Aircrew Exposure to Dioxin Was PRIMARY, not Secondary!

To contact us Click HERE

74 AES & C-123 on Cross-Country Mission

In her letter to us dated 1 Oct 2012, Under Secretary for Benifits Allison Hickey explained that the VA has no basis for considering "secondary exposure" Agent Orange claims, grouping our C-123 veterans into that category. We, however, were exposed in a direct, or primary manner!

So let's look at "secondary exposure":
It is a simple thing. One person or thing is exposed or contaminated by something. Then another person or thing is also exposed or contaminated by contact with that first person or thing...a secondary transfer of the contaminant.

Secretary Hickey entirely misses the point. Our airplanes remained contaminated with Agent Orange. Our intense, long-term contact with our airplanes exposed us to that contamination...in an initial, direct and primary, NOT secondary manner!

Here is one occupational medicine professional's definition of "secondary exposure":

"Secondary exposure: This term often refers to exposure to a different individual from contaminants on or in another individual, or on or in one thing from another thing; the term may also refer to exposure of a given part of an individual's body as a result of from contamination on or in some other part(s) of the individual's body."

The VA is suggesting that, in their secondary exposure scenario, our touching some item on the C-123 that earlier itself touched and was contaminated by Agent Orange residue would not cause us harm. Perhaps so, but that is not the only way in which we were exposed...instead, our exposure was primary.

Our aircraft were contaminated. Dioxin and other military herbicides remained on the aircraft until they had to be completely destroyed as hazardous waste in 2012. Our exposure aboard was primary. According to the first comprehensive test done in 1994 (23 years after the last spray missions) they were "heavily contaminated" on "100% of the test surfaces" when examined by toxicologists from the USAF Armstrong Laboratories.

But it is worst than that! We started flying these aircraft in 1972, one year after the last spray missions. Dioxin has a half-life of seven years on most surfaces, so the dioxin residue remaining on the C-123 was "fresh" and non-degraded. More intense, more contaminated...far more dangerous in the years 1972 to 1982 than suggested by tests completed so many years after the fact!

The CDC/ATSDR agrees that 1994 tests, dangerous enough in themselves, suggest the C-123 fleet was even more dangerous in earlier years. In his letter to the C-123 Veterans Association, Dr. Tom Sinks (Deputy Director) concludes our crews were exposed to a "200-fold greater cancer risk than the Army's screening value" suggested in the Army's gold-standard publication TG312. ATSDR even found that "TG312 likely understates the daily exposure of Air Force flight personnel in side the contaminated aircraft." The VA says our veterans were not exposed...but the ATSDR says we were and that our exposure was even worse than the "200 fold greater cancer risk" indicated by the 1994 tests. General Hickey...how bad does it have to get?

The only journal which would carry the VA's reports!

The VA's argument seems to shift. Earlier efforts to block us from medical care were advanced by the VA's Public Health folks who said the dioxin remaining on the aircraft could not expose us via dermal route because of their novel "dry dioxin transfer" concept plus the pretense that the skin is a near-perfect barrier to dioxin exposure. Science, as well as more experienced researchers, disagree completely. "Unscientific" was the toxicological scientists' description of the VA's hodgepodge of barriers raised against us.

We ask that the VA, our fellow veterans and the Air Force remember that the C-123 fleet came to us the year after Vietnam missions. It began being cleaned, and cleaned, and cleaned, and cleaned because the stench (from malathion and other contaminants) persisted. There was "goop" throughout the aircraft and especially in the wing boxes, under the cargo deck and nooks and crannies in the cargo area where spray had accumulated. The aircraft went through at least one depot-level attempt to clean out the contamination. But it persisted, and was first analyzed in 1979 at the insistence of the 439th Tactical Hospital...and dioxin along with other military herbicides was identified. General...our contact with that goop was primary exposure! Even tests completed at Davis-Monthan in 2009 continued to show the aircraft continued to have dioxin present in all aircraft.

General Hicky, how bad does it have to get? How dedicated is the VA to creating mythical arguments to prevent us getting care for our Agent Orange illnesses? What about that "duty to assist?"