Perhaps the reason there is no difference between those
exposed to chemical agents and those who were not is that something else is
responsible - like vaccination? - SM
No extra disease seen in chemical-exposed Gulf War veterans
Another study adds to the growing body of evidence suggesting that exposure
to low levels of chemical warfare agents during the Gulf War has not led to
increased illness among veterans of that conflict.
While psychological and physical ailments have been found in higher rates
among military personnel deployed to the Gulf War arena, there is no difference
between veterans who were exposed to low levels of chemical weapons and those
not exposed, says Linda A. McCauley, Ph.D., of Oregon Health and Science
University.
"Our findings suggest that veterans who were possibly exposed to very low
levels of chemical warfare agents do not differ from other deployed veterans on
any health indicator, including self-reported medical diagnoses, hospitalization
or disability," the researchers write in the September/October issue of the
American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
The study included data collected through telephone interviews with 1,779
military personnel, 653 who had served in the Khamisiyah area (where chemical
exposure is believed to have occurred), 610 deployed during the Gulf War but not
in an area with chemical exposure and 516 not deployed during the conflict. All
those surveyed lived Oregon, Washington, California, Georgia and North Carolina
at the time of the interview.
Respondents who had been deployed to the region were more likely than
non-deployed personnel to have high blood pressure, heart disease, a slipped
disk or a pinched nerve. They were also more likely to have post-traumatic
stress disorder and be hospitalized for depression. The deployed veterans were
much more likely to report being in fair to poor health or say that they had
moderate to severe impairment compared with their non-deployed counterparts,
says McCauley.
There was also a trend for deployed subjects to report more cases of cancer,
although this number did not reach statistical significance.
"Our study, along with other cross-sectional studies of [Gulf War] veterans,
has been limited in the ability to form conclusions regarding the potential risk
of cancer due to small sample size and limited number of cases of cancer," notes
McCauley.
The researchers also note that while their model assumed anyone within 50
kilometers of the site where the chemical weapons were destroyed could have been
exposed to low levels of the chemical warfare agent sarin, more complex models
suggest this model may not be completely accurate.
"If the chemical warfare agents were not restricted to the 50-km Khamisiyah
area, but dispersed more widely, health effects would be expected in a much
larger proportion of veterans than the group that served as the sample in this
investigation," they say.
Senior author, Peter Spencer, Ph.D., notes that the lack of detectable
adverse health effects is relevant to communities living nearby U.S. facilities
that will shortly engage in the destruction of aging munitions containing the
same chemical agents that were destroyed at Khamisiyah. The release of small
amounts of CW agents from the incinerators are not likely to cause illness in
those who live nearby.
###
The research study was carried out by OHSU's Center for Research on
Occupational and Environmental Toxicology (CROET) with assistance from a grant
to CROET Director Peter Spencer Ph.D. from the U.S. Army Medical Research and
Material Command.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Health Behavior News Service: (202) 387-2829 or
www.hbns.org.
Interviews: Contact Jim Newman at (503) 494-4158 or
newmanj@ohsu.edu.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine: Contact the editorial office at (619)
594-7344.
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.
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth."
-- Albert Einstein, letter to a friend, 1901
"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William C. Jarvis, September 28, 1820
"What's the point of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from the unvaccinated?"
-- Sandy Gottstein
"Who gets to decide what the greater good is and how many will be sacrificed to it?"