<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="container font-size5 content-width3">
<div class="header reader-header" style="display: block;"> <font
size="-2"><a class="domain reader-domain"
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2018/09/vietnam-demands-compensation-from-monsanto-for-devastating-harm-caused-by-agent-orange-during-war/">https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2018/09/vietnam-demands-compensation-from-monsanto-for-devastating-harm-caused-by-agent-orange-during-war/</a></font>
<h1 class="reader-title">Vietnam Demands Compensation from
Monsanto for Devastating Harm Caused by Agent Orange During
War</h1>
<em>Beyond Pesticides</em>, September 4, 2018<br>
</div>
<div class="content">
<div class="moz-reader-content line-height4" style="display:
block;">
<div id="readability-page-1" class="page">
<div>
<p>Close on the heels of the recent <a
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2018/08/groundskeeper-used-monsantos-herbicide-roundup-contracted-cancer-non-hodgkin-lymphoma-nhl-wins-289-million-jury-verdict/">landmark
California decision against Monsanto,</a> maker of the
glyphosate-based pesticide Roundup, <a
href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/vietnam-agent-orange-monsanto-victims-compensation-a8508271.html">Vietnam
has demanded that the company pay damages</a> to the
many victims of its <a
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange">Agent
Orange</a> herbicide and defoliant, which Monsanto
supplied to the U.S. military during the Vietnam War.
(Monsanto was not the only U.S. manufacturer of the
compound; there were nine in total.) <a
href="https://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/agent-orange">U.S.
forces, in a program dubbed Operation Ranch Hand,</a>
used more than 13 million gallons of the compound in
Vietnam — nearly one-third of the 20 million gallons of
all herbicides used during the war in Laos, Cambodia,
and Vietnam. In Vietnam alone, 4.5 million acres were
impacted by Agent Orange.</p>
<p><a
href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/vietnam-agent-orange-monsanto-victims-compensation-a8508271.html">Nguyen
Phuong Tra, a spokesperson for Vietnam’s foreign
ministry, said,</a> “The [U.S.] verdict serves as a
legal precedent which refutes previous claims that the
herbicides made by Monsanto and other chemical
corporations in the U.S. and provided for the U.S. army
in the war are harmless. . . . Vietnam has suffered
tremendous consequences from the war, especially with
regard to the lasting and devastating effects of toxic
chemicals, including Agent Orange.”</p>
<p><a
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2018/08/brazilian-judge-suspends-glyphosate-monsanto-stock-plunges-san-francisco-jury-orders-cancer-victim-paid-289-million/">Around
the world,</a> the U.S. case may be sparking <a
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2018/08/australia-germany-urged-to-restrict-glyphosate-after-u-s-court-ruling/">bolder
actions</a> on the toxic weed killer. In that
watershed decision, the jury in San Francisco County
Superior Court awarded Dewayne “Lee” Johnson <a
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2018/08/groundskeeper-used-monsantos-herbicide-roundup-contracted-cancer-non-hodgkin-lymphoma-nhl-wins-289-million-jury-verdict/">$289
million in compensatory and punitive damages</a> for
his exposure to Monsanto’s Roundup (whose active
ingredient is glyphosate) that caused his subsequent
development of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, as well as for
the corporation’s deliberate and protracted cover-ups to
keep the risks of exposure to glyphosate hidden from the
public and regulators.</p>
<p>Agent Orange got its moniker because of the color of
the band around the 55-gallon drums in which the
chemical was transported. Other herbicides used by U.S.
