Originally posted by 9007933:
My father served in Vietnam and was
exposed to large amounts of Agent
Orange. He died in 1989 while we lived
in England. He had originally been
diagnosed with some form of "viral
infection", then was later diagnosed
with "hepatitis non-A non-B". hepatitis
non-A non-B is what they used to refer
to hepatitis C as, since there was no
official test for it and no treatments
at the time. Also he had had for quite
some time before hand, several
upper-digestive problems. At the time of
diagnosis with hepatitis non-A non-B
(hepatitis C), it was assumed that he
contracted it through a blood
transfusion he received during
open-heart surgery about 6 or 7 years
earlier. In the past few days, while
researching my own medical condition, I
came across information regarding some
health effects caused by Agent Orange
that I was previously unaware of:
esophageal and digestive complications,
and liver complications that sometimes
mimic the symptoms and effects of
hepatitis C. Is it possible that what we
thought to be hepatitis C was actually
caused by Agent Orange?
Now, regarding my medical problem. I
have a very prominent connective tissue
disorder. I have so far been unable to
find any doctor knowledgeable enough to
diagnose it. After my own research, I
feel that it may be a form of Ehlers-Danlos
Syndrome (EDS) (info at
http://www.ednf.org/index.php).
There only seems to be one
contradiction: EDS is completely
hereditary, due to the fact that it's
caused by mutated genes and/or DNA
breaks; No one in my entire family
history has had this disorder. I think
that I may be the exception to the rule,
because although no one in my family
has/had it, Agent Orange would have the
ability to cause a gene mutation that
would create similar problems to EDS. By
the way, I was born in 1984. Does anyone
know if there is a correlation between
AO and connection tissue disorders in
the children of Vietnam Veterans? I also
have asthma.
I would appreciate any info on the
Hepatitis C issue or the EDS issue. I
know that it would be "too-little
too-late" for my father, but it's not
too late for me....and I have my son to
worry about, if it is genetic. Thank you
for taking the time to read this.
Yes, connective tissue disorder, and the
Hepatitis C or liver issue,
Just because they say it is hereditary, doesn't
mean that it isn't actually a chemical poisoning
by a teratogen chemical, 2-butoxyethanol, that
does affect the child
Consider glyconutrients for help
There is an ongoing trial now with schleroderma
patients, and they glyconutrients are helping.
Should have results soon.
Easy to be exposed to 2-butxoyethanol today.
AVOID it or what ails you and your loved ones
can be worse than it is now.
Maybe soon our researchers will note how similar
health issues have been down through the decades
and quit looking for something different all the
time?
Could be an issue for any soldier of any war
period ... or for non war periods ... or for
civilians. The clue is not the time period, BUT
the same chemical throughout the decades, so
even civilians are harmed, and that has been the
dilemma for the gulf war vets ... they have more
incidences of the same issues others have.
Dear Maggie:
OK so you do not accept the fact Agent Orange
has had a devastating effect on the nearly
20,000 Vietnam veterans I have interviewed since
1977 (plus thouands of other veterans). We have
had the Federal government deny veterans dying
of cancers other than soft tissue sarcoma for
decades. Widows and dependent children denied
death benefits. The VA approves some soft tissue
sarcoma cases and deny much more. You insist on
bringing more "facts" against what we have
fought for over 35 years. Why?
What is your motive?
If you wish to publish anti-Agent Orange
material please ask Military.com to give you
forum to do it. Please do not demean what little
forum we have here.
In one post above, I said thank you for some
information you posted. Then you post a link to
a site, which creates more doubt in the minds of
those, who do not wish to spend any more money
on research. I know this for a fact, as I get
e-mails constantly at my office regarding these
issues.
To quote the website: "Reply:
What Agent Orange gets
blamed for is a whole lot more than it can do.
Scientists have said that the immune issues they
find in Vietnam vets are not the kind of thing
that Dioxin would do." What scientists?
