<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<itemContainer xmlns="http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5 http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5/omeka-xml-5-0.xsd" uri="https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=49&amp;advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&amp;advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Marine+Corps+exposure&amp;sort_field=Dublin+Core%2CTitle&amp;output=omeka-xml" accessDate="2026-04-18T16:35:21+00:00">
  <miscellaneousContainer>
    <pagination>
      <pageNumber>1</pageNumber>
      <perPage>15</perPage>
      <totalResults>6</totalResults>
    </pagination>
  </miscellaneousContainer>
  <item itemId="2626" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="1432">
        <src>https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/b3c8d196bfeae2fd16cca439f997949b.pdf</src>
        <authentication>0279bc68f76bccafff6b8ddf7b92337d</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="60">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="63381">
                    <text>Item ID Number

("592

Author
Corporate Author
Roport/Artldo TltlO

Executive

Summary: Ranch Hand -MAS Marine Study
Comparison

Journal/Book Title
Year

000

°

Month/Day
Color

n

Number of Images

17

DOSCTlptOn NOtOS

Paragraph summary accompanied by information in list,
graphic, and table form.

Wednesday, May 23, 2001

Page 1593 of 1608

�EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RANCH HAND - NAS MARINE STUDY COMPARISON

The exposed Ranch Hand cohort consists of approximately 1,200 individuals
and 6,000 controls, while the proposed NAS Marine Study consists of 5,900
individuals near the herbicide flight paths, on the same day of spraying
and for which there are 212,100 controls. Despite the fact that the
Ranch Hand study involves smaller sample sizes than the proposed Marine
effort, the Ranch Hand Study is more powerful statistically. Specifically, lower exposure to herbicide and misclassification in Marine exposure groups renders the Marine Study less powerful than the Ranch Hand
effort, as set out in the attached tables and graphs. In the attached
materials, misclassification and decreased exposure are seen to be independent factors additively decrementing Marine Study statistical power.
Even when all 21,900 Marines within the herbicide spray paths up to 28
days following the spray operations are considered exposed, the Ranch
Hand Study is noted to be significantly superior.

�KEY ITEMS OF CONSIDERATION
MARINE STUDY RELATIVE TO RANCH HAND STUDY

"EXPOSED " MARINES RECEIVED AN AVERAGE EXPOSURE 1/1000 THE AVERAGE DOSE
RECEIVED BY RANCH HAND PERSONNEL

MARINE EXPOSURE ALLOCATIONS BASED ON DISTANCE FROM SPRAY PATHS LEAD TO
SERIOUS MISCLASSIFICATION OR BIAS

MARINE EXPOSURE ALLOCATIONS BASED ON TIME IN A SPRAY AREA SUBSTANTIALLY
ALTER THE SIZES OF THE STUDY AND CONTROL POPULATIONS AND LEAD TO SERIOUS
MISCLASSIFICATION

�1979 GAO REPORT
COMPARED GROUND TROOP LOCATIONS WITH HERBICIDE ORANGE
MISSION
TIME - 1, 7, 14, 2B DAYS
GEOGRAPHY PROXIMITY - 0,5, 1,5, 2,
ASSUMED
BATTALION TURNOVER RATE - 202/MONTH
ALL TROOPS LOCATED AT BATTALION HQ
DRIFT IN ALL DIRECTIONS

�1979 GAO REPORT
MARINE CORPS INFANTRY BATTALIONS CLOSEST
TO HERBICIDE ORANGE SPRAYING MISSIONS
ON DAY OF SPRAYING (CON THIEN VACINITY)
BATTALION HEADQUARTERS
FLIGHT PATH OF SPRAYING MISSION
CLOSEST DISTANCE BETWEEN
HEADQUARTERS AND FLIGHT
PATH (IN KILOMETERS)

A
B

1st BATTALION 4th REGIMENT

C

2nd BATTALION 9th REGIMENT

D
SCALE 1" = 2 Km.

