International Gulf War Council
   A centralized working group for the advancement of veterans health issues
   Soap Box proposals
 

Item 1 - posted June 08, 2005 19:43          
The following are HOT Topics we believe need immediate attention by anyone willing to help.

Leadership Change in the House Veterans Affairs Committee is now tied directly to the Administration and is redefining your entitlements and the structure of how the VA serves veterans.

The disability commission is tied to number 1, they will write the report congress uses to under cut established benefits and make it harder for new veterans to obtain services.

The OIG Report on Variance in Disability claims is about to review 10 years of PTSD claims. This is especially important because many good natured VA Docs gave the diagnosis of PTSD rather than try and prove FMS, CFS, MCS or unexplained illnesses. This review will directly impact Gulf Era veterans claims already adjudicated.
The rewriting of Title 38 has begun - people with Gulf War Illnesses, ALS and MS diognosis beware.

If you are a GW group and want to jointly work on these issues then reach out to others. The NGWRC cant make every meeting at every event. Perhaps we can split these responsibilities up between groups.

Steve


Item 2 - posted June 08, 2005 19:44       

Dear Advocates:
Desert Storm Justice Foundation is not here to beat up anyother Organization.
We are here to communicated to the "powers that be" policies, regulations,
health services, compensation which have not helped gulf war era veterans.

So let us focus on Offices which exist and fail to listen to the concerns which we had such as
[1] VA- Office Environmental Agents (health care);
[2] VA-RAC creation of study of gulf war illness treatments;
[3] IOM Committees which are addressing -(a) gulf war health studies;
(b) Physiologic, Psychologic, and Psychosocial Effects of Deployment-Related Stress; (c) Infectious Diseases Project;(d) deployment illness.

[4] Veterans Disablity Benefit Commission;

[5] Deployment Health Support Directoraite (OSAGWI)

[6] And other Offices YOU suggest.

Let us TOGETHER address these matters without "Maryland based" organization directions.


WE, You need to be heard and supported by each other.

Venus Hammack

Executive Director of DSJF


Item 3 - posted June 08, 2005 19:44 

Whatever is done needs to be done in public- outside closed doors, and for the good of all gulf war vets.

Communication between the "group of elders" and the people they represent is essential, as is communication between the members of the council.

Without this- any endeavor of this sort is going to fail.

A calendar of some sort needs to be created and regularly updated that lists meetings and events of importance to Veterans such as IOM meetings, etc so that veterans can get involved.
I think most critical though to all of this is having a leadership that is willing to address questions from veterans on what's being done in their behalf.

IE who is making what meetings, what is happening at those meetings, and having people involved that actually report back to the vets what is heard.

As a group- information needs to flow up and down the chain of command- and if you accept a tasking it needs to be followed through on. If you say you will be somewhere- then that's what needs to happen. Essentially- what needs to happen is for people to make a commitment to each other to work together despite personal differences for the good of all vets.
If that can happen- progress can be made. Tonia

Tonia S. Goertz
Member NGWRC http://www.ngwrc.org/
MY site: http://groups.msn.com/TinksSpace/welcome.msnw


Item 4 - posted June 11, 2005 14:23             

878193.002 USAF IRIS Secret Document
CENTCOM MEDICAL SURVELILLANCE,
16-22 DECEMBER 1990
SURVEY OF 69,875 PERSONNEL PARTICIPATING
IN DESERT SHIELD.
DISEASE CASE RATES REPORTED.
FORWARDED TO CENTCOM 30 OCT 1996

This document has been a major sore point with Deployment Health Support Directorate.
They refuse to make it available, as niether does CENTCOM or NARA. Its been offered to the RAC - IOM - and other medical sources as a possible medical lead.

FOIA's have been non-responsive.

If its medically relevant, and it offers disease case reports for 1990 - why isnt it declassified and available for researchers to review.

Mike Kilpatrick told me at the IOM Infectious Disease meeting he would look into why his staff have stalled on this.

This has a possibility of being productive and should be made public. I submit this to the council as a project needing resolution.


