VA Denies Presumptive Service Connection for Gulf War
Illnesses
DAV Magazine, March/April 2001 Issue - Pages 12 and 13
The VA has decided against granting presumptive
service-connection for a variety of illnesses that affect more than 120,000
Gulf War veterans.
The VA cites as justification an Institute of Medicine Study (IOM) study that failed to find a link between health problems experience by veterans and their service in the Persian Gulf.
The VA decision means that Gulf War veterans must continue
to prove their health problems occurred during or are related to their military
service in the Persian Gulf.
“This is not the decision that the DAV feels is needed,”
said DAV Washington Headquarters Executive Director David W. Gorman. “To assume that 120,000 of the 700,000
veterans of the Persian Gulf War are suffering from completely unrelated
illnesses flies in the face of logic.”
Scores of studies have been conducted on a variety of
possible causes for Gulf War illness, including exposure to chemical and biological
warfare agents, depleted uranium, oil well fires, and chemical agent-resistant paint.
The IOM study, released in September 2000, reviewed more
than 10,000 published scientific studies related to four potential causes of
Gulf War illness—depleted uranium, sarin (a nerve gas), vaccines, and pyridostigmine
bromide (a medication to protect troops from nerve gas). It found a link between some medical problems
and sarin.
Currently, Gulf War veterans can receive free specialized
medical examinations at VA facilities.
They may be eligible for disability compensation for illnesses or
injuries related to their military service.
VA said it provides disability compensation to more than
190,000 Gulf War veterans, including more than 3,000 with undiagnosed illnesses. Gulf War veterans should contact their
nearest DAV National Service Officer for additional information.
Meanwhile, the trio of new reports on Gulf War illness
failed to identify the cause of the illnesses affecting veterans, but say that
it could be linked to combat stress, pesticides, or even where troops were
deployed.
“It is notable that 10 years after the Persian Gulf War we
are still searching for the cause of Gulf War illness,” Mr. Gorman said. “After spending $155 million and conducting
192 research projects, no single cause for the disease has been found. It is time the VA grant presumptive service-connection
for these illnesses, increase treatment options, and award compensation
appropriately.”
The most recent reports were conducted by the Rand Corp.,
a private research organization; the Presidential Special Oversight Board for
Department of Defense (DoD) Investigations of Gulf War Chemical and Biological Incidents;
and the Kansas Persian Gulf War Veterans Health Initiative, a project of the Kansas
Commission on Veterans Affairs.
The Rand Corp., investigating whether pesticides used by
our troops in the Persian Gulf contributed to Gulf War illnesses, concluded
there was no linkage, but could not exclude the possibility that some
pesticides caused the chronic health problems experienced by Gulf War veterans.
A survey of Gulf War veterans found that about 13,000
troops used a flea or tick collar while in the Gulf which the DoD determined to
be unsafe or illegal. The survey also
found than an estimated 3,500 to 4,500 troops were assigned pesticide-spraying
duty who did not use masks or other protection.
In addition, researchers found that some troops made
frequent use of personal pesticides and also took larger amounts of the nerve
agent antidote known as pyridostigmine bromide, or PB. Scientific research is unclear on the
effects of combining PB and pesticides.
The presidential Special Oversight Commission was ordered
to oversee Pentagon investigations of Gulf War illness conducted by the Office
of the Special Assistant for Gulf War Illnesses (OSAGWI), which was the primary
DoD agency responsible for coordinating the department’s Gulf War illness investigations.
After 30 months, the commission said stress is a likely
cause of illness in at least some veterans and “is likely a secondary factor in
other causes of undiagnosed illnesses among some Gulf War veterans.” The final report said “research has not
validated any specific cause of these illnesses.”
A dissenting opinion by one member of the commission said
that the report’s conclusion that combat stress was a contributing factor to
undiagnosed Gulf War illnesses was “a blatant misrepresentation.” Dr. Vihn Cam, an immunologist, said in
dissenting remarks on the report that she or “the board, as a group, was never
asked such a question.”
While the commission determined that OSAGWI had worked
diligently and didn’t cover up any findings, Dr. Cam argued that the commission
members were Pentagon insiders who worked too closely with OSAGWI instead of exercising
oversight. “At times, the Presidential
Special Oversight Board acted more like an extension of OSAGWI,” she said. “There was no fire wall between the oversight
party and the party being under oversight.”
The so-called Kansas study found that 34% of the 2,000
Kansas Gulf War veterans interviewed for the study are affected by Gulf War
illness, but the rate of illness differs by where and when veterans served in
the Persian Gulf. Researchers found
that 42% of veterans who served in Iraq or Kuwait suffered Gulf War illness
symptoms. The rate of illness for
veterans who left the region before the air and ground wars began was about 9%.
“Differences in illness rates indicated that Gulf
War-related health problems are not just randomly reported by all veterans, but
are connected to different locations and experiences in the war,” said study
director Dr.
Lea Steele.
The Kansas study also found that veterans who reported
receiving vaccines from the military during the Gulf War, but did not deploy to
the Persian Gulf, may have some of the same health problems as Gulf War
veterans.
About 12% of veterans who did not serve in the Gulf War, but
reported getting vaccines during that time, had symptoms of Gulf War illness,
compared to 4% of veterans who did not serve in the war and did not receive
vaccines. “Studies are needed to
determine whether and to what extent veterans serving in specific locations and
at specific times have similar manifestations of illness,” said House Veterans
Affairs’ Committee member Lane Evans (D-Ill.).
“With notable exceptions, such as the Kansas study, this
area of research has been largely ignored.”
“Research to identify patterns of symptoms may be more
effective in associating specific medical problems with Gulf service,” he said.
“Clearly, Gulf War illness has a cause or number of
causes,” Mr. Gorman said. “And just as
clearly, those suffering from these disabilities should receive timely
treatment and compensation. While it is
important that studies continue, the time has long past when Gulf War veterans
should have received the proper medical treatment and compensation for the many
debilitating illnesses they suffer.”
DAV Magazine
P.O. Box 14301
Cincinnati, Ohio 45250-0301
Telephone: (859) 441-7300
Toll free: (877) I AM
A VET
DAV Home Page: http://www.dav.org
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
---------------------~-~>
We give away $70,000 a month! Come to iWin.com for
your chance to win!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/olMXHC/BJVCAA/4ihDAA/1wOVlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Our Anthrax information web site: http://www.dallasnw.quik.com/cyberella/
PETITION TO OVERTURN/REPEAL FERES DOCTRINE http://www.i-charity.net/ptn/80
To visit Dr. Meryl Nass’s web site, go to: http://www.anthraxvaccine.org
Also visit: http://www.MajorBates.com/
and http://www.enter.net/~jfsorg/
http://www.jamesmadisonproject.org/importantlinks.html
and
Anthrax Vaccine Network proposal http://www.anthraxvaccine.net
http://www.house.gov/reform/hearings/healthcare/00.10.03/accountability.doc
Contact list owner: Gretchen Whitney at: anna_nim@ix.netcom.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your
subscription to
digest, go to the ONElist web site at http://www.onelist.com
ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.