1st BATTALION 3rd REGIMENT

3rd BATTALION 4th REGIMENT

�CRITIQUE - 1979 GAO
ATYPICAL SPRAYING IN D1Z
INADEQUATE RECORDS-BELOW BATTALION LEVEL
TEN-PERCENT OF TROOPS AT BATTALION HQ
REMAINING TROOPS IN "ROVING UNITS"
UNIT LOCATIONS ONLY FOR COMBAT ACTION
HEAVY VEGETATION/mUNTAIM TERRAIN MINIMIZED
GROUND LEVEL EXPOSURE
SPRAY DRIFT LIMITED AND DIRECTIONAL
ENVIRONFENTAL FATE DISREGARDED

�FATE IN AIR (HERBICIDE)
PARTICLE SIZE
&lt;100u 1,9%
10Q-500u76,2%
&gt;500y 21,9%
87% IMPACT WITHIN 1 MIN
13% DRIFT/VOLATILIZE (?)
PHOTODEGRADATION

�FATE ON VEGETATION (HERBICIDE)
MULTI CANOPY FOREST INTERCEPTED * 94%
GROUND - LEVEL DEPOSITION * 6%
(0,17 GAL/A = 1,4 LB AI/A)
CUTICULAR PENETRATION OCCURRED WITHIN 30 MIN

�ENVIRONMENTAL FATE OF TCDD
RAPID PHOTODEGRADATION IN AIR/PLANT SURFACE
(CROSSBY, &gt; 98% IN 6 HR)
(NASH, 86% IN 32 HR)
MIN TRANSLOCATION IN PLANTS
NEG, PLANT UPTAKE
SOIL: 20% PHOTODEGRADES IN 6 HR
T 1/2 WITH HERBICIDE = 1 YEAR
T 1/2 WITHOUT HERBICIDE = 3 YEARS
BIOACCUMULATION IN ANIMALS
(EGLIN AFB STUDY)

�CONSIDERATION OF THE EXPOSURE
ALLOCATION FOR THE MARINE POPULATION

SUBJECTIVE MEANS: PERSONAL HISTORY OF THE MARINES
PROBLEMS: BIAS FROM COMPENSATION CARROT MISIDENTIFICATION
OF SPRAYING AIRCRAFT
PROBABLE RESULTS: POSITIVE HISTORIES

RESULTING EFFECT: SUBSTANTIAL POSITIVE BIAS

�CONSIDERATION OF THE EXPOSURE
ALLOCATION FOR THE MARINE POPULATION
"OBJECTIVE" MEANS: HERB TAPES; GEOGRAPHIC PROXIMITY OF MARINE HQs TO SPRAY PATHS

PROBLEMS: TAPE INACCURACIES; COMBAT MANEUVERS OF MARINES FROM HQs; SHORT
ENVIRONMENTAL FATE OF TCDD; CONFOUNDING EXPOSURE TO CONTROL GROUP
VIA PERIMETER GROUND SPRAYING

PROBABLE RESULT: SUBSTANTIAL MISCLASSIFICATION OF "EXPOSED" GROUP PLUS MINOR
MISCLASSIFICATION OF "UNEXPOSED" CONTROL GROUP

RESULTING EFFECT: SUBSTANTIAL DILUTION OF HEATH EFFECTS, IF PRESENT SIGNIFICANT
DILUTION OF EFFECTS IF MARINES ADDED TO RANCH HAND
POPULATION FOR STUDY

�MORTALITY ANALYSIS
POWER COMPARISON OF THE RANCH HAND STUDY TO THE MARINE
POPULATION CONSIDERING MISCLASSIFICATION AND RELATIVE EXPOSURE
POWER TABLE
RANCH HAND
POWER

MISCLASSIFICATION

1-B
.92

MARINE STUDY POWER
EXPOSURE LEVELS
RELATIVE TO RANCH HAND
1/10 1/20 1/100 1/1000

0

.19

.10

.06

.05

10

.17

.10

.06

.05

25

.14

.09

.06

.05

ASSUMPTIONS: RH STUDY POP. 1,200: 6,000 (1:5)
MARINE STUDY POP. 5,900: 212,100
NORMAL INCIDENCE OF DISEASE = 0.01
DISEASE INCIDENCE IN RH = 0.02
LINEAR DOSE - RESPONSE
MISCLASS. OF MARINE CONTROLS EXCLUDED

�MORTALITY ANALYSIS
POWER COMPARISON OF THE RANCH HAND STUDY TO THE MARINE POPULATION
CONSIDERING MISCLASSIFICATIQN AND RELATIVE EXPOSURE
POWER* TABLE
RANCH HAND
POWER
1-B