forces in Vietnam were identified as Agents White, Blue,
Purple, Pink, and Green. <a
href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK236351/">The
Orange version</a> — comprising <a
href="https://www.beyondpesticides.org/assets/media/documents/pesticides/factsheets/24D_Jul04.pdf">2,4-D</a>
(2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, still widely used as a
broadleaf herbicide) and <a
href="https://www.beyondpesticides.org/assets/media/documents/pesticides/factsheets/Triclopyr.pdf">2,4,5-T</a>
(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid) — <a
href="https://www.history.com/topics/vietnam-war/agent-orange">was
used to defoliate food crops and forest cover used by
North Vietnamese and Viet Cong troops during the
Vietnam War.</a> The toxic compound was sprayed
heavily on forested areas, farmland and rice paddies,
waterways, and roads. Military members — <a
href="https://www.propublica.org/article/agent-orange-act-was-supposed-to-help-vietnam-veterans-but-many-still-dont-">numbering
approximately 2.6 million</a> — were not the only
people potentially exposed; crops and water sources used
by non-combatant South Vietnamese people were also
affected.</p>
<p>The compound contained significant amounts of the
synthetic contaminant dioxin
(2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-<em>p</em>-dioxin), often
called TCDD. Dioxins are highly toxic chemicals that
persist for years in the environment (especially in
soils, lake and river sediments, and the food chain),
and accumulate in fatty tissues of animals. Dioxins are
carcinogenic, toxic even at very low exposure levels,
and responsible for both acute and long-term effects.
They have been proven to cause not only cancer, but
also, other grave health problems, such as birth
defects, <a
href="https://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/publications/agent-orange/agent-orange-summer-2017/skin-conditions.asp">extreme
rashes</a> (chloracne and related conditions), and
severe neurological and psychological issues. This has
been true for both Vietnamese military and civilian
people who were exposed, and for U.S. Vietnam-era
service members. It should be noted that <a
href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK236351/">those
in the military are not the only workers impacted by
TCDD;</a> workers in other sectors have registered
health effects, including employees in pesticide
manufacturing and transport facilities, farm and
forestry operations, and pulp and paper mills.</p>
<p>Many Vietnam Era service members have long charged
Agent Orange with responsibility for a host of maladies
they suffered both in the field, and in the years after
their return stateside. They began to link their
exposures to Agent Orange with the myriad chronic health
issues some were developing. <a
href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK236351/">In
1979, the first class action suit</a> was brought
against five manufacturers (with more added to the suit
later on) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York. The suit was brought by the class
comprising Vietnam veterans, and their spouses, parents,
and children; it did not name the federal government as
a third-party defendant. (A 1950 U.S. Supreme Court case
gave rise to the <a
href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/feres_doctrine">Feres
doctrine,</a> which prevents claims against the
federal government by armed forces members and their
families for injuries arising from, or in the course
of, activity incident to military service.) The outcome
was a settlement in the form of a $180 million fund to
be used to: (1) provide cash payments to totally
disabled veterans and survivors of deceased veterans;
(2) establish a class assistance foundation to help meet
the medical, social, and legal service needs of members
of the class; and (3) establish a trust fund for New
Zealand and Australian class members. Because a
settlement was made out of court, no determination of
the causal relationship between Agent Orange exposure
and veterans’ health outcomes was made.</p>
<p>Subsequently, beginning with the first claims the
Veterans Administration (VA) received related to Agent
Orange in 1977, veterans’ groups and other advocates
have worked persistently to get recognition for the
harms of Agent Orange to veterans — and in some cases,
to their children — as well as coverage for medical
needs and disability. It has been, no doubt, a maddening
journey, with <a
href="https://www.propublica.org/article/va-delays-key-agent-orange-decisions">repeated
delays</a> in progress and glacially <a
href="https://www.propublica.org/article/long-list-of-agent-orange-decisions-awaits-va-in-2017">incremental
expansion of coverages.</a></p>
<p>Any federal attempt to deal with coverage for exposed
veterans started with the <a
href="https://www.vetshq.com/agent-orange-timeline/">1984