Item 5 - posted June 11, 2005 14:32

AFIP Gulf War tissue catalog

The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology has
a collection of tissue samples derived from Gulf War veterans since 1990. Physical organ samples from VA hospitals have been sent here by the thousands. Blood samples are in the millions, most from the HIV repository. Mike Kilpatrick told me of it at a NSO meeting at the Pentagon in 2000.

This has been addresses over and over to all available sources since 2001. At this time the RAC is supposed to go over it for a possible review.

Problem is the AFIP is slated for closing. Chair Florabell Mullick has told me that all that is needed is for a researcher to put in the request. Then offer to pay for the catalog.

So we should ask Rep. Shays committee to include a discretionary fund to the AFIP for the catalog of Gulf War veteran tissue samples. So that researchers have an idea what to request. No one else to include DHSD has taken up the offer to fund the catalog, and time is running out before the doors close on the AFIP committee that could do this. Then it becomes a DOD custody issue when the repository is moved to a military base.

I submit this project for the approval of the Council.


Item 6 - posted June 11, 2005 14:41             

WRIISC study clinic transportation fund

The WRIISC clinic if funded for local transportation within a 50 mile radius of the Washington DC clinic. So locally they have seen close to 500 patients.

On a National Level, the clinic has seen 62 people in three years due to state VAMC directors declining transportation cost of sending veterans to East Orange or Washington DC.

Ive discussed this at length with Helen Malaskiewicz ( Senior Environmental Health Coordinator ), and she is powerless to do anything about the VAMC's directors on this.
She is the final approval authority for a patient bound to WRIISC clinic.

A VA special transportation fund should be established so that veterans can travel from the west coast, central Rockies, or anywhere around America to the WRIISC for a comprehensive workup. So that VAMC medical facilities can no longer discourage WRIISC visits based on travel cost.

I submit this this project for the approval of the council.


Item 7- posted June 11, 2005 15:01   

Public Law 105-368 Amendment

PL 105-368 was designed to foster a effort to bring Gulf War Research forward. It set in place the IOM medical reviews, the Research Advisory Committee, and the War Related Illness and Injury Study Clinic.

But, implementation was delayed by two years. Afterwards the independent research facility became a DOD regulated clinic with WRAMC over shadowing it. ( WRIISC )

IOM reviews became strictly literature reviews of Peer Reviewed materials only. Which lead to conflicting or indecisive reports that the media butchered.

The RAC's structure lead to a hands off approach that is not able to do much but offer suggestions.

At every turn these programs have been bound by the narrow definition of the watered down language of PL 105-368. So much so that IOM, and others have cited there hands are tied by this law.

Also, VA has shifted away from undiagnosed illnesses. They will give a veterans a diagnosis even if its a wrong one, to avoid the Title 38 language of Undiagnosed Illnesses compensation.

So as DOD / VA shifted from Gulf War Illness to Environmental Illness, PL 105-368 did no grow with the changes of TRICARE / Consolidated Health Program / Force Health protection programs.

I propose the council actively debate the nature of PL 105-368 for the possibility of tweaking the language by amendment. I submit
this project for council to vote on.


Item 8 - posted June 11, 2005 15:17

Leishmaniasis testing

VA Gulf War Registry exams are structured so that they are in 3 phases.

Phase I is a breif visual observation review.
Phase II is a little more comprehensive, based on what the patient volunteers.
Phase III becomes intensive, with a possible trip to the WRIISC clinic.

Many troops returning from OIF are coming back with Leishmaniasis. Skin test, and blood test are very unreliable as the maturation of the parasite can lay dormant for upto 3 years.

Allan Magill of Walter Reed Army Hospital said at the May 26th IOM Infectious disease meeting that this disease is hard to find until its swarming in the body at 10 to the 15 power. The it can be cultured, usually by splene or bone marrow.

I suggest that Phase I exams include blood draw for Leishmaniasis that is sent to Walter Reed Infectious Disease lab, AFIP Leishmaniasis registry, and a independent parasite lab for verification.