MARINE STUDY POWER
EXPOSURE LEVELS
RELATIVE TO RANCH HAND

MISCLASSIFICATION

1/10
.87

0
10
25

ASSUMPTIONS: RH STUDY POP. 1,200: 6,000 (1:5)
MARINE STUDY POP. 5,900: 212,100
NORMAL INCIDENCE OF DISEASE 0.001
DISEASE INCIDENCE IN RH 0.004
LINEAR DOSE - RESPONSE
MISCLASS. OF MARINE CONTROLS EXCLUDED

1/20

1/100

.18
.18
.15

.10
.09
.09

.06
.06
.06

1/1000
.05
.05
.05

�POWER CURVES OF THE MARINE STUDY CONSIDERING RELATIVE
EXPOSURE AND MISCLASSIFICATION OF THE STUDY POPULATION
1.0 r

0.8

NO MISCLASSIFICATION

0.6

5,900 EXPOSED

0.4

25 % MISCLASSIFICATION

212,100 CONTROL
RH RR-4.0

p ^.001

0.2

p 2 =.004

j

0.0

.001

.01

i

i

l

l i ii i

i

.1

MARINE EXPOSURE/RANCH HAND EXPOSURE

i

i

i

i i i ii

1.0

�MORTALITY ANALYSIS
POWER COMPARISON OF THE RANCH HAND STUDY TO THE MARINE POPULATION
CONSIDERING MISCLASSIFICATION AND RELATIVE EXPOSURE *
POWER TABLE
RANCH HAND
POWER
1-B

MARINE STUDY POWER
MISCLASSIFICATION
1/10

.92

EXPOSURE LEVELS
RELATIVE TO RANCH HAND
1/20
1/100
1/1000

.41

.17

.07

.05

10

.36

.16

.07

.05

25
ASSUMPTIONS:

0

.28

.13

.06

.05

RH STUDY POP. 1,200; 6,000 (1:5)
MARINE STUDY POP. 21,900: 196,100
NORMAL INCIDENCE OF DISEASE = 0.01
DISEASE INCIDENCE IN RH = 0.02
LINEAR DOSE - RESPONSE
MISCLASS. OF MARINE CONTROLS EXCLUDED

* INCORRECT POPULATION
NUMERICS BASED ON
ENVIRONMENTAL FATE
OF TCDD

�MORTALITY ANALYSIS
POWER COMPARISON OF THE RANCH HAND STUDY TO THE MARINE
POPULATION CONSIDERING MISCLASSIFICATION AND RELATIVE EXPOSURE *
POWER TABLE
ANCH HAND
POWER
1-B

MARINE STUDY POWER

%
MISCLASSIFICATION

EXPOSURE LEVELS
RELATIVE TO RANCH HAND
1/10 1/20 1/100

.87

0
10
25

ASSUMPTIONS: RH STURY POP. 1,200; 6,000(1:5)
MARINE STUDY POP. 21,900: 196,100
NORMAL INCIDENCE OF DISEASE =0.001
DISEASE INCIDENCE IN RH = 0.004
LINEAR DOSE - RESPONSE
MISCLASa OF MARINE CONTROLS EXCLUDED

.38
.33
.26

.17
.15
.13

.07
.06
.06

1/1000
.05
.05
.05

* INCORRECT POPULATION
NUMERICS BASED ON
ENVIRONMENTAL FATE
OF TCDD

�POWER CURVES OF THE MARINE STUDY CONSIDERING RELATIVE
EXPOSURE AND MISCLASSIFICATION OF THE STUDY POPULATION
1.0 r

.8

INCORRECT POPULATION NUMERICS
BASED ON EVIRONMENTAL FATE OF

&gt;GO

TCDD
NO MISCLASSIFICATION

.6

25% MISCLASSIFICATION

.4

21,900 EXPOSED
196,100 CONTROL

RH RR = 4.0

.2

p
p

1

=.001
=-004

0.0

.001

J

.01

I

» I I I II
.1

MARINE EXPOSURE/RANCH HAND EXPOSURE

J

I

I

I I I II

1.0

�CONCLUSIONS
RANCH HAND VERSUS OR PLUS THE MARINE POPULATION
• OVERWHELMING ALLOCATION PROBLEMS FOR"EXPOSURE-NONEXPOSURE" IN MARINES
- MISCLASSIFICATION BY GAO CRITERIA = DILUTIONAL EFFECT
- ALLOCATION BY PERSONAL HISTORY = BIAS
• MARINE EXPOSURE 1/1000 OF RANCH HAND EXPOSURE
• MARINE - RANCH HAND POPULATIONS DIFFER BY HOST FACTORS; AGE, RACE,
EDUCATIONAL LEVEL, ETC
•• BY CONSIDERATION OF EXPOSURE DIFFERENTIAL AND MISCLASSIFICATION, RANCH HAND
STUDY FAR MORE POWERFUL THAN INDEPENDENT MARINE STUDY OR ADDITIVE
STUDY TO INCLUDE MARINES
•• ADDITION OF MARINE POPULATION TO RANCH HAND POPULATION = UNACCEPTABLE SCIENCE