Congressional passage of Public Law 98-542, which</a>
“provide[d] compensation to Vietnam veterans for soft
tissue sarcoma and require[d] the VA [U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs] to establish standards for Agent
Orange and atomic radiation compensation” (which law the
VA has been charged with largely ignoring). <a
href="https://www.vetshq.com/agent-orange-timeline/">This
was followed by</a> a 1989 order, by a federal judge,
that the VA reconsider 31,000 Vietnam Era vets’ claims
related to health impacts of exposure, and the Agent
Orange Act of 1991, which established that certain
diseases tied to chemical exposure would be presumed
related to a veteran’s military service and would make
such veterans eligible for benefits.</p>
<p>This act really marked the beginning of at least
passive acknowledgement, by the federal government, that
its use of Agent Orange was causal of many health
problems. The health issues covered by this “presumption
policy” has grown over time to include: non-Hodgkin’s
lymphoma, soft-tissue sarcoma, and chloracne (1991);
multiple myeloma, respiratory cancers, Hodgkin’s
disease, and porphyria cutanea tarda, a metabolic
disease (1994); type II diabetes (2001); chronic
lymphocytic leukemia (2003); AL amyloidosis (2009);
chronic B-cell leukemias, Parkinson’s disease, and
ischemic heart disease (2010); prostate cancer (2015);
and peripheral neuropathy (2016). <a
href="https://www.vetshq.com/">VetsHQ</a> is an online
veterans’ community that describes its mission as
“helping ensure America’s commitments to veterans and
their families are honored.” Its website provides many
tools for vets, and a <a
href="https://www.vetshq.com/agent-orange-timeline/">very
useful timeline</a> of significant events in the Agent
Orange saga.</p>
<p>A 2018 update on coverage from the VA is available <a
href="https://www.benefits.va.gov/compensation/claims-postservice-agent_orange.asp">here.</a>
The agency reported in June of this year that its
presumption policy — which sets out the diseases or
syndromes that are assumed related to Agent Orange
exposure — has resulted in increased utilization of VA
healthcare benefits by veterans. <a
href="https://www.research.va.gov/currents/0618-Agent-Orange-presumption-policy-leads-to-higher-VA-health-care-use.cfm">The
agency notes</a> that a study by researchers from the <a
href="https://www.warrelatedillness.va.gov/">War
Related Illness and Injury Study Center</a> (WRIISC)
at the VA New Jersey Healthcare System found that the
“law passed by Congress nearly 30 years ago [the Agent
Orange Act of 1991] has largely met its goal: helping
affected Veterans get the care they need.”</p>
<p>Yet progress in veterans receiving the support they
need has been interspersed with plenty of setbacks,
including denials of claims, government statements of
inconclusive causation, and <a
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2017/11/veterans-coverage-agent-orange-related-diseases-delayed/">delays
or failures</a> of potentially helpful legislation.
For example, until 2015, military personnel who worked
in, on, or around the C-123 — the aircraft that
delivered Agent Orange in Vietnam and elsewhere in Asia
during or after the Vietnam War — <a
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2015/06/air-force-veterans-who-used-agent-orange-contaminated-aircraft-may-be-compensated/">were
deemed ineligible</a> for medical care and disability
coverage for their exposures. These contaminated
transport aircraft were never decontaminated after their
Southeast Asia service, and some were repurposed, back
in the U.S., for basic transport operations, such as
cargo shipping and medical evacuation missions.</p>
<p>The VA had declared that “dried residues” of Agent
Orange in these C-123s were likely not harmful, but a <a
href="https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/aircraft-vietnam-identified-agent-orange-contamination">2014
study showed</a> that people who worked on or around
the C-123 were very likely to have been exposed to
dioxin from those residues. <a
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2015/06/air-force-veterans-who-used-agent-orange-contaminated-aircraft-may-be-compensated/">Beyond
Pesticides reported, in June 2015,</a> that things
were looking more hopeful, saying, “After years of
denial and obstruction, Air Force and Air Force Reserve
veterans now have the chance to receive compensation for
their exposure to the highly toxic herbicide Agent
Orange on contaminated aircraft used after the Vietnam
War.” In that year, 1,500–2,100 service members did gain
eligibility for coverage.</p>
<p>A further example of the difficulties veterans have had
and continue to have: <a
href="https://www.propublica.org/article/agent-orange-act-was-supposed-to-help-vietnam-veterans-but-many-still-dont-">as
<em>Pro Publica</em> reported in 2015,</a> the 1991
