt a venture into an area that had very little exploration at the time. As a Veterans Service Officer, I had met quite a few veterans who had children with various birth defects. The problems ranged from learning disabilities to obvious crippling conditions. There were very few articles available dealing with the children; however, I was very aware of the situation.

In 1984 there was an attempt to do my own survey with the birth defect question. I asked the VFW Magazine to run an article asking Vietnam veterans to respond to the types of birth defects. With an approximate 250,000 Vietnam veterans in the membership at that time, I thought I would get good response. I didnt. The response was about 105 letters. I knew more than 105 veterans personally , in this community, who had a child that had some sort of problem, either physical defects or a possible learning disability. With a response of 105 out of 250,000 it was apparent we had to rely on the Center for Disease Control (CDC); or, other government sources. It was very disappointing to learn the CDC was either unable, or not interested enough to develop information supplied to them. As a result of the CDCs inability to find 1,100 veterans in 1986 that were exposed to Agent Orange, many of us in the veterans community, lost all hope in the CDC; or their being even remotely effective in this issue. I had written an article "ARE THEY SERIOUS?" in 1989. The article mentioned, I had filed 1,100 claims by the date the CDC decided they could not find 1,100 exposed veterans. This article became a chapter in this book "IN SEARCH OF THE TRUTH FOR THE VIETNAM COMBAT VETERAN" it has been always available at no charge. Wisely, the VA moved its research hopes to the Institute of Medicine, the National Academy of Science.

Again, my mother used to tell me when I needed something that "a half a loaf is better than none." This is a great quote that fits very well, into the VA scheme of things pertaining to Agent Orange; most especially the issue of BIRTH DEFECTS. My position is "a half a loaf may be better than none, but we will not accept crumbs!"

In the Veterans and Agent Orange: Update 1996 (VAO-96) the door was opened with SPINA BIFIDA being accepted as a residual of Agent Orange exposure in offspring, of veterans exposed to herbicides. The VAO-96 states "There is limited/suggestive evidence of an association between exposure to the herbicides considered in this report and spina bifida. There is inadequate or insufficient evidence to determine whether an association exists between exposure to herbicides and all other birth defects." There is no comment to say there is no association.

It is obvious the information is at this time not complete. Research must and will go on. The VAO-96 further states: "Biologic Plausibility- Laboratory studies of the potential developmental toxicity, specifically birth defects, of TCDD and herbicides as a result of exposure to adult male animals are too limited to permit conclusions." During the CDC research and review of available data, several areas were covered. There was a telephone poll conducted that gave limited studies. The CDC attempted to use this as "validated research" and created some clouds over the Agent Orange issues. The data gathered by CDC in 1989 was restudied in VAO-96 and placed in apparent correct status. The VAO-96 states in part "As part of the CDC Vietnam Experience Study (1989), the reproductive outcomes and the health of children of male veterans were examined. The VES assessment included a telephone interview, a review of hospital birth defect records for a subsample of veterans who underwent a medical examination, and a review of the medical records of selected birth defects for all study subjects." This report actually revealed a significantly higher birth defect rate among the Vietnam veterans offspring 64.6 per 1,000 total births vs. Non Vietnam veterans rate of 49.5 per 1,000 total births. It is important for you to know, there were several different areas of birth defects! Not only spina bifida; also, birth defects of the nervous system, ear, face neck, and integument (skin). About half of the health problems were respiratory, as in asthma; also, otitis media. In general the Vietnam veterans reported more health problems than non Vietnam veterans. This was 1989 and prior! Please remember, many birth defects were not reported. Those defects not showing until the child reached age three for example were usually lost issues. Think about this for example: speech problems, hearing disorders, tooth and gum problems. Problems that would not appear for a few years. So again a factor worked against the Vietnam veteran and even worse, their children. There is no possibility the CDC would have followed up, on what was thought to be a normal healthy child , concerning two million plus, Vietnam veterans. In 1996 VAO-96 allowed one birth defect, spina bifida.

So in a nutshell, the birth defect issue is still a major issue, to be resolved later! If we hold our ground and continue to press our issues we will eventually be victorious. If we stand idle, we will lose.

SIRS

As far as I understand, if an Agent Orange case is not involving the seven cancers selected by Secretary Brown, or chloracne or PCT; the VA is listing the claim on a special set of tapes called SIRS. When each issue is later addressed the tapes will be reviewed and veterans with those conditions will be considered.

A few things you have heard before need repeated. Several million Vietnam veterans will be lost in the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs. We saw the VA find a sure way to end the problem of Agent Orange plaguing the system. He arbitrarily denied all claims except those few which fell into a selected small area of cancers. Even at its very best of limited cancers, the secretary struck out conditions in the middle of a sentence. He removed the words linking prostate cancer to Agent Orange. The National Academy of Science had carefully placed those words in the center of a sentence. They were protected by a comma on each side. Alas, to no avail, the secretary saw them and knowing thousands would benefit, he struck them away. A little over two years later they were reinserted. This was one time we stuck together and fought the battle!

