- 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 1 5
- 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.
|