[tw]

Originally Posted by warch

No. I think the appropriate liberal response would be to investigate the claims further ( a lawsuit is obviously neccessary to demand governmental and corporate attention), build a working relationship with the Vietnamese on this issue that strives to move beyond political games, respond with justice and compassion to the afflicted- including any Vets still suffering, to those found to have been made ill by our toxic dump or those at continuing risk, this compassion taking the form of funding internationally collaborative healthcare support, environmental education, and cleanup as possible. The appropriate liberal response I think, is rational and civil.

There is a small problem with the assumption that that genetic defect is traceable to Agent Orange. Even the Admiral who was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs (during Vietnam) believed Agent Orange killed his son. But making specific proof has been elusive.

First, not all Agent Orange contained dioxin. When made correctly, Agent Orange had no dioxin. But many companies (including one in the same county as The Cellar) made the stuff. Not all made it correctly. The amounts of dioxin vary significantly and do not exist in all locations treated by Agent Orange. Therefore many locations where dioxins did not exist are still blamed for health and birth defects.

It gets more complex. For example, a recent study demonstrated how large doses of toxins cause no adverse problems whereas low (minisucle) doses can cause genetic defects. This only complicates a problem in courts.

Yes, there is a statistical relationship between Agent Orange and those health problems. Which ones? No one can say. Even the Admiral could not establish a relationship between Agent Orange and his son's death even though he tried. The problem is the science. A direct relationship between a specific health problem and dioxin currently does not exist.

Pictured is what dioxin did the Yushchenko. Why were the Austrian doctors originally so mystified by his health problem? Because what dioxin does still is not well understood. This poisoning was only discovered in two or three 'not well circulated' papers in Russia (which is why Russian involvement was suspected). Specialists from U of VA eventually uncovered a link between dioxin and the previously unknow health problem. No matter how much one is sure that dioxin must be the source of so many Vietnam birth defects, unfortunately, science still does not understand what dioxin does nor what diseases can result.

The world is ternary. Arguements made here are based upon binary logic. Yes, there is a statistical relationship between dioxin and health defects. But the law demands that a defect must be specifically attached to a source. Unfortunately, a direct relationship between low level dioxin exposure and the resulting health problems have never been established. Not established even by those who desperately wanted to find those relationships. Tragic? Yes. But the emotion attached to a tragedy does not make fact. The courts need facts.

As the frog demonstrates, science did not understand that lower levels of a toxin can sometimes be more lethal. Still unknown are reasons why this is so. Science also was mostly unaware of a relationship between dioxin and what Yushcenko suffered. Major talent was recruited to save Yushchenko's life.

In a ternary world, the relationship between Agent Orange and specific genetic defects remains in neither the Yes or No categories. In science, the relationship remains in the column entitled "unknown".

The one fact we do know - some applications of Agent Orange appear to be statistically related to health and birth defects. Details still remain unknown.

A very good case could be made for a government conspiracy to coverup the Agent Orange story. However, where are all the employees of those Agent Orange factories who should have also suffered? Too many questions remain to make a case in court.