His decision early in 1994 started a clock ticking away the hopes of millions of Vietnam veterans gaining any justice. It seems as if the VA can stretch the time enough, the veterans will lose interest. It is working. The veterans are losing interest. Many have given up hope; even worse many have died. The VA has denied thousands of cancer claims because they do not fit into that very narrow definition as listed.

If you had a claim filed for residuals of Agent Orange prior to February 1994. You must realize, there is a one year period in which to appeal. If you didn't file the appeal, you didn't necessarily lose it. However, beginning February 1995, there were thousands losing their right to appeal the decisions. To delay was to automatically lose, if your condition was one of those Jesse Brown recognized. If yours was other than one of the select few, you still have an opportunity to pursue the claim and/or appeal. You can reopen with new and material evidence. This evidence will be forthcoming from the National Academy of Science. The VA agreed to use their research on decisions. I assure you, as long as I am able to read and write, my reports will go out to those who choose to read them.

The spraying of Agent Orange ceased in 1971; the untimely deaths of Vietnam veterans continues. Over a quarter century has passed since the spray stopped. The VA has done little, in the meantime, to soothe the terrible pain.

As an example some asked about diabetes. The National Academy of Science (NAS) has not released information in regards to their studies on diabetes. They were scheduled to release information in July of 1995. As you can see July came and went with no sign of a release of information. In the system we are in, it is difficult to predict any time period of action. I hope we shall soon receive a new report from the NAS. This has been a very difficult time in the history of our struggle on the Agent Orange issue. For so many years the government simply said no. Suddenly we found ourselves winning a major court action in the San Francisco District Court. Then Secretary Derwinski agreed to recognize Agent Orange as a dangerous chemical with devastating residuals. That was in 1988. Then "the famed settlement" with the seven chemical companies, it looked like the total victory was in sight. The chemical companies settled in May 1984 for $180,000,000.00 and that amount was deposited at interest. Over the past eleven plus years that money was distributed through the District Court in Brooklyn, New York. Thus, we have a Federal District Court decision on both coasts seven and again eleven years ago, with little in between. As I told my friend the hang glider rider, hang in there!

Has the end of the Agent Orange era arrived? Some Bureaucrats thought so: but, it is not the end of Agent Orange issues. Only the end of the hopes of several million Vietnam veterans who were lost in the quick response of Secretary Brown of the VA. It seemed as if the VA found a sure way to end the problem of Agent Orange plaguing the system. Arbitrarily deny all claims, except those few which fell into a selected small area of cancers.

If you had a claim filed for any residuals of Agent Orange prior to February 1994, today is the day to review that claim to make sure you are not being arbitrarily denied your rights. If you have not already done so; to delay is to automatically lose. The time to act is now.

It is time to call for a review of your claim. To wait will eliminate your chances of receiving justice well after a quarter of a century and more for untold thousands. The spraying of Agent Orange ceased in 1971; the untimely deaths of Vietnam veterans continues.

UPDATE 1998 (1999)

It was thought by many to be a report that would develop the question regarding birth defects, diabetes, peripheral neuropathy and out of the ordinary conditions creating havoc on Vietnam veterans. The report did call for additional studies on these conditions. However the next report is not due until 2000. If we have the same delay situation again, the report may well not be released until 2001. For those suffering from urinary bladder cancer this will be more than likely to late for help with their financial burden. Many times it is forgotten the purpose of compensation is to compensate for the loss of earning power.

Once again the birth defect issue studies were not conclusive. A quote from the new study states in part "Several previous studies of veterans showed a suggestive association with spina bifida, although a number of methodologic issues limit interpretation. [Three new occupational studies] provide some additional support for the association of herbicide with this specific birth defect, although concerns remain, including the control of confounding, exposure to herbicides and TCDD."

In general language this means, the studies are far from complete. It has remained a mystery if the study of birth defects are restricted to those which were noted by physicians at birth. The major question remains, after all of the years dealing with this subject; are birth defects that do not show at birth, as learning disabilities, et al, later studied?

Many Vietnam veterans have concerns regarding their skin disorders. It has been established for decades that chloracne is a recognized residual of Agent Orange. Now recent studies have indicated some change in procedure. "In VAO and Update 1996, all skin cancers were assessed together. However, with this review, the committee has decided to address studies assessing the health risk associated with nonmelanocytic cancers (basal and squamous cell carcinoma)." The report goes on to state "The strongest evidence linking herbicide exposure and nonmelanocytic skin cancers comes from a recent community-based control study. This study controlled for sun exposure, skin and hair color, and mothers ethnic origin, and found increasing of squamous cell carcinoma with increasing lifetime exposure to herbicides. Although the committee agrees that [this] study is best to date, concerns still remained regarding the control of confounding and the adequacy of exposure assessment." It further stated "In addition, efforts to examine the carcinogenicity of organic arsenicals should be encouraged."