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="30">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="4687">
                  <text>Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="49809">
                  <text>&lt;p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;"&gt;The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;For more about this collection, &lt;a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a"&gt;view the Agent Orange Exhibit.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="1">
      <name>Text</name>
      <description>A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.</description>
      <elementContainer>
        <element elementId="52">
          <name>Box</name>
          <description>The box containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18644">
              <text>059</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="53">
          <name>Folder</name>
          <description>The folder containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18645">
              <text>1592</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="54">
          <name>Series</name>
          <description>The series number of the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18647">
              <text>Series III Subseries III</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
      </elementContainer>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="18646">
                <text>Executive Summary: Ranch Hand -NAS Marine Study Comparison</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="18648">
                <text>Air Force Health Study</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="18649">
                <text>mortality trends</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="18650">
                <text>Marine Corps exposure</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="1">
        <name>ao_seriesIII</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="2517" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="1353">
        <src>https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/4db5f3af947565e11920ccd04710b45d.pdf</src>
        <authentication>e7910789115207f09a36d676ed50e28e</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="60">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="63302">
                    <text>Item ID Number

01473

Author
Corporate Author
Report/Article Title Manuscript: Exposure Estimates for Herbicide Orange
of Ranch Hand and ground troops in Vietnam

Journal/Book Title
Year

000

°

Month/Day
Color

'—'

Number of Images

25

Descrlpton Notes

Tuesday, May 15, 2001

Page 1478 of 1514

���Z7
C triditdi

C

/tf

��/o
*

AtX

Jju* tfJ^MAf^&amp;&lt;4 CktMlWAU"'

�G&gt;

/f
-j

700

���'

///

"

�x

3

&gt; ^ / Jerttt)

�ft

�f

z,
2^

�7?

�s-r

a &lt;/,s-r

o.uz
/s

0-49

0,210

�0,03

16

/•¥/

�32,
3OO

�/,

a
/c^

&gt;f*# ym

/

10 ty vnaw

IDO%

�O.0/S

e
TCib

iff?

£

7t0

(9
V

�/
d'

f

7
T

9.27 *#y
T

- 0437*)

0.5V #4} MI

�j
/

/)
TlGM •

70 fy
7

Q

7~

�?
iI
Tti.

,|

10

/

'

�7

I

7
5

uio

�i
.

j

fe

1227

_JL

:.-__&amp; 51&lt;i,!C
-w

v

fioGUML

�/2 «*&gt; jUfls

f&gt;-

y • 7fa&gt; ^^ »

sOW&amp;

^tv4s

��</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="30">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="4687">
                  <text>Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="49809">
                  <text>&lt;p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;"&gt;The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;For more about this collection, &lt;a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a"&gt;view the Agent Orange Exhibit.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="1">
      <name>Text</name>
      <description>A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.</description>
      <elementContainer>
        <element elementId="52">
          <name>Box</name>
          <description>The box containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="17711">
              <text>055</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="53">
          <name>Folder</name>
          <description>The folder containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="17712">
              <text>1478</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="54">
          <name>Series</name>
          <description>The series number of the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="17714">
              <text>Series III Subseries II</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
      </elementContainer>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="17713">
                <text>Manuscript: Exposure Estimates for Herbicide Orange of Ranch Hand and ground troops in Vietnam</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="17715">
                <text>exposure assessment</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="17716">
                <text>Marine Corps exposure</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="17717">
                <text>dioxin</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="1">
        <name>ao_seriesIII</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="2632" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="1438">
        <src>https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/0e50613879a9fa29be27c2bba9af06d6.pdf</src>
        <authentication>34189ec953d0ae8977d30a5d4d84d3a5</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="60">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="63387">
                    <text>Item ID Number

°1598

Author
Corporate Author
Report/Article TltlB

Notes:

Ranch Hand Exposure

Journal/Book Title
Year

000

°

Month/Day
Color
Number of Images

9

DeSCrlptOU Notes

Includes both handwritten notes by Alvin Young and
typed notes.