This topic needs further discussion, but I submit the concept as a project for the councils attention.


Item 9 - posted June 11, 2005 15:32

Gulf War Registry Exams

Phase II and Phase III medical exams can be forwarded to the War Related Illness and Injury Study Clinic if the examining physician elects to.

At the WRIISC clinic they will be setting up a new PET 3.0 scanner for the Washington DC VAMC.

For research purposes, the WRIISC should do cranial MRI's, MRI non-invasive Angiograms,
and a PET if the MRI should turn up anything.

Then from a year to 3 years later, the WRIISC
do a follow up MRI series on that veteran.

At the moment VHA handbook 1303.2 has a loophole that allows WRIISC visits under Gulf War Registry exams.

I think this concept needs support, and solicitation to VAMC Environmental Clinicians
so that they take advantage of it.

I submit this proposal for the councils attention.


Item 10 - posted June 11, 2005 15:38

Central US WRIISC clinic

The East Coast WRIISC clinic is difficult for veterans to get transportation to. Often veterans give up contacting Helen Malaskiewicz given this problem.

Another solution to the transportation issue is a centrally located WRIISC clinic like
in the Houston VAMC that housed the former Gulf War Referral Clinic. The original Gulf War Registry Coordinator is still there, and he was the one person out of the original team that should have stayed.

With the VAMC already having previous experience with this program, and having the space to run it. Very little cost would be involved in the start up.

I submit this concept to the council for debate.


Item 11 - posted June 11, 2005 19:32

Clostridial flora biopsies

Over the years the issue of intestinal bacteria of Gulf War vets have been glossed over. Vets with IBS, Diarrhea, and similar disorders are not thoroughly examined.

A possible cause of Gulf War GI problems maybe the indigenous bacterial flora of Iraq. A more severe strain of clostridial bacteria than in America.

Quote:
C. difficile-associated disease occurs when the normal intestinal flora is altered, allowing C. difficile to flourish in the intestinal tract and produce a toxin that causes a watery diarrhea. Repeated enemas, prolonged nasogastric tube insertion and gastrointestinal tract surgery increase a person's risk of developing the disease. The overuse of antibiotics, especially penicillin (ampicillin), clindamycin and cephalosporins may also alter the normal intestinal flora and increase the risk of developing C. difficile diarrhea.

Clostridium difficile toxin is very unstable. The toxin degrades at room temperature and may be undetectable within 2 hours after collection of a stool specimen. False-negative results occur when specimens are not promptly tested or kept refrigerated until testing can be done.

VA Gulf War registry exams, WRIISC exams, should try to do more detailed analysis of the intestinal flora. C. Difficile is just one example of many Clostridial strains that might be out of balance in Gulf War veterans.

I propose the council discuss this further in forum.


Item 12 - posted June 11, 2005 20:16

Here's an outline of all the topics discussed in this thread so far. Please feel free to copy the outline and edit it as you think needs changing so there's little to no misunderstanding as to what needs attention.

Also, a plan of action needs to be implemented for these issues.

Items needing group action:

1. We need to write the OIG (Office of Inspector General)

a. to support and include MS/ALS veterans in the criteria used in the healthcare protocol and benefits for Gulf War Illnesses.
b. to make sure the review of PTSD claims does not punish those previously diagnosed with PTSD that weren't properly evaluated.

2. We need a way to share the load of attending meetings.

a. a calendar of events needs to be posted well in advance
b. we need volunteers to attend and funding for their expenses

3. VA Environmental Agents

a. needs wider disemination of Gulf War criteria in health care protocol.
b. more public points of contact (POC) within every VA facility and all VA staff.
c. VA Gulf War registry exams, WRIISC exams, should try to do more detailed analysis of the intestinal flora. (C. Difficile)

4. VA Research Advisory Committee (RAC)

a. needs to address the treatment needs of Gulf War Illnesses

5. Institute of Medicine (IOM)

a. Gulf War Health Studies
b. physiologic, psychologic and psycholsocial effects of deployment-related stress
c. Infectious diseases project
d. deployment illness