What criteria do they use? The sources used in
my work include the basics: National Academy
of Sciences, New England Journal of Medicine,
Journal of the American Medical Association,
USAF Operation Ranch Hand Study 2000, plus
nearly 20,000 different veterans medical records
reviewed by me since becoming a veterans service
officer
| Registered: Tue 12
November 2002
Ignored post by
DaveBarker posted
Fri 17 November 2006 12:06 PM
We are talking about the same thing: all that
happened to the Vietnam vet ... However, you
give it the heading DIOXIN ... I give
the other chemical the blame (Except for the
2-3 things that ARE dioxin (AO) only.
What happened to the Vietnam Vet? The whole
list of presented harm should be presumptively
approved; and although AO was in the mix for
some who were harmed, it is not the core issue
for most, nor did those who came down with many
health issues 'on this list' have to be exposed
to AO (They would have to be exposed to EGBE or
2-butoxyethanol, however)
I was just wondering, how many Vietnam Vets have
applied for disability? ... and what percentage
have been approved?
If they haven't figured it out by now, they
probably won't. Paradigm shifts are hard to do,
especially for the govt
To quote the website: "Reply: What Agent
Orange gets blamed for is a whole lot
more than it can do.
Scientists have said that the immune
issues they find in Vietnam vets are not
the kind of thing that Dioxin would do."
What scientists? What criteria do they
use? The sources used in my work include
the basics: National Academy of
Sciences, New England Journal of
Medicine, Journal of the American
Medical Association, USAF Operation
Ranch Hand Study 2000, plus nearly
20,000 different veterans medical
records reveiwed by me since becoming a
veterans service officer.
I am interested in sharing. What I stated is a
quote from a site, which raises issues that once
again place doubt on Agent Orange residuals. Not
in my mind, or most of those who visit the site.
But in the minds of those who constantly work to
deny the affect the chemical had on the Agent
Orange exposed veteran. The link clearly stated
as I copied it and pasted it "What Agent Orange
gets blamed for is a whole lot more than it can
do... Scientists have said that the immune
issues they find in Vietnam vets are not the
kind of thing that Dioxin would do." I respond
what scientists, I now add, what is their
research consisting of? A part of the research
found in my studies comes from the 10-80
Committee which was a Vietnam national study
done with the natives of the affected areas.
Those anti-Vietnam veteran sites are not going
to disappear, so my wanting them to go away is a
moot point. We worked for years to get what
little recognition for the damage done to
veterans (and others) by the government use of
herbicides in Vietnam, Korea DMZ, Guam, Thailand
and several other places.
I have no problem with issues of
2-butxoyethanol. I also have articles related to
many cases of other conditions as well. It is
just that this is an Agent Orange support forum
and posting information which IMPLIES Agent
Orange gets blamed for is a whole lot more than
it can do" is exactly what I heard in the
1970's. This was when I first became involved in
Agent Orange veterans cases.
I have written and published articles on:
Benzene, Depleted Uranium, ionization radiation,
non-ionization radiation, Undiagnosed Illness of
PGW veterans, PTSD and a lot more. They are not
posted on this site, they are posted elsewhere. Please notice your article was not
deleted, edited, moved or anything of that
nature. It remains intact. I am not a censor. My
statement to you is many people gave up careers
to bring the Agent Orange issue to light. One
was a VA employee of many years ago. Maude
Victor a Veterans Benefit Councelor who assisted
veterans in fighting the VA general response of
Agent Orange claims, "just say no!" She was
finally terminated. My own job was threatened in
1983 and 1984 over Agent Orange articles
published in veterans newspapers and magazines.
I simply ask you not to try to take away what we
worked so hard to obtain.
Registered: Tue 12
November 2002
Ignored post by
DaveBarker posted
Sat 18 November 2006 04:39 AM
Some of my info I found on Ranch Hand site &
some you reference.
I am just saying THE WHOLE list of harm
presented by the Vietnam Vet soldier should be
presumptively approved ... not just the first
4-5 items on the list. I am saying that if this
is what happened to our Vietnam VET, THEN it is
the kind of thing that 2-butoxyethanol does,
whether or not AO was in the mix.
