DU? I don't buy it

[Dragon Lady]

The reason Jet fuel has a pesticide rating is because it is a highly refined chemical.

ALL synthesized chemicals be it JP4, J5, or chlorox bleach are assigned a pesticide chemical. It is simply a measurement of toxicity.

And by the way...everything is toxic, even water can kill you if you drink too much. Had it happen right here last year. Some knuckleheaded fraternity party got out of hand. The combo of too much alcohol and slamming down too much water. The kid's brain could not function because the salinity and potasium levels were diluted way too thinly

The jet fuels have been in use for 30 years. If there was an issue with them than it would have shown up by now in the civilian sector. Little hint: military planes fly into civilian airports and many are even hangared at civilian airports every day.
The way the EPA has been all over the military in recent years with base clean ups...this would definately have been discovered and become a big issue.

I do not propose that I am an expert on the causes of these tragic and dibilitating illnesses. I am certainly in support of all of our vets and will not just arbitrarily rule out a cause without true investigation. Neither will I jump on the chemical industry and accuse them of knowingly covering up at the expense of our people. Not all companies are big bad companies, just as not all chemicals are bad.

There just needs to be some balance to your statements. If nothing else you really need to do some research before you make your accusations. Research is not difficult to do, there are libraries, the internet, newspapers (although I don't trust them very much if at all). You just need to make an effort and not expect that people will do it for you and place the info in you lap.

I also question where you get your information? Are you educated in the field of chemistry? Do you have years of research and a full understanding of the details involved at the nuclear level and how each atom interacts with the human molecular structure?

Oh, and when I say nuclear I don't mean things that go boom. I mean the atomic levels down to the nucleus of each atom.

[Margaret Diann]

You make some good points.

It's not the single exposures that are the problem as much as repetitive exposures that add up to too much exposure. And it's not just one thing - This chemical is in many things - So inventory where it is; monitor all exposure to it. Pesticide is a specific type of chemical; not an indication of toxicity only. (EPA has studied 2-butoxyethanol and diethylene glycol monobutyl ether for endocrine disruption, for instance. Something pesticides do, which other chemicals generally don't.)

Hardball helped me think through some things - on this thread

Hunters who clean their guns a couple of times a year don't have to be so concerned about the solvents in gun cleaners, for instance ... compared to our troops who clean their guns 3 times a day. NOW you are talking about the right personal protective equipment per MSDS - that is not happening in our military today.

So, should they use less toxic products or wear the personal protecitve equipment per MSDS?

Jet fuel? It is more hazardous than people realize and may be a source of harm not fully checked into. I believe the ethylene glycol ethers have been harming our people for more than 30 years & that they may be ingredients in jet fuel for that long, too

I have been doing a lot of research - mostly on 2-butoxyethanol; and I wish to share what I've learned in hopes that others can take it further: a link in a chain.

This has some good info: www.valdezlink.com/generic.htm#research

Mike shared these thoughts: "Why aren't more servicepeople who served on carriers suffering from JP fuels?

My immediate thoughts are: Not everyone who made a living pumping gas got sick, but quite a few still did. It's just gas station workers suffered from a higher rate of certain illnesses than others.

Same with people who worked with certain metals, chemicals, gases, etc.

Many people in the service were told that what they were handling was safe; many of them swallowed those statements, perhaps never connecting their health condition to previous naval work. Only some who were sickened connected the dots and only some of them are speaking out. And of those, not many are actually heard on a broad basis. Well, that's my opinion.

The White House and the VA got very tired and exasperated listening to my dad regarding his health problems from WWII as well of those of his fellow servicemen. The government and big business wants them to shut their mouths.

[David]

I will tell you what happened in the Gulf. They pumped us full of experimental drugs and then put us in the field with training gear rather then real mopp gear. They then let the scuds and whatever else fall. They now tally the results. End of mystery.

[catman]

Phase Line Norfolk...red and green star clusters clear across the horizon, M-8's going crazy....higher says keep moving!

Trav

[David]

Yep catman I hear you. M8's going off dailey, all clear was the only word ever passed down. "Must be faulty equipment", we would say to one another, not really wanting to suit up anyway. The scuds I saw explode on their own never hit the ground, they all air bursted. I could go on and on but it just puts me in a bad frame of mind.

[catman]

Been there for a few days now, not sure why. Have been very busy with grass fires and vehicle accidents. 3 car wrecks and 4 grass/wildland fires since about 10:30 pm Saturday.