6. Offices that we need to respond to

a. Veterans Disability Benefit Commission
b. Deployment Health Support Directorate (OSAGWI)
c. other offices

7. Pressure on Deployment Health Support Directorate to declassify disease case reports for 1990 for research review

a. Find interested researcher to request catalog of Gulf War veteran tissue samples
b. request Rep Shays committee to include a discretionary fund to the AFIP for the catalog

8. Push for wider geographic range of transportation for WRIISC clinics to evaluate GW veterans.

9. Public Law 105-368 Amendment (http://www7.nationalacademies.org/ocga/laws/PL105_368.asp)

a. Push for IOM peer reviews to include findings from GW research, rather than peer-reviews that have no connections to latest findings in GW exposures.

10. Leishmaniasis Testing

a. testing to be accomplished over and beyond a 3 year period due to dormacey of disease.
b. Phase I exams include blood draw for Leishmaniasis that is sent to Walter Reed Infectious Disease lab, AFIP Leishmaniasis registry, and a independent parasite lab for verification

11. Gulf War Registry Exams

a. Phase II and Phase III medical exams can be forwarded to the War Related Illness and Injury Study Clinic if the examining physician elects to.
b. the WRIISC should do cranial MRI's, MRI non-invasive Angiograms, and a PET if the MRI should turn up anything.
c. then from a year to 3 years later, the WRIISC do a followup MRI series on that veteran.
d. allow VAMC Environmental Clinicians access to WRIISC exams.
e. VA Gulf War registry exams, WRIISC exams, should try to do more detailed analysis of the intestinal flora. C. Difficile

12. Utilize the personnel already in place in the Houston VAMC to evaluate for WRIISC candidates in that area.


Item 13 ( Approved ) - posted June 12, 2005 18:02

International Gulf War Council

Proposal from Tony Flint by proxy:

Why not make The Gulf War Council International ? As we fought together in both Gulf wars and we are now fighting our own Governments why not fight them together as the only way a Government works is by divide and rule so if we all unite then we can all get what we want which is justice.

REGARDS

TONY FLINT

A VETERAN SEEKING JUSTICE


Item 14 - posted June 13, 2005 10:59

SUBJECT: Language for the Congressional Record Regarding the Amendment to the FY06 Defense Appropriations Bill For Gulf War Illnesses Research Funding.

PROBLEM: Not enough time to write up new wording for this bill.

SUGGESTION: could all interested readers here at least sign on a new roll call, to submit to the Congressional Office, to notify them of OUR interest to participate in future changes to this legislation. Venus


Item 15 - posted June 13, 2005 17:32  

quote:
Originally posted by Kirt Love:
Gulf War Registry Exams


For research purposes, the WRIISC should do cranial MRI's, MRI non-invasive Angiograms, and a PET if the MRI should turn up anything.

Then from a year to 3 years later, the WRIISC
do a followup MRI series on that veteran.

I think this concept needs support, and solicitation to VAMC Environmental Clinicians so that they take advantage of it.

I submit this proposal for the councils attention.



Kirt While I agree with your post in the needs of the scans under the circumstances I feel that the VA should be doing the Spect or Pet Scans as a rule rather than the exception simply because all to often the MRI's will miss obvious disorders within the brainstem and other regions all to easily. As you and I have discussed previously the reason they halted this procedure in a few of the VAMC's was the funding for this study was pulled when it became obvious that it was showing prominent results in the Gulf vets whereas the regular MRI's were showing little to no results, this was the reason that the VAMC in Lexington KY was told they could take no new patients in it's Gulf war clinic and the reason they lost their funding for the spect scans leaving Dr's. Stephenson and Dr. Anderson to figure out sort of underhanded reasons to order the SPECT scans for the vets he was trying to treat. Also Dr Anderson went public with the pulled funding and his findings up to the date of notification of his being transferred and he told the media in Lexington (Lex. Herald Leader) of his findings and his belief that DOD was trying to shut him down on the research and why and they were quick to try to recover and Dr. Anderson's move was pushed up and Dr. Stephenson has since begun his own privately funded research for treatment etc.with a civilian neuropsych. to include annual Spect scans although most other dr.s within the VA
state that the spect and pet scans have little or no clinical value when dealing with a Gulf vet. Which leads me to think that they are perhaps on the right track, so, maybe it should be all inclusive for any scans of the brain rather than conditional upon what is found by a lab tech?
Just a thought anyway.
Leslie