In regards to diabetes the study stated in part "the potentially more definitive 1997 report from the Ranch Hand study raises the possibility that veterans in the highest herbicide exposure category may be at increased risk."

HERBICIDES, DIABETES AND YOU

In the month of March 2000, I wrote an article for the OHIO AMVET magazine, regarding the Ranch Hand study of diabetes and Agent Orange exposure. This was actually, a developing follow up, on the subject addressed several years before regarding diabetes and herbicide exposure.

In March of the year 2000, we had an astounding revelation from the United States Air Force regarding Agent Orange and its devastating affect upon its victims. This is the same United States Air Force whose "Ranch Hand study" at one time was used by the old Veterans Administration, now the Department of Veterans Affairs, to uphold the theory that the herbicides only caused chloracne. As a side note: I have seen more than one chloracne case denied by the VARO! In the chapter: THE VERDICT IS IN: GUILTY, Operation Ranch Hand personnel were claiming to have played in Agent Orange by spraying it upon one another in acts of horseplay. That had been a topic in a COLUMBUS DISPATCH story, which appeared to foil Vietnam veteran attempts to obtain rightful benefits from being poisoned by dangerous herbicides.

The Ranch Hand study now suddenly reveals, what has been addressed in my articles for over a decade. There are many conditions resulting from Agent Orange besides chloracne. These conditions include diabetes and birth defects other than spina bifida.

The new report found in VETERANS and AGENT ORANGE Update 2000, confirms what the up to date veteran has known for many years, diabetes developed in later life is associated with exposure to herbicides containing Tetrachlor isomer of p-dibenzo dioxin known as TCDD or Agent Orange. It has been called the most lethal synthetic chemical known to man.

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) of the Institute of Health has now released the study to America. Congressman John Kasich furnished my copy. It was my duty to read the entire publication and report findings to my clients and those who read my work.

I had sent a copy of the unfinished draft of this chapter to Secretary of Veterans Affairs Hershel Gober in October. In a letter dated November 1, 2000, Secretary Gober informed me of his great interest in the NAS study and he had a task force studying the NAS document. He further promised to have a decision before Thanksgiving. True to his word, Secretary Gober announced November 9, 2000 the diabetes type 2 (adult onset) was to be service connected.

Veterans affected by this situation will probably reach more that one quarter million. A major dilemma faces the VA and American politicians. Who is going to pay the bill? Well for the past years since the end of the Vietnam War, Americas veterans have paid a terribly high price. Now the VA and the politicians are working on their cost. The VA has apparently accepted responsibility.

In conversations with two individuals in separate interviews, employed by the VA, I was told the cost would be prohibitive. These were conversations with veterans employed in the VA who are dedicated to fairness. It was finally the time for the government to come to the aid of the Agent Orange diabetes victim. The study by the NAS shows the designation of "Limited/Suggestive" scientific evidence, which is as strong as three other conditions, approved by the VA.

Hundreds of my veteran clients had peripheral neuropathy claims denied by the VA, because their condition did not fall into the acute and subacute category as established in earlier VAO studies. Diabetes is a major cause of peripheral neuropathy. Major changes are in the forecast on this issue. Now we can correct the problems of the past for those who still survive.

Diabetes moved upward in the NAS report and the 2000 Ranch Hand study together gave new hope to Vietnam veterans. The Ranch Hand study indicated the higher the bloodstream concentration of dioxin, shown in tests back in the 1980s (which was ten years or more) after exposure to Agent Orange was greater risk in developing diabetes. There are dioxin studies now completed in the USA showing abnormalities in the bodys insulin response to sugar. Diabetes also causes death by heart and kidney failure as well as other diseases. These conditions have not been ruled out and most likely will not be ruled out.

MEDIA CATCH UP!

Tuesday April 2, 2002 the Columbus Dispatch and many other papers across our land presented an article on Agent Orange and the VA debt to veterans. It was refreshing to say the least to see the Columbus Dispatch article that verifies several chapters in the book In Search Of The Truth For Vietnam Combat Veterans 1998 Ohio AMVETS.

Finally the issue of effective dates were resolved by the 9^th United States Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The article quoted Judge Dorothy Nelson "ailing Vietnam veterans should not bear the financial burden of government delays in acknowledging the devastating effects of Agent Orange." This decision will also assist the survivors of deceased veterans obtain benefits long overdue them.

