Recently, World War II veterans have come forward to claim compensation for health effects they say were caused by their participation in chemical warfare experiments. In response, the Veterans Administration asked the Institute of Medicine to study the issue. Based on a literature review and personal testimony from more than 250 affected veterans, this new volume discusses in detail the development and chemistry of mustard agents and Lewisite followed by interesting and informative discussions about these substances and their possible connection to a range of health problems, from cancer to reproductive disorders. The volume also offers an often chilling historical examination of the use of volunteers in chemical warfare experiments by the U.S. militaryâ€"what the then-young soldiers were told prior to the experiments, how they were "encouraged" to remain in the program, and how they were treated afterward. This comprehensive and controversial book will be of importance to policymakers and legislators, military and civilian planners, officials at the Department of Veterans Affairs, military historians, and researchers.
Recently, World War II veterans have come forward to claim compensation for health effects they say were caused by their participation in chemical warfare experiments. In response, the Veterans Administration asked the Institute of Medicine to study the issue. Based on a literature review and personal testimony from more than 250 affected veterans, this new volume discusses in detail the development and chemistry of mustard agents and Lewisite followed by interesting and informative discussions about these substances and their possible connection to a range of health problems, from cancer to reproductive disorders. The volume also offers an often chilling historical examination of the use of volunteers in chemical warfare experiments by the U.S. military--what the then-young soldiers were told prior to the experiments, how they were "encouraged" to remain in the program, and how they were treated afterward. This comprehensive and controversial book will be of importance to policymakers and legislators, military and civilian planners, officials at the Department of Veterans Affairs, military historians, and researchers.
Recently, World War II veterans have come forward to claim compensation for health effects they say were caused by their participation in chemical warfare experiments. In response, the Veterans Administration asked the Institute of Medicine to study the issue. Based on a literature review and personal testimony from more than 250 affected veterans, this new volume discusses in detail the development and chemistry of mustard agents and Lewisite followed by interesting and informative discussions about these substances and their possible connection to a range of health problems, from cancer to reproductive disorders. The volume also offers an often chilling historical examination of the use of volunteers in chemical warfare experiments by the U.S. militaryâ€"what the then-young soldiers were told prior to the experiments, how they were "encouraged" to remain in the program, and how they were treated afterward. This comprehensive and controversial book will be of importance to policymakers and legislators, military and civilian planners, officials at the Department of Veterans Affairs, military historians, and researchers.
This study is a review and evaluation of the U.S. Army's Report to Congress on Alternative Approaches for the Treatment and Disposal of Chemical Agent Identification Sets (CAIS). CAIS are test kits that were used to train soldiers from 1928 to 1969 in defensive responses to a chemical attack. They contain samples of chemicals that had been or might have been used by opponents as chemical warfare agents. The Army's baseline approach for treating and disposing of CAIS has been to develop a mobile treatment system, called the Rapid Response System (RRS), which can be carried by several large over-the-road trailers.
The United States has long recognized and honored the service and sacrifices of its military and veterans. Veterans who have been injured by their service (whether their injury appears during service or afterwards) are owed appropriate health care and disability compensation. For some medical conditions that develop after military service, the scientific information needed to connect the health conditions to the circumstances of service may be incomplete. When information is incomplete, Congress or the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) may need to make a "presumption" of service connection so that a group of veterans can be appropriately compensated. The missing information may be about the specific exposures of the veterans, or there may be incomplete scientific evidence as to whether an exposure during service causes the health condition of concern. For example, when the exposures of military personnel in Vietnam to Agent Orange could not be clearly documented, a presumption was established that all those who set foot on Vietnam soil were exposed to Agent Orange. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) Committee was charged with reviewing and describing how presumptions have been made in the past and, if needed, to make recommendations for an improved scientific framework that could be used in the future for determining if a presumption should be made. The Committee was asked to consider and describe the processes of all participants in the current presumptive disability decision-making process for veterans. The Committee was not asked to offer an opinion about past presumptive decisions or to suggest specific future presumptions. The Committee heard from a range of groups that figure into this decision-making process, including past and present staffers from Congress, the VA, the IOM, veterans service organizations, and individual veterans. The Department of Defense (DoD) briefed the Committee about its current activities and plans to better track the exposures and health conditions of military personnel. The Committee further documented the current process by developing case studies around exposures and health conditions for which presumptions had been made. Improving the Presumptive Disability Decision-Making Process for Veterans explains recommendations made by the committee general methods by which scientists, as well as government and other organizations, evaluate scientific evidence in order to determine if a specific exposure causes a health condition.
This report reviews documents on acute exposure guideline levels (AEGLs) for nerve agents GA (tabun), GB (sarin), GD (soman), GD, and VX, sulfur mustard, diborane, and methyl isocyanate. The documents were developed by the National Advisory Committee on Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for Hazardous Chemicals (NAC). The subcommittee concludes that the AEGLs developed in those documents are scientifically valid conclusions based on data reviewed by NAC and are consistent with the NRC reports on developing acute exposure guideline levels.
To determine whether the air quality inside armored-vehicle cabins can meet exposure guidelines under deployment conditions, the Army assessed possible synergistic toxic effects from potentially harmful substances. This book, the final of two reports on the subject from the National Research Council, addresses whether the approach discussed in the technical context section of the Army's proposed guidance is appropriate, or whether an alternative assessment method should be developed. Combined Exposures to Hydrogen Cyanide and Carbon Monoxide in Army Operations provides several conclusions and recommendations, including the use of alternative instrumentation for monitoring gas, conducting experiments on human subjects, and seeking advice from additional groups involved with personnel training and field deployment.
U.S. Navy personnel who work on submarines are in an enclosed and isolated environment for days or weeks at a time when at sea. Unlike a typical work environment, they are potentially exposed to air contaminants 24 hours a day. To protect workers from potential adverse health effects due to those conditions, the U.S. Navy has established exposure guidance levels for a number of contaminants. The Navy asked a subcommittee of the National Research Council (NRC) to review, and develop when necessary, exposure guidance levels for 10 contaminants. Overall, the subcommittee found the values proposed by the Navy to be suitable for protecting human health. For a few chemicals, the committee proposed levels that were lower than those proposed by the Navy. In conducting its evaluation, the subcommittee found that there is little exposure data available on the submarine environment and echoed a previous recommendation from an earlier NRC report to conduct monitoring that would provide a complete analysis of submarine air and data on exposure of personnel to contaminants.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.