Item 16 - posted June 13, 2005 18:24   

I agree with everyone's topics as things that need to be done. But my thoughts are lets not all get lost in all of the issues in the within the beltway.... I think our first priority should be health care. VA hospitals still today are saying the same old song and dance. " Nothing happened in the Gulf to cause your illness" This must change, there are treatments for chemical exposure ect. If only the VHA would recognize our illnesses... I think that should be a top priority for this new Council


Item 17 - posted June 13, 2005 23:01  

Kucinich-Shays-Sanders Amendment to the Defense Appropriation Bill to restore research funding into Gulf War Illnesses.
========================
Suggestion for expanded HHS Gulf War Illnesses research funding to include previously done non-funded work to be included, to determine actual merit and expanded upon where appropriate to new and continuing research.

A significant consideration is to have inclusion of research already done by non-funded individuals and groups that have long been ignored or denied for consideration by DOD, frequently because they were not sanctioned (paid for and controlled) by DOD.

It would be helpful to have the HHS program include these prior research projects, at a nominal cost for HHS receiving results already determined.

And if agree on originators findings or if used further in future as part

of new or expanded DOD or HHS studies, then the original researchers are entitled to royalties on their previous non-funded work and participation by no less than peer review on extension of their original work.

There have been several exceptional non-funded research programs that should be strongly considered and have been ignored by DOD, i.e., Tulane University research and development of assay for squalene antibodies which led to uncovering unlawful use of squalene in vaccines administered to pre, during and since Desert Shield and Storm. Jim Moss and his colleagues for work with PB and insecticides should be considered, and several others with merit should fall into the HHS review process.

Richard.Shuster@us.crl.com


Item 18- posted June 15, 2005 08:43

As I have been cleaning out the in-box, I have run across a few research needs, and questions that to date, still don't have answers. Many of them origionate with Denise, some from others on other sites and lists, but I am posting them here for consideration of issues needing funding/ research.~ Tonia

1. Visual changes are happening in gulf war veterans....where is the research to answer critical questions? IE what kind, how many vets have these problems, etc.

2. Dental problems in gulf war veterans... where is the dental findings, what is causing the loss and breakage of teeth, etc.

3. What exposures could trigger #1 and 2

4. Where are the results of SPECT SCANS and PET SCANS on Gulf War vets...do they show neuronal loss, or similarities of any kind?

5. What is trigerring problems of cardiac deaths in gulf war vets?

6. Where are the mortality reviews and autopsy results on gulf war vets?

7. What is trigerring rare spleen ruptures of Gulf War Vets?

8. Is there a relationship between cholesterol levels increases and OPs, PB, etc?

9. How many vets have been tested for viruses and what is the relationships?

10. How many tested for herpes viruses, stealth viruses, HHV6 and what is relationship to cardiac , dental, liver, vision, etc?

11. What is the test called that was done in registry by ear drs...re the persussion air hammer test/////and what were the results?

12. What were results of EEG and Q EEG in registries?

13. What results of sleep studies?

14. Where are results of muscle biopsies of gwvets?

15. How many GW Vets are incarcerated, and is there any connection between exposures to PB, Liriam, chemicals, etc that is common to them that has led to behavior changes?

16. Is there a way to get funding to cross check social security numbers for those deployed with death records at the social security offices to ensure that the mortality data is accurate with regard to all gulf vets versus just those who have filed claims or used the VA since exit from the service.

