[ RadSafe ] Facts from Dr. Kang

[Steven Dapra]

January 30, 2007

On 1-28-07 James Salsman wrote: "The fact remains that the number of birth 
defects in the children of combat-deployed male U.S. and U.K. 1991 Gulf War 
troops has been rising sharply, from 180% above the non-combat troops from 
the same era in 2000, to 220% in 2003."

         On July 25, 2006, James Salsman wrote: "I spoke with Dr. Kang by 
telephone today.  He confirmed that the total number of "moderate to 
severe" birth defects in children of male Gulf War veterans INCREASED from 
an odds ratio of 1.8 from survey data to 2.2 after the pediatric medical 
records were examined."

         Note the differences.  On Jan. 28 it's "birth defects."  On July 
25, it's "moderate to severe" birth defects.  On Jan. 28 it's 
"combat-deployed" male veterans.  On July 25 it's "Gulf War veterans."  (A 
veteran is someone who was or may have been deployed in the theater.  A 
mere veteran did not necessarily see combat.  Some Vietnam era veterans 
never got near Vietnam.)

         On July 25 Salsman also wrote, "Dr. Kang refuses to release that 
draft or cite it in his bibliography because of his concerns about its 
accuracy brought about by that reviewer's request.  Dr. Kang is no longer 
seeking publication of the pediatric evaluation until considerably more 
data is obtained by the V.A., in hopes that the odds ratios for the 
specific types of birth defects can be shown with enough accuracy to be 
considered statistically significant.  The process of collecting such data 
is going slowly, Dr. Kang said, because of the difficulty of having veteran 
parents come in with their kids."

         An unreleased draft that the author won't cite, and the author has 
stopped seeking publication of it because he needs "considerably more 
data."  Do you really expect us to believe this?

         On July 25, James, you also alluded to a paper by Doyle and 
Ryan.  What is this?  Was their paper published, and if so what is the 
citation?

         You invocation of Dr. Kang (whoever he may be) proves 
nothing.  Give us the citation to a primary source that proves --- or at 
least suggests --- that birth defects have increased from 180% to 
220%.  Everyone who is following this can see you are being evasive, so 
knock it off and give us a citation.  While you're at it, you can also give 
us a citation to Dr. Kang's Annals of Epidemiology report that you 
mentioned.  (And leave agent orange out of this.)

Steven Dapra
sjd at swcp.com


At 05:56 PM 1/30/07 -0800, James Salsman wrote:
>Colonel Daxon wrote:
>
>>Salsman wrote:
>>
>> >>The fact remains that the number of birth defects in the children of
>>combat-deployed male U.S. and U.K. 1991 Gulf War troops has been rising
>>sharply, from 180% above the non-combat troops from the same era in 2000, to
>>220% in 2003.  Nutritional deficiency-related causes of birth defects affect
>>mothers, not fathers. <<
>>
>>These are not the facts....
>
>They are the facts, from Dr. Han Kang's Annals of Epidemiology report,
>and from the his summary of research which I have posted to the
>Radsafe list before and cited here on multiple occasions:
>http://lists.radlab.nl/pipermail/radsafe/2006-July/003768.html
>http://lists.radlab.nl/pipermail/radsafe/2006-July/003776.html
>
>It not stress-related for male veterans to suffer increased incidences
>of brith defects, because it hasn't happened before, execpt with agent
>orange.
>
>Sincerely,
>James Salsman