VA study of medical records on birth defects (was Re: [ RadSafe ]RE: uranium in the gulf war)

Eric D edaxon at
Mon Jul 24 19:30:51 CDT 2006

Don Mercado wrote: 

<<"You mysteriously neglected to include the last sentence of that
paragraph. And I quote, 'His research is currently undergoing peer review.
.... 'While the Associated Press and other news media entities reported the
finding, it has not yet been peer-reviewed or published in a scientific
journal, steps required to gain acceptance in the scientific community.
(Occasionally, scientific papers undergo extensive changes during this
process as methodologies are carefully analyzed, assumptions challenged, and
conclusions modified.)">>

Also absent from the discussion was the nature of the Gulf War Review. It is
an informational outreach publication for Gulf War veterans not a peer
reviewed journal.  The section Mr. Salsman cited was actually a note at the
bottom of an answer to a veteran's question concerning birth defects.  The
full quote is as follows:

"*Note: Dr. Brown's remarks pre-dated Dr. Han Kang's findings discussed in
the article on the Research Advisory Committee. Preliminary results,
announced by Dr. Kang, found that male Gulf War veterans reported having
infants with likely birth defects at twice the rate of non-veterans.
Furthermore, female Gulf War veterans were almost three times more likely to
report children with birth defects than their non-Gulf counterparts. The
numbers changed somewhat with medical records verification. However, Dr.
Kang and his colleagues concluded that the risk of birth defects in children
of deployed male veterans still was about 2.2 times that of non-deployed
veterans. His research is currently undergoing peer review."

Dr. Doyle's paper (my previous post) is peer reviewed and I have provided
Mr. Salsman the citation he requested.  I regret he is unable to find the


Eric Daxon

More information about the RadSafe mailing list