Like LT says, we just gotta "Keep Movin"

Stay healthy David

Trav

[Dragon Lady]

I tend to agree more with David and Trav. Than ethelyne glycol. We used hundreds of gallons of propylene glycol to deice airplanes its the same thing the civies use on their planes. There were many nights I was soaked in the stuff, or in fuel, or in oil. I spent 10 years working very intimately with HUGE airplanes filled with all sorts of chems. The worst by far was the naptha we used as a solvent to clean the grime from the T-tail. You would think that after years of near daily exposure that I would certainly be exhibiting signs that you list as well as those exposed in the Gulf for far less time. However I am as healthy as can be for someone turning 41 this year.

The biggest difference is that I didn't get all those crazy shots all at one time like they did. Nor was I exposed to any chem warfare.

I think you are just simply looking in the wrong direction and you are attempting to twist the research to match your agenda. That is not how true science or research is done.

Sorry if you don't agree and I wish you luck in locating an audience.

[Margaret Diann]

I'm surprised that you don't have health effects if you've had that much exposure to the ethylene glycols ... But, of course, that is good news

The evidence is yet to be forthcoming. Although much research has been done & harm is known; it isn't taken seriously. I'm awaiting a serious study by CDC for any of these known to be affected groups of people.

This 2003 research that has been done - is noteworthy. Definitely not barking up the wrong tree.

[Hawk]

to quote Dragonlady,

I tend to agree more with David and Trav. Than ethelyne glycol. We used hundreds of gallons of propylene glycol to deice airplanes its the same thing the civies use on their planes. There were many nights I was soaked in the stuff, or in fuel, or in oil. I spent 10 years working very intimately with HUGE airplanes filled with all sorts of chems. The worst by far was the naptha we used as a solvent to clean the grime from the T-tail. You would think that after years of near daily exposure that I would certainly be exhibiting signs that you list as well as those exposed in the Gulf for far less time. However I am as healthy as can be for someone turning 41 this year.

to qoute david

I will tell you what happened in the Gulf. They pumped us full of experimental drugs and then put us in the field with training gear rather then real mopp gear. They then let the scuds and whatever else fall. They now tally the results. End of mystery.

back to dragonlady

However I am as healthy as can be for someone turning 41 this year.
The biggest difference is that I didn't get all those crazy shots all at one time like they did. Nor was I exposed to any chem warfare.
I think you are just simply looking in the wrong direction and you are attempting to twist the research to match your agenda. That is not how true science or research is done.
Sorry if you don't agree and I wish you luck in locating an audience.

to qoute my ealier post on this thread

You have become single minded in your focus, to the exclussion of all other possible causes of GWS. Yes you did acknowledge the possibility of other causes. But there is a very strong possibility that GWS mimics your symptoms of corexit, is because chemical weapons cause toxic reactions, just as over exposure to a chemical causes toxic reactions.
Your devotion to your cause is commendable, and I truly believe your desire to help is genuine. What you are forgetting is the large number of Biological agents that where available to be used by Iraq

further

Maggie, consider the above, I will not respond again to this topic, as further discussion between us would be better served via email, you have my email address. Both of us have stated our position. To answer your question, what is my agenda?

as you felt it was needed to continue this here rather than via email, so will I :re: it seems everyone that has posted in reply to this thread does'nt agree with your position on GWS being related to 2-butoxyethanol so;
do you have anything further to support your position on 2-butoxyethanol? or just what you have already stated? :cd:
do you have anyway to account for how such a large exposure occurred/ to all the countries involved? :cd:
can you explain the IRAQI CURSE? :cd: do you even know what that refers to? :cd:

I look forward to your answers, perhaps they could explain how you determined this one may be the culprit for the majority in your following reply;

Yes, of course there are multiple causes of harm to Gulf War Troops. I just say that this one may be the culprit for the majority - & in some people 'all' of the symptoms of 'gulf war syndrome'

of course you could just side step the questions, or distort their meaning :re: as implied in a final qoute from dragonlady,

you are attempting to twist the research to match your agenda.

Hawk :cl:

[Margaret Diann]

... on the chemical exposure you had to 2-butoxyethanol and diethylene glycol monobutyl ether

I checked the VA studies. It doesn't exist.

Too bad - the symptoms of gulf war syndrome line up better than the organophosphate study, for instance.

This is the bigger mystery!