Wednesday, May 23, 2001

Page 1599 of 1608

�._3.Q

/Wsp

0

/

90

A)

10

x J-

•*"

£
fr\

db

'•H
Ccis

X-

f

*^v

X
WliSSe.t&gt;/^ i

�. I.

.5"

l/Ufc-^5

e.io/Ho
^^•&gt;ijiiiULHHir

-irr—r-

'

_t

x I

�Ri
154
UTaVucfcSor

66-67

fAo4

£6-67

4

I.H5

f.fel

I.HP

.6.7-

6 SO

'
1

(05

Pvlo
fct

- 70
95

143
30(3

1. .5 1

�DIRECT APPLICATION TO MAN
1 SQUARE FOOT PLANAR SURFACE

110 LB HUMAN
= 50 KG BODY WEIGHT

MAN STANDING IN OPEN AND SPRAYED DIRECTLY
IS ESTIMATED TO INTERCEPT SPRAY EQUIVALENT TO
1 SQUARE FOOT OF HORIZONTAL PLANAR SURFACE
2,4-D + 2A5-T
12,63 + 13,23 LB/A = 131,3 + 137,6 MG/SQ, FT,',
= 131,3 + 137,6 MG/50 KG BODY WEIGHT
£ 2,6 + 2,7 MG/KG OF BODY WEIGHT
= 1/100 LD50 FOR'2,4-D + 2A5-T IN RATS

TCDD
6 MG'/A = 0,14 JJG/SQ, FT,
- 0 J4 JJG/50 KG BODY WEIGHT
=? 0,003 JJG/KG OF BODY WEIGHT
= 1/10,000 LD5Q IN RATS
AS SINGLE TOPICAL APPLICATION ON HEAD AND SHOULDERS,
PROTECTED BY HAI.R AND CLOTHING,
CAN BE WASHED OFF,

�•DIRECT CONTAMINATION-OF SOIL
1 ACRE OF SOIL
\%^/

3 INCHES THICK
= 1 MILLION POUNDS
BARE SOIL

illlLil

OF SOIL

AGENT ORANGE SPRAYED ON BARE SOIL
AND PENETRATING TO A DEPTH OF 3 INCHES
WOULD GIVE MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION IN SOIL:
2,4-D

=

12,63

LB/1 MILLION LB

=

12,63

PPM

2A5-T = 13,23 LB/1 MILLION LB = 13,23 PPM
IF 2&gt;^5-T CONTAINED 1 PPM TCDD,
SOIL WOULD CONTAIN 0,000013 PPM TCDD
- 0,013 PARTS PER BILLION TCDD
53
13 PARTS PER TRILLION TCDD
LEVELS IN SOIL WOULD GENERALLY BE
CONSIDERABLY LOWER THAN THIS DUE TO
INTERCEPTION OF SPRAY BY OVERSTORY FOLIAGE,
UNDERSTORY FOLIAGE, BRUSH, GRASS AND
GROUND LITTER

�DIRECT CONTAMINATION OF POND WATER

AVERAGE DEPTH 1 FT

1 SQ FT OF SURFACE 1 FT DEEP
=

62,4 LB

=

28,4

=

1 CU FT

KG OF WATER

AGENT ORANGE SPRAYED AT 3 GAL/A
DIRECTLY ON POND SURFACE

= 131,3 MG 2,4-D/28,4 KG = 5 PPM 2,4-D
+ 137,6 MG 2,4,5-T/28,4 KG = 5 PPM 2,4,5-T
+0,14 UG TCDD/28,4 KG = 0,005 PPB TCDD
IF 50 KG WOMAN DRANK 2 LITERS OF THIS POND WATER
EACH DAY, SHE WOULD INGEST

0,2 MG 2,4-D + 0,2 MG 2,4,5-T + 0,002 UG TCDD
PER KG OF BODY WEIGHT PER DAY, PROVIDED
IT ALL REMAINED IN SOLUTION OR SUSPENSION
AND DID NOT DEGRADE WITH TIME,
NO-EFFECT LEVELS IN TERATOGENI.C STUDIES IN RATS;
FOR 2,4-D = 25 MG/KG BODY WEIGHT PER DAY
FOR 2,4,5-T = 24 MG/KG BODY WEIGHT PER DAY
FOR TCDD = 0,03 JJG/KG BODY WEIGHT PER DAY