------------
Questions regarding the children of Vets:

1. How many have physical defects and what kind are they?

2. What kinds of neurological disorders are being seen in the kids? How many have them versus the total number of offspring born to gulf vets since deployment or post deployment vaccinations? Are there things like Autism or bi- polar or ADHD that are seen more commonly in veterans kids versus general population?

3. Is there a higher incidence of behaviorial or learning problems present in the kids?

4. Are the kids having the same kinds of issues regarding eyes, ears, and reproductive health as the vets? If so, why?

5. How do we ask and who do we ask for specific research studies to be done regarding the children, and ensure both their privacy and accurate data collection?
----------

Questions regarding oversight agencies:

1. What needs to be done to ensure the RAC and IOM review all literature/ studies relevant to the issues, not just VA/ DoD funded studies?

2. What needs to happen to ensure more of the funding goes towards answering the questions that will lead to service connection for illnesses associated with service?

3. What is the process for getting the VA to make an illness or issue compensable?


Item 19 - posted June 19, 2005 07:19   

Transcranial Doppler Ultrasound

Cerebral Perfusion in Gulf War Vets

The WRIISC Dr. Li Mian discussed a technique by which using the TCD ultrasound one could monitor blood flow patterns in a veterans brain.

The issue of perfusion is a decreased cerebral blood flow, which causes temporary mental confusion as pressure regulation goes up and down in a unusual manner. Another term is cerebral auto regulation.

The ultrasound device measurement is a three probe process that is non-invasive, small.
The measurement are referred to as ml/100gtissue/min, or how much blood volume as speed per minute as per body mass.

Normal values can be 50-80 ml/kg per minute while a auto regulation problem would be 30 ml/kg per minute or less.

Problem is, WRIISC does not have the TCD and Ive never heard of any of the other VAMCs having one.

With the WRIISC having the new state of the art MRI, and the new PET 3.0 that will measure cerebral perfusion in a different way - it could use the TCD as a third option in monitoring cerebral function problems in Gulf War veterans.

I propose we solicit VA to seek out and purchase a TCD for the WRIISC, and a good technician that can run it. Then suggest a pilot study of 10 chronically ill Gulf War veterans as a test bed for cerebral perfusion issues.

I ask the council vote on this.


Item 20 - posted June 26, 2005 12:03 PM   

What is the  status of the bill in the senate?

MOAA's Legislative Update for Friday, June 24, 2005

Senate Defense Bill Stalled
Senate leadership concerns over the potential for a long list of contentious
amendments has led them to delay action on the FY2006 Defense Authorization
Act (S. 1042) until at least mid-July.

The defense bill frequently attracts more than 200 amendments, but senators'
concerns over base realignment and closure (BRAC) issues created heightened
concerns that protracted debate over BRAC amendments could tie up the Senate
for an extended period. In the past, leaders have sought an agreement to
limit amendments before bringing the bill to the floor.

Even knowledgeable staffers were reluctant to say when the Senate leaders
may agree to bring the bill up for action. In response to MOAA's request for
a "best guess," one staffer offered, "My ouija board, which may be wrong,
says the week of July 19."

The delay means House and Senate leaders probably won't even start working
out the differences between their respective bills until shortly before the
month-long August recess. Considering that they haven't finished the Defense
bill until December in three of the last four years, anyway, it's hard to
say how much the current delay will affect the bill's final enactment


Item 21 - posted June 26, 2005 12:03 PM

Steve what was the status of this meeting?

Thanks,

Gary

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Fortune" <gfortune@starband.net>
To: "Steve Robinson" <srobinson@NGWRC.ORG>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: The Honorable Gordon H. Mansfield