In this work authored by David Barker from 1983 to 2001 each issue addressed in the Columbus Dispatch article was addressed in the 1980s and 90s. The Columbus Dispatch was sent copies but declined to publish or review them. The now very well known CNBC financial newscaster Liz Claman did a nice piece on the issues with David Barker on then WTVN-TV Channel 6. The OHIO AMVET magazine, Ohio VFW News, VVAs Ohio Veteran Communicator and several other veteran publications published each chapter of the book in serial form.

The letter to Jesse Brown on April 20, 1994 and its follow-up was also incorporated into the book and the issue was published in our state veteran publications as well as Bravo Outlook a national magazine.

In each year the National Academy of Sciences has published a review, the author has revised his work to reflect on the new findings.

In 1983 when employed by the Franklin County Soldier and Sailors Relief Commission, now known as the Franklin County Veterans Service Commission, David Barker came under personal attack on his position regarding Agent Orange. There was considerable pressure by isolated critics that attempted to discredit not only the work but the author as well. Several critics went to the point of an attempt to cause the termination of the authors employment. Fortunately for David it was to no avail.

To sum up the decision of the Appeals Court and the Columbus Dispatch we thank you in this year of 2002

IF YOU WERE EXPOSED TO AGENT ORANGE READ THIS!

Leukemia and other issues resulting from the 2002 report released in January 2003 from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). The fourth biennial update.

Agent Orange first used in Vietnam in February of 1961 and used thereafter until the end of 1971 has beleaguered surviving Vietnam veterans more than any other issue. From the early months of the 1970s returning Vietnam veterans reported a multitude of conditions out of the normal realm of illness which seemed to be from a common source. That source was Agent Orange.

For many years we fought an uphill battle, which is still far from won. Currently we are in the midst of a bureaucratic argument of charging Vietnam veterans co-payment of medicines related to conditions the veterans knows is related to their Agent Orange exposure. Congress can mandate all of the laws and regulations they want and VA lawyers will interpret them to satisfy the VA budget. Thus three decades after the last use of the poisonous herbicide Agent Orange we are still fighting the system.

Again, a report from the National Academy of Sciences regarding leukemia and Agent Orange. If you recall the last report regarding leukemia and Agent Orange was flawed and another birth defect issue was trashed. That aroused joy in the hearts of the VA bureaucrats who are budget driven.

The Institute of Medicine, the National Academy of Sciences connected thorough research Agent Orange with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL). In the past reports Veterans and Agent Orange mention of this condition was made as not significant. Now it has been upgraded and the results will be sent to the VA lawyers to finalize the rules the victims will be subjected to for benefits. The research has indicated CLL is sharing characteristics with Hodgkin's Disease and Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma. Well, why not admit the facts that nearly all cancers are related. Most especially the people exposed to herbicides.

Many cancers are the result of Agent Orange. As a matter of fact it has been very difficult for the NAS scientists definitely rule out any cancer, being a residual of the exposure to the deadliest of synthetic chemicals. In 1994 it was determined that soft tissue sarcoma was a residual of exposure to Agent Orange. Since that time the Central Office redefined what soft tissue sarcoma is and had been considered. Thus it was restricted to certain organs rather than sarcoma of soft tissue in general.

Today, we still find many unbelievers in our midst. Even veterans in some cases that were in Vietnam feel if it did not affect them it just did not happen..

In the early 1990s my job had again been threatened over the stance taken regarding leukemia and cancers attacking those exposed to 2,3,7,8-TCDD or Agent Orange. Also it is very important to remember arsenic was used in herbicides as well as TCDD. Now, would you spray to kill undesirable weeds or rats around your home with arsenic? I doubt it. You may carefully set out bait with that substance; but I seriously doubt if you would spray your yard!

We need the NAS to concentrate on issues that are making Vietnam and certain Korea veterans ill with multiple cancers and other conditions. The birth defect issues as cerebral palsy which have a very high rate of incidence be explored. Renal cancer was upgraded in 1998 and where is a recent report on that killing condition? It would seem as if a condition that was upgraded would also have a high priority.

Another question comes to mind in the resolve of this issue. Those that died from Agent Orange before May 11, 1988 are statistics of the past. We see no evidence that their autopsies have been considered in the formula used in determination. I specifically recall veteran clients dying of cancer 1n the very early 1980s and their claim were denied, the appeals denied and the widows went on and the claim was forgotten by the VA. That issue did not make the cause and effect go away. It only made the statistics reflect other than the true facts. When these issues are brought to the attention of the veterans community some scoff, some deny, some ridicule, and some listen and make up their own mind.

One fact is important above all others after over thirty years of complaints, we are still far from the final analysis, so this fact bears repeating: The research has indicated CLL is sharing characteristics with Hodgkin's Disease and Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma. Well, why not admit the facts that nearly all cancers are related. Most especially the people exposed to herbicides. In 1988 none of these conditions were accepted.

I am certain there are those who criticize the eagerness of Vietnam veterans who want answers. However, this has been going on for nearly four decades.