�DIRECT CONTAMINATION OF DRINKING WATER

HOUSE 20 x 50 FT,
ESTIMATED TO INTERCEPT
1000 SQ, FT, OF SPRAY

DIRECT SPRAYING OF 1000 SQ, FT, WILL DEPOSIT
131,3 GRAMS 2,4-D + 137,6 GRAMS 2 A 5-T +0,11 MG TCDD
.IF ROOF IS WASHED OFF COMPLETELY BY 0,5 INCH OF R A I N
AND ALL R U N O F F IS COLLECTED IN AN EMPTY CISTERN

(0,5/12) x 1000 x 7,5 = 313 GALLONS OF WATER
= 2600 LB OR 1180 KG OF WATER IN CISTERN
THE WATER COULD THEORETICALLY CONTAIN A MAXIMUM OF

111 PPM 2,4-D + 116 PPM 2 A 5-T + 0,0001 PPM TCDD
BUT AGENT ORANGE is NOT THIS SOLUBLE IN WATER,
A SATURATED SOLUTION CONTAINS ONLY 20 PPM
= 10 PPM 2AD BUTYL ESTER + 10 PPM 2A5-T BUTYL ESTER

OR 8 PPM 2 AD

A,E, + 8 PPM 2A5-T A,E,

TCDD IS EXTREMELY INSOLUBLE IN WATER,

SATURATED SOLUTION CONTAINS 0.2 PPB TCDD.
IF A 50 KG WOMAN DRANK 2 LITERS OF SATURATED WATER EACH DAY-.
SHE COULD INGEST 16 MG 2 AD
+ 16 MG 2,4,5-T + 0,4 JJG TCDD
EQUIVALENT TO 0,3 MG/KG/DAY 2 AD +0,3 MG/KG/DAY 2 A5-T
+ 0,008 JJG/KG/DAY TCDD IF N O N E DECOMPOSED WITH TIME,

HOWEVER, SATURATED SOLUTION OF AGENT ORANGE WOULD NOT
LIKELY BE USED AS DRINKING WATER DUE TO UNPLEASANT
ODOR AND DISAGREEABLE TASTE,

�2,4-D AND 2,4,5-T ARE USED AS HERBICIDES TO CONTROL BROADLEAF hfEEDS IN TOLERANT CROPS SUCH AS RICE AND SUGARCANE,

RECOMMENDED RATES FOR RICE ARE 1,25 ¥o 1,7 LB/A, DIRECT
SPRAYING WITH AGENT ORANGE AT 3 GAL/A (25,86 LB PHENOXY
ACID EQUIVALENT PER ACRE) WOULD CAUSE DAMAGE AND LITTLE
OR NO CROP WOULD SURVIVE TO MATURITY,
IF PART OF THE SPRAY IS INTERCEPTED BY OVERSTORY AMD
UNDERSTORY FOLIAGE, CROPS COULD RECEIVE TOLERATED DOSES

OF 2,*f-D OR 2A5-T,
•

*

*

IF THE RICE RECEIVED 1,25 LB 2,'hD + 2A5-T PER ACRE NO
DETECTABLE RESIDUE (&lt;0,01 PPM) 2,*M) OR 2A5-T WOULD BE
PRESENT IN THE 2000 KG OF RICE GRAIN HARVESTED FROM THAT ACRE,
IF THE 2A5-T CONTAINED 1 PPM TCDD AN£ ALL TH£ TCDD
ENDED U£ I£ THE RJLC£ GRAIN, THE GRAIN WOULD CONTAIN

ABOUT 0,00015 PPM TCDD = 0,15 PPB TCDD,
IF A 50 KG WOMAN ATE 300 GRAMS OF THIS RICE EACH DAY,
SHE WOULD INGEST LESS THAN 0,001 /JG OF TCDD PER KG
OF BODY WEIGHT PER DAY.

