Report finds no Agent Orange proof
Click
Here to Add Comment Subject:
Report finds no Agent Orange proof
Date:
Tue, 27 Aug 2002
From:
Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
To: Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
Director, State of California, Department of Pesticide
Regulation
cc: Christine Whitman whitman.christine@epa.gov
Report finds no Agent Orange proof THURSDAY , 15 AUGUST 2002 By RICHARD TROW A long-awaited government report on studies into soldiers' exposure to Agent Orange in Vietnam is believed to show there is no proof that it is linked to high rates of birth defects in their descendants.
But families of Vietnam veterans, some of who have put off having children for fear of higher than normal chances of being born with abnormalities, are angry that the Government has "sat on the report" for months.
The report, commissioned by the Veterans Affairs Ministry, was due in June. It reviews several worldwide studies after earlier New Zealand reports on Agent Orange proved inconclusive because of small sample sizes.
Agent Orange, which contains highly-toxic dioxins, was used in big quantities to clear swathes of forest in Vietnam.
Veterans' groups have said studies existed that clearly showed that a link between their exposure and what they say are higher-than-usual levels of abnormalities in the children and grandchildren could not be ruled out.
The report was completed by researchers at Wellington School of Medicine in February. The following month, the Cabinet approved a Health Ministry peer review of the report.
Yesterday, the report was handed to Health Minister Annette King. A spokeswoman said it would be up to two weeks before the report was made public.
The delay has angered some veterans. One of them, John Jennings, whose daughter has several serious illnesses that he links with his time in Vietnam, said the Government was sitting on the report.
Mr Jennings, from Auckland, said he could see no reason why the report had not been issued after four months of peer review.
He said another daughter, seeing her sister's poor health, had put off having children because she feared there would be a good chance they would be born with abnormalities.
Mrs King's office, the Health Ministry and the Office of Veteran's Affairs have all refused to comment on the report's whereabouts for several months because it was commissioned by Veterans Affairs Minister Mark Burton.
Mr Burton's office has refused to comment till Mrs King has seen the report.
A spokeswoman for Mrs King said the report had taken four months to peer review to ensure a thorough job was done.
© You may not copy, republish or distribute this page or the content from it without having obtained written permission from the copyright owner. To enquire about copyright clearances contact clearance@inl.co.nz
Well Mr. Helliker, Admiral Hyman Rickover, the outspoken father of the nuclear submarine, described the monotonously repeated tactics used by those with a vested interest in harmful technology. First you confuse the issue by arguing as if a law of science were at issue when, in fact, the proposed legislation deals with technology, not science. Second, when this logic fails, the need for legislation is categorically denied. Warnings of scientists are rejected as anecdotal, unproven and exaggerated. Third, when it turns out that the scientists were right after all, the argument shifts from the question of technological harm to the legitimacy of any kind of protective legislation, such as the violation of basic liberties and government tyranny. Fourth, when all else fails and protective legislation is imminent, create urgent demands for more research to prove the appositeness of the proposed law.
Respectfully, Stephen L. Tvedten
"Little by little we were taught all these things. We grew into them." - Adolph EichmannIf you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, please email us at list@safe2use.com.