> Hope you get it back on track.  Appreciate the update.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Robinson" <srobinson@NGWRC.ORG>
> To: "Gary Fortune" <gfortune@starband.net>
> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 9:08 AM
> Subject: RE: The Honorable Gordon H. Mansfield
>
>
> We have a special friend who is calling Mr Nicholoson to try and correct
> this problem.  I will have some details this week
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary Fortune" <gfortune@starband.net>
> To: "Steve Robinson" <srobinson@ngwrc.org>
> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 6:44 AM
> Subject: The Honorable Gordon H. Mansfield
>
>
>>
>> Steve, ran across this.  What is the status and what do you need to help?
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> <Members Action Needed! Here is a possibility where we can all work
>> together.
>> I can get a meeting with Gordon Mansfield.  The NGWRC is sending the
>> following letter to obtain the appointment.  I would be happy to include
>> the
>> logo of any GW group that concures and also wants to attend with me.
>> Also  - you may rewrite the letter in your own words and send it directly
>> to
>> the VA or the House Veterans Affairs Committee and the Shays Committee.
>>
>> The Honorable Gordon H. Mansfield
>> Deputy Secretary
>> Department of Veterans Affairs
>> 810 Vermont Avenue, NW
>> Washington, DC 20420
>>
>> Dear  Deputy Secretary Mansfield:
>>
>> My name is Steve Robinson.  I am the Executive Director of the National
>> Gulf
>> War Resource Center and a Gulf War veteran.  We are a 501c3 that focuses
>> on
>> the needs of Gulf War veterans.  I am also a member of the VA Research
>> Advisory Committee on Gulf War Illnesses and formerly a briefer and
>> analyst
>> for the Secretary of Defense researching Gulf War Illnesses for the
>> Pentagon.  I am uniquely qualified having served on all sides of the Gulf
>> War veteran's health issues.  I am writing to you because I believe that
>> you
>> will understand this problem as a former VSO leader.
>>
>> Recently the Institute of Medicine initiated an unannounced Committee on
>> Gulf War and Health: Review of the Medical Literature Relative to Gulf
>> War
>> Veterans' Health.
>>
>> As a serving member of the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War
>> Illnesses
>> I was startled to learn of this committees committee's existence and
>> baffled
>> that the RAC was kept out of the loop on it's formation.  This oversight
>> from the VA is in contravention to our  mission established by Congress
>> and
>> charter adopted by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
>>
>> As the Executive Director of the NGWRC I am even more concerned about the
>> charge given to the committee by bad faith players in the VA who have
>> sought
>> for years to undermine research and steer scientist toward unfounded
>> theories.
>>
>> We are grateful to the VA for recent findings and funding for GWI
>> Research
>> and it appeared that the VA, under Secretary Principi turned a corner
>> regarding stress as the primary reason Gulf War veterans were ill.
>> However,
>> under new leadership old foes that were forced to follow the Secretaries
>> direction seem to be massing to undue all the gains made under Secretary
>> Principi.  These are inherited and entrenched bureaucrats in the VA
>> Healthcare system.  They were there before Secretary Principi arrived and
>> will be there when Secretary Nicholson leaves unless you act to stop them
>> from undoing the gains of the last 3 years.
>>
>> To understand this problem you must see it as an Information Warfare
>> campaign.
>> Information Warfare is controlling the message and perception and it's
>> something we currently employ in Iraq but it has no place in the VA or
>> the
>> IOM.
>>
>> In the case of Gulf War Veterans Illness information warfare is being
>> used
>> by people in the DoD and the VA with the long held beliefs that Gulf War
>> veteran's illnesses are a Somatoform Stress Disorders and common to every
>> war.  Recently VA Employees made presentations to the IOM regarding this
>> long discounted theory.  Some of the same people who communicated this
>> message were also instrumental in securing the contract for this work the
>> IOM is doing and wrote the charge to the committee.   They are the some
>> of
>> the same individuals who were engaged in information warfare regarding
>> this
>> same theory when I worked in the DoD Office of the Special Assistant for
>> Gulf War Veterans Illnesses in 1997-2001.
>>
>> These VA Employees are purposefully steering the IOM toward the stress
>> theory by using a narrow definition that describes what type of
>> information they can review.  This committee cannot reach appropriate conclusions on
>> new science because of the scope and type of information the IOM is allowed
>> to judge.  I also personally attended the only public meeting of the panel
>> and heard the very one-sided group of research presentations that the panel
>> was given.  Because of this narrow view the IOM will produce reports that the
>> VA will use to deny veterans service connection at a time when the science
>> has never been stronger.
>>
>> In order to believe that stress is the cause of Gulf War Veterans Illness
>> you would have to believe that the first gulf war produced a mass
>> psychosis where 330, 000 out of 697,000 veterans (54%) have fell ill because of
>> unfounded beliefs.  Yet the rate of mental health disorders in Gulf War
>> veterans is lower than any other war veteran in recorded history and
>> rightly so.  The first Gulf War was 100 hrs in duration with limited up-close
>> fighting and direct contact with the enemy.
>>
It concerns us that once again, some in the Department of Veterans
Affairs are employing   information warfare directed at stalling or managing the flow of information that this committee may review.  The Committee is being managed and guided down a particular path, which is not in the interest of science or ill veterans.

