|
29 May 03 - 10:57 PM (#961626) Subject: BS: ANZAC's From: Doug_Remley A short and specific thread....what is your impression of VVAA? |
|
30 May 03 - 12:03 AM (#961640) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: Padre And what, if you can reveal it without having someone accuse you of being part of another conspiracy, is VVAA? |
|
30 May 03 - 12:45 AM (#961654) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: Doug_Remley Test this link: http://www.vvaa.org.au/ |
|
30 May 03 - 04:59 AM (#961703) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: Liz the Squeak This might help.... I seem to be Blicky Fairy today... http://www.vvaa.org.au/ |
|
30 May 03 - 05:00 AM (#961705) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: Liz the Squeak seems to be a perfectly decent site, aimed at a specific audience. What's your beef with it? LTS |
|
30 May 03 - 05:39 AM (#961722) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: Doug_Remley No beef, Liz, some organizations are better than others. |
|
30 May 03 - 06:19 AM (#961742) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: GUEST Well what do *you* think of the website Doug? Maybe if we know that we will have a better chance of knowing what you wanted to discuss when you started the thread. |
|
30 May 03 - 06:39 AM (#961748) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: Doug_Remley I wanted to know the quality of the websit for personal research into various agents used by the U.S. in Vietnam. |
|
30 May 03 - 06:53 AM (#961752) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: GUEST Well they seem to have a few studies into veterans health and whether it has been affected by agents known to have been used. These seem at first glance to be pretty well designed sudies and not at all slanted (the one I read came back negative for increased cancer risk after exposure to a certain chemical). The fact that they are conducting research rather than selectively summarising other work in a slanted way seem to make me thing they are a good possible source of info, rather than propaganda. |
|
30 May 03 - 08:36 AM (#961801) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: artbrooks Here is the US government's most recent release on Agent Orange. There is a lot more available if you do a search on the VA's website at www.va.gov. |
|
30 May 03 - 09:16 AM (#961831) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: Rapparee My brother Tony was exposed to Agent Orange and has adult-onset diabetes. He's getting a 10% disability from the VA, as well as drug help. He also has respiratory problems which may or may not be related to his exposure. PM me and I'll give you his email address, but don't try to bullsh*t him or he'll talk your ear off (he might anyway, come to think of it). He really does have a lot of info on Agent Orange and the others (Blue, etc.). |
|
30 May 03 - 05:50 PM (#962199) Subject: RE: BS: ANZAC's From: Doug_Remley I basically think that, yes, there was a clear case of potential harm brought to light by the Agent Orange "trial." I also think that revelation was a red-herring Mr and Mrs Budweiser/NASCAR could not quite embrace small chemical amounts as doing so much damage. Would they have reacted differently to the agent called Blue, a close second the Orange with more Dioxin, otherwise known as Cacodylic Acid composed of an inorganic Arsenic compound(54+%) molar weight; everybody knows Arsenic is a poison. It is ingested through the skin, food and air. How might that have affected public attitude. Check some D.O.T.'s Cacodylic is under "nasty stuff" and one of its synonyms is still Agent Blue. Australian veterans are concerned with Agent White and Spinal Bifida. |