This chemical that was used in Vietnam:
CAS:108-88-3 Toluene Fraction by Wt: 99.99% was
neither chemical of harm.}
The 'list'
Soft tissue sarcoma *
Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma NHL
Hodgkin's disease
Chloracne (this however IS from dioxin)
Porphyria cutanea tarda * (in genetically
susceptible individuals) * high blood sugar, low
HGB this example
What birth defects are found in Vietnam Vets? in
Korean Vets? in Gulf war vets? in WWII vets?
today?
Spina Bifada OKed for Korean vets - Others?
I think it should be, along with Autism,
growth abnormalities, connective tissue issues,
kidney, liver, thyroid concerns, some of which
are mentioned in this thread.
Good work you've done to find the pattern of
harm for Vietnam vets ... and to take your job
so seriously ... still with a big heart. Not
true of everyone who has your job.
Lastly, for those who have been harmed by
2-butoxyethanol, they would have more than one
thing wrong. You have to look for the pattern of
CFIDS & the various stages of hemolytic anemia
underlie ... and are the proof of its harm for
the one strongly exposed
Yes it is, teratogen is a chemical which may
cause non-heritable genetic mutations, or
malformations in the developing fetus. I have
read all of the "Veterans and Agent Orange" and
the update releases from the National Academy of
Sciences that you linked in your post. From
cover to cover, every one and within days of
their release each year (every other year until
2004 which was published 2005). Also on July 8,
2004 my testimony was made a matter of record,
before the Agent Orange research committee in
person. My testimony is a matter of record in
their journal. Based on part of my presentation,
the committee clarified diabetes mellitus adult
onset, could also under current terminology, be
referred to as diabetes type 1 and still be a
residual of AO exposure. The sad part of that
change, in "Veterans and Agent Orange, Update
2004" (released 2005) is the VA lawyers in the
Central Office failed to act on that clause
change, thus VA continues to deny the diabetes
type 1 based on the former terminology, that
diabetes type 1 was juvenile onset.
http://www.geocities.com/dave_barker_amvet/AO-2005.html
Our objective on this forum AGENT ORANGE
DISCUSSION BOARDS is to keep the AO issues
paramount, in the eye of those reders visiting
this site. It is important to keep focused, or
we shall lose what little we have gained.
In my many years of claims work, study,
research, reading of medical records, schooling
(college, then graduate school) and outside
training by VA and continuing education classes
when available, I have learned people ignore
facts and go with the popular thoughts. I don't.
In the Veterans and Agent Orange and subsequent
updates, I have observed other birth defects
with as alarming stasitics as spina bifida. One
for example is cerebel palsy. However as being
far more common, the compensation expense would
be overwheming, so it was ignored. It was not a
research study that showed effect on a cell, but
the statisical ratio of exposed vs non exposed
subjects that leads me to believe, a study
should have been made, when the findings could
have been tested.
The easiest way to lose our ship is to get off
course.
| Registered: Tue 12
November 2002
Ignored post by
DaveBarker posted
Sat 18 November 2006 12:18 PM
Because this is a free website from GeoCities
(no money here for websites) the original
article is on top, which was on Military.com. It
is followed by my later NAS report which was
added by my webmistress Maria Hall.
| Registered: Tue 12
November 2002
Ignored post by
DaveBarker posted
Sat 18 November 2006 12:29 PM
I have observed other birth defects with
as alarming stasitics as spina bifida.
One for example is cerebral palsy.
However as being far more common, the
compensation expense would be
overwheming, so it was ignored. It was
not a research study that showed effect
on a cell, but the statisical ratio of
exposed vs non exposed subjects that
leads me to believe, a study should have
been made, when the findings could have
been tested.
The easiest way to lose our ship is to
get off course.
For both diabetes and the cerebral palsy ... I
find them to be things that 2-butoxyethanol
would do. So sad that a 'for sure' concern for
vets of Vietnam (Cerebral palsy & diabetes)
would be not allowed, for such cause as you
mention. I have heard this 'complaint' but your
comment has more relevance, and makes it all the
more sad.