UNLIKELY AS THE ABOVE MAY BE, u is STILL 30 TIMES LESS
THAN THE NO-EFFECT LEVEL FOUND IN TERATOGENIC STUDIES
IN RATS,

�AGENT ORANGE

50/S N-BUTYL ESTER OF 2,1-D
50% N-BUTYL ESTER OF 2,1,5-T

1,21 LB 2,1-D ACID EQUIVALENT (A,E.) PER GALLON
1,11 LB 2,1,5-T ACID EQUIVALENT PER GALLON
APPLIED IN VIETNAM AT 3 GAL, PER ACRE
= 12,63 LB 2,1-D A.E./A
+ 13,23 LB 2,1,5-T A,E,/A •
TOTAL = 25,86 LB PHENOXY A.E./A
1 LB/A = 10,1 MILLIGRAMS PER SQUARE FOOT
AGENT ORANGE AT 3 GALLONS PER ACRE
= 131,3 MG 2,1-D A.E./SQ FT
+ 137,6 MG 2,1,5-T'A,E,/SQ FT

IF THE 2,1,5-T BUTYL ESTER CONTAINS 1 PpM
2,3,7,8-TETRACHLORODIBENZO-p-DIOXIN (TCDD)
USE OF AGENT ORANGE AT 3 GALLONS PER ACRE
= 6 MILLIGRAMS TCDD PER ACRE (MG/A)
0R 0-1^ MICROGRAMS TCDD/SQ FT (jUG/SQ FT&gt;
AT 10 PPM TCDD IN 2,1,5-T BUTYL ESTER
3 GAL/A

=

60 MG/A OR 1,1 pG/SQ, FT,

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="30">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="4687">
                  <text>Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="49809">
                  <text>&lt;p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;"&gt;The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;For more about this collection, &lt;a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a"&gt;view the Agent Orange Exhibit.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="1">
      <name>Text</name>
      <description>A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.</description>
      <elementContainer>
        <element elementId="52">
          <name>Box</name>
          <description>The box containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18681">
              <text>060</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="53">
          <name>Folder</name>
          <description>The folder containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18682">
              <text>1598</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="54">
          <name>Series</name>
          <description>The series number of the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18684">
              <text>Series III Subseries III</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
      </elementContainer>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="18683">
                <text>Notes: Ranch Hand Exposure</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="18685">
                <text>Air Force Health Study</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="18686">
                <text>Ranch Hand crew</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="18687">
                <text>contaminant distribution</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="18688">
                <text>Marine Corps exposure</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="1">
        <name>ao_seriesIII</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="2633" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="1439">
        <src>https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/349d4743aac5166a5ed60c3b69335fab.pdf</src>
        <authentication>37aa40a46cbd198251f8a518b4f5b1b4</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="60">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="63388">
                    <text>Item ID Number

°1599

Author
Corporate Author
Roport/Artldo HUB Supporting Statement with Attachments

Journal/Book Title
Year

000

°

Month/Day
Color

''

Number of Images ^
DOSGriptOn NotOS

'tem includes: Supporting Statement which discusses
aspects of the Ranch Hand II study, Letter from
Thomas B. Bruton, Judge Advocate General dated 22
October 1984 regarding confidentiality issues with the
Ranch Hand II study, Fact Sheet sent to Ranch Hand I
participants, and pages 17-55 of unknown source
discussing the Ranch Hand II study

Wednesday, May 23, 2001

Page 1600 of 1608

�SUPPORTING STATEMENT

A. Justification:
1. In 1981, the Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs and Policy,
directed the A1r Force to undertake the Ranch Hand epidemiology study, as recommended by the Interagency Work Group to Study the Possible Long-Term Health
Effects of Phenoxy Herbicides and Contaminants. The Initial portion of this
ongoing study was begun 1n October 1981. The follow-up phase of this study
will begin in 1985.
This series of questionnaires will be used as a part of the follow-up
phases of the Ranch Hand study. A contractor (National Opinion Research Center
[NORC]) experienced 1n Interviewing techniques will conduct the questioning of
study participants. The data derived from the questionnaire will be utilized
by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) and the USAF School of
Aerospace Medicine to statistically assess the existence and/or the development
of various disease states 1n present and former A1r Force personnel who participated in herbicide spraying (Operation Ranch Hand) during the years 1962 to
1971. A control group of nonexposed individuals will be additionally questioned. No previous data exists which can be used to assess the current health
status of these groups.
2. Four data collection instruments will be used, all nearly identical to
previously approved questionnaires (OMB 10701-0033). They will be administered
by personnel of NORC, Chicago, Illinois. Two hundred participants who are
newly entered into this ongoing study will be given an in-home interview,
lasting approximately 1.5 hours, and their current and former wives will be
interviewed as well (approximately 200 wives for 45 minutes). A 30-minute
self-administered interval fertility history questionnaire will be mailed to
the 2400 wives who participated in the 1981/82 baseline interviews. Additionally, 7863 previously identified but uncontacted Air Force veterans will be
contacted by telephone and asked six questions relating to current state of
health and socioeconomic status. These data will permit proper matching for
these key demographic variables. All collected data will be used to determine
the presence or absence of health effects related to wartime exposure to Agent
Orange. If these data are not collected, resolution of major scientific and
social issues will not be achieved.
3. Improved data collection techniques and program modifications have resulted
in a projected 1021.5 hour decrease in interviewing time.
4. Duplication has been avoided through the action of the Cabinet Council
Agent Orange Working Group, its Science Panel and Advisory Committee. These
groups have coordinated Agent Orange and related research throughout the federal sector to prevent unnecessary duplication and its associated information
collection burden. Thestudy protocol and the members of the Agent Orange
Working Group have set a requirement to conduct this study over a 20-year
period.
5. Similar health information from an identified population with quantifiable
exposure to Agent Orange is unavailable from any other source.