You should be aware that the IOM through the VA is being used to promote
long discarded beliefs that are no longer scientifically valid.  These
ideas had some merit in the early 1990s when science had not looked fully at Gulf
>> War veterans issues however new science has emerged and the IOM is being
>> prevented from reviewing it for political purposes.
>>
>> We believe any new IOM committee formed to review, evaluate, and
>> summarize
>> scientific data should have full access to any and all reports on Gulf
>> War
>> Veterans Illness and not be limited in scope at the whim of those who
>> wrote
>> the contract for this panel.
>>
>> I must make clear that we are in no way impugning the integrity of the
>> scientist who make up the panel but rather questioning the marching
>> orders
>> given by the VA.  I am forced to conclude that VA's purpose in requesting
>> this review is not to advance the cause of science or ill veterans but to
>> score public relations points for the discredited viewpoint that these
>> illnesses are caused by stress and no different from what is seen after
>> every war.
>>
>> Shamefully, the same people who played a role in forming this IOM
>> Committee
>> also denied the existence of illnesses in Gulf War veterans are now
>> responsible for monitoring the health outcomes of Operation Iraqi Freedom
>> and Enduring Freedom veterans in the VA and have direct ties to DoD
>> players
>> who also deny exposures as causal factors in veterans health.
>>
>> I would like to meet with you as soon as possible to discuss our
>> concerns.
>> Please contact me at 301-996-8450
>>
>> Respectfully
>>
>> Steve Robinson
>> Executive Director
>> National Gulf War Resource Center >


Item 22 - posted June 26, 2005 12:03 PM


Steve, are you following this, too?  As in the last post, can we tag
research funding to this issue or who in the senate should we focus on with
the defense budget amendment that was offered by Shays & Kucinich?

VA Admits $1B Vets Budget Shortfall
Earlier this year, House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committee chairmen
resisted calls by Democrats and veterans' groups for significantly bigger
plus-ups in veterans' health care funding, after receiving repeated
assurances by VA leaders that such extra increases weren't needed.


This week, all of those leaders had egg on their faces when Secretary of
Veterans Affairs R. James Nicholson acknowledged that mistakes in budget
preparation actually left the VA budget $1 billion short of the amount
needed to continue current VA health services.


Fortunately, Congress still has time to fix the shortfall. Although the
House already has passed its version of the FY2006 Veterans/Quality of Life
Appropriations Bill, the Senate is still working on its counterpart bill.
Leaders in both chambers indicated their intent to get it fixed.


House Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Steve Buyer (R-IN) called for
quick action to determine the real funding needs, and Senate Committee
Chairman Larry Craig said, "We in Congress must fix this financial problem."


The acknowledgement was vindication for military and veterans groups and
others who had complained that the budget submission wasn't sufficient to
meet veterans' needs.


Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), an Appropriations Committee member who led efforts
to add $1.9 billion in extra VA funding, was particularly critical at a
Thursday news conference, asserting that the Administration was reluctant to
make the sacrifices necessary to meet health care commitments to veterans.
Significantly, Chairman Craig appeared with her at the conference and agreed
with many of her criticisms of the VA budget development process.


Hopefully, Hill leaders of both parties will now step up to the plate and
ensure the VA gets the needed funding increase.