Agent Orange Act made eligible for benefits veterans
with certain diseases who “‘must have actually set foot
on Vietnamese soil or served on a craft in its rivers
(also known as “brown water veterans”),’ according to
the Congressional Research Service. . . . Those who
instead spent time on deep-water Navy ships (called
‘Blue Water Navy’ veterans) do not qualify unless they
can show that they spent time on Vietnam land or
rivers.” Now, in 2018, a U.S. House of Representatives <a
href="https://www.military.com/militaryadvantage/2018/08/02/va-rips-blue-water-agent-orange-bill-urges-senate-sink-it.html">bill
(HR 299) that would extend Agent Orange disability
benefits and health care</a> to 70,000–90,000 veterans
who served aboard ships in territorial waters off
Vietnam during the war, passed the House unanimously,
but is being opposed by the VA, which is urging the
Senate to quash it.</p>
<p><a
href="https://www.military.com/militaryadvantage/2018/08/02/va-rips-blue-water-agent-orange-bill-urges-senate-sink-it.html">Paul
R. Lawrence, VA Undersecretary for Benefits, testified
that</a> “There’s still no credible scientific
evidence to support extending Agent Orange-related
benefits to shipboard personnel who never went ashore in
Vietnam or patrolled its rivers. Without such evidence,
he said, it would be wrong, and would create a
disastrous precedent, to award VA benefits.” Although
David Shulkin, the first VA secretary under the Trump
administration, had said, one year into the job, “These
veterans have waited too long and this is a
responsibility that this country has. . . . It is a
high priority for us,” the scorching comment from Mr.
Lawrence came days after the subsequent secretary,
Robert Wilkie, assumed the secretary post.</p>
<p><em><a
href="https://www.propublica.org/article/agent-orange-act-was-supposed-to-help-vietnam-veterans-but-many-still-dont-">Pro
Publica offers a helpful guide</a></em> to which
groups are covered for Agent Orange–related issues, or
are seeking coverage. Those groups include: those who
served in Vietnam; Air Force personnel exposed to
contaminated C-123 aircraft; Blue Water veterans; those
who served in or near the Korean DMZ (demilitarized
zone), 1968–1971; Air Force personnel who worked in
Thailand, 1961–1975; and children of veterans.
Currently, kids of Vietnam Era vets with spina bifida
qualify for benefits, and children of female vets
qualify if they suffer from 18 other various conditions.
There may be coming research on potential epigenetic
effects on children of veterans that could add others to
the coverage list.</p>
<p>Halfway across the world, people in Vietnam are dealing
with many of the same health, never mind environmental
(such as persistence of dioxin in the food chain)
issues. <a
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2012/08/us-to-clean-up-sites-contaminated-with-agent-orange/">In
2012, as Beyond Pesticides reported,</a> the U.S.
launched its first major effort to address environmental
contamination brought on by its use of Agent Orange
during the Vietnam War — after decades of denying
Vietnamese requests for assistance in a cleanup. Five
years later, <a
href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/will-u-s-stay-committed-to-toxic-agent-orange-cleanup-in-vietnam">PBS
reported a mixed picture,</a> and perhaps waning
commitment, on keeping on top of that task, given costs.
Whether <a
href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/vietnam-agent-orange-monsanto-victims-compensation-a8508271.html">Vietnam’s
latest attempt to achieve some justice</a> for its
affected people bears future fruit — in what may, in
light of the <a
href="https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2018/08/groundskeeper-used-monsantos-herbicide-roundup-contracted-cancer-non-hodgkin-lymphoma-nhl-wins-289-million-jury-verdict/">recent
California award,</a> be a changing landscape on
corporate culpability for harms to human health — will
be a development eagerly awaited by that country, and by
advocates for policies on toxic chemicals that will
actually protect people and our environments.</p>
<p>For more information about the legacy of Agent Orange,
see Beyond Pesticides’ <a
href="http://www.beyondpesticides.org/health/index.php">Pesticide
Induced Diseases Database</a>.</p>
<p><em>All unattributed positions and opinions in this
piece are those of Beyond Pesticides,</em></p>
<p>Primary source: <a
href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/vietnam-agent-orange-monsanto-victims-compensation-a8508271.html">https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/vietnam-agent-orange-monsanto-victims-compensation-a8508271.html</a></p>
<p> <span></span> <span></span> </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863.9977
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://freedomarchives.org/">https://freedomarchives.org/</a>
</div>
</body>
</html>