You will also see these issues in Korean, gulf
war & WWII time periods. So, I still contend
that the chemical of harm is another other than
AO.
But it doesn't matter to me what you call it. It
is the term people recognize as being the group
of soldiers of the Vietnam Era. To me it does
not mean that it is AO that causes all of these
things.
The proof of harm of 2-butoxyethanol is the
fatigue that doctors don't know, can't find.
I've explained some of this flu-causing,
diabetes-causing, birth defect - causing
chemical here:
The cruise ship that has too much 'flu' The
flu is how 2-butoxyethanol exposure shows up
Problem with saying it is Dioxin that caused the
primary harm to the Vietnam Vet, is that others
who are harmed then & down through the decades
by 2-butoxyethanol ... can be denied their
rightful benefits.
_____________________________
This reminds me:
For both diabetes and
Cerebral Palsy Dr Garrett of Kansas reported
trials that showed amazing results for these two
issues ... not within months, but within weeks?
You will also see these issues in
Korean, gulf war & WWII time periods.
So, I still contend that the chemical of
harm is another other than AO.
These issues exist with or without chemical
exposure. My point is there is a ratio found
linking them to AO. That does not exclude
2-butoxyethanol, carbon tetrachloride, or
benzene from doing the exact same thing. I feel
many diseases are caused by exposure to
chemicals. My case studies on this forum are
those exposed to AO, that's all!
| Registered: Tue 12
November 2002
Ignored post by
DaveBarker posted
Tue 21 November 2006 11:17 AM
You will also see these issues
in Korean, gulf war & WWII time
periods. So, I still contend
that the chemical of harm is
another other than AO.
These issues exist with or without
chemical exposure. My point is there is
a ratio found linking them to AO. That
does not exclude 2-butoxyethanol, carbon
tetrachloride, or benzene from doing the
exact same thing. I feel many diseases
are caused by exposure to chemicals. My
case studies on this forum are those
exposed to AO, that's all!
Dear Maggie:
Thanks for disagreeing with me and the nearly
1/2 million people that have been affected by
Agent Orange residuals. I clicked on the link
and read it. So?
The first and bottom lines of that article sum
up our discussion. It appears you wish to
discredit the progress made of the AO victim for
another agenda. Where is it written there is
only one set of chemicals that cause damage to
humans? What is your motive? I went through this
same set of issues in 1983 with a former
director of mine, who believed the government
would never spray poison on the troops. He
believed it was all a lie so Vietnam veterans
could get money.
'Nuff said.
Oh, no, I'm not just picking on you. I've
started with the gulf war vets; now I'm adding
the current troops, the WWII troops, the Korean
troops, and YOU.
When the doctors find the fatigue of CFIDS,CFS,
FM ... with blood in urine & red blood cells
that go from ragged & beat up to small sized ...
then you might want to look at all groups of
soldiers differently & add EGBE exposure to the
list of allowable disability approval
Picking on me does not exist. I will give you
the last word on this topic, as it seems as if
anything else on my part is futile.
Dave
Post away....
| Registered: Tue 12
November 2002
Ignored post by
DaveBarker posted
Fri 24 November 2006 03:31 AM
Posted
Fri 24 November 2006 03:55 AM
Might does not make right. Anyone in your 1/2
million recognize the pattern of 2-butoxyethanol
poisoning?
If so, they would not blame Dioxin for all that
happened to the Vietnam Vet
Are you saying that
was not mixed with jet fuel, as one soldier
shared with me?
JP-2, JP-3,
JP-4, JP-5, JP-6 are listed as pesticides by
EPA. There was another chemical in the mix;
based on warnings of the product (which is all
that has to be listed) 2-butoxyethanol was
there, too
To say that
this poison helped bugs eat oil is
ludicrous.
It affects multiple body systems simultaneously
Where it shows up first is irrelevant. All the
soft tissue sarcomas, NHL, CLL, DIABETES & many
autoimmune metabolic issues ... including HEART
& Vision and Birth Defects.