At a meeting in March, a lead analyst in the VA’s compensation service
was critical of the media, scientists and the VA’s own administrative
tribunal for taking positions that differ from his. The VA said his
comments “did not fully or accurately reflect VA’s position” but also
said his quotes were being taken out of context.
A key federal official who helps adjudicate claims by veterans who
say they were exposed to Agent Orange has downplayed the risks of the
chemical herbicide and questioned the findings of scientists,
journalists and even a federal administrative tribunal that conflict
with his views.
Jim Sampsel, a lead analyst within the Department of Veterans
Affairs’ compensation service, told a VA advisory committee in March
that he believes much of the renewed attention to Agent Orange — used
during the Vietnam War to kill brush and deny cover to enemy troops — is
the result of media “hype” and “hysteria,” according to a transcript of the meeting released to ProPublica.
“When it comes to Agent Orange, the facts don’t always matter,” said Sampsel, himself a Vietnam veteran who also handles Gulf War-related illness questions. “So we have to deal with the law as written.”
Part of Sampsel’s job entails reviewing evidence to determine whether
a veteran or group of veterans came in contact with Agent Orange
outside of Vietnam. By law, veterans are presumed to have been exposed
to Agent Orange if they served or stepped foot in Vietnam; they have to
prove exposure if they served at sea or in another country during the
war. They also must have a disease that the VA ties to exposure to the
herbicide.
“From my point of view, I will do anything to help veterans, any legitimate veteran, and I’ve done it plenty of times,” he told
the Advisory Committee on Disability Compensation, a group that advises
the VA. “Unfortunately when it comes to this Agent Orange, we have to
have a lot of denials.”
No comments:
Post a Comment