�6. Information will be collected from Individual volunteers, and no small
businesses or other entitles will be Involved.
7. Baseline data were collected 1n 1981-82 from this predominantly middle-aged
population. Follow-up data are required 1n 1985 and 1987 so Increasing disease
Incidence 1s detected promptly. The average age of this population places the
members at a time when diseases associated with the aging process are most
common. After 1987, data collection will only occur at 5-year Intervals.
8. This data collection effort 1s being conducted 1n full compliance with 5
CFR 1320.6.
9. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Cabinet Council Agent Orange Working Group, Its Science Panel, and Advisory Committee have
maintained a continuing review of this project and approved the data collection
methods, frequency of collection, Instructions and record keeping procedures,
and report formats. Additionally, periodic contact (at least annually) is
maintained with key members of the study population.
a. Name

Address

Telephone

Contact

Mr Jack Spey

Ranch Hand Association
850 Tarpon Drive
Fort Walton Beach FL 32548

(904) 243-5696

1983,1984

Mr. Ralph Dresser

3410 Stonehaven Drive
San Antonio TX 78230

(512) 699-0761

1983,1984

Mr. Charles Hubbs 6002 Summerhill Road
Temple Hills MD 20748

(301) 899-6716

1983,1984

Mr. Delmar Spivey 2524 Jennifer Terrace
Palm Harbor FL 33563

(813) 784-9681

1938,1984

b. There have been no unresolved problems during the consultations.
c. Other public contacts have included briefings to House and Senate committees, press releases, press conferences, and speeches to public scientific
and nonscientific audiences.
10. Confidentiality is granted in accordance with direction of the U.S. Air
Force Judge Advocate General and will be strictly maintained. Since "the protective privilege ends where the public peril begins," appropriate civil
agencies would be notified in the event serious medical problems which impact
public health and safety are identified. The Fact Sheet sent to all potential
participants and the Judge Advocate General's letter of 22 October 1984 are
attached (attachments 1 and 2, respectively).

�11. Sensitive Questions:
a. The questionnaire contains questions on the following sensitive topic
areas:
Marital and nonmarltal relations
Reproductive histories
Birth defects
Alcohol history
Use of marijuana
b. Responses relating to sexual activity and outcome are necessary for
assessing the Incidence of birth defects and reproductive effects alleged by a
number of Vietnam veterans. Additionally, since Vietnam was a complex environment, other factors which could bear upon -observed disease Incidences must be
evaluated. It 1s essential to the study that these questions be Included.
12. There 1s no cost to the respondents. The data collection for this study
will cost the A1r Force $670,000 In FY85, $218,000 1n FY86, $677,000 1n FY87,
and $221,000 1n FY88. These costs are based on a firm, fixed-price contract
between the A1r Force and SAIC, McLean VA. These are actual costs and the Air
Force will Incur no additional costs for data collection using these questionnaires.
13. Each of the 7,863 previously uncontacted subjects will be contacted by
telephone and given the 6-mlnute short questionnaire (pages 275-276 of the
attached USAFSAM-TR 82-42 [attachment 3]). Two hundred of these Individuals
will be selected as replacements for other noncompHant individuals and given
the additional baseline questionnaire (pages 1-153 of USAFSAM-TR 82-42). Their
wives will also receive the baseline spouse questionnaire (pages 159-193,
USAFSAM-TR 82-42). The 2600 spouses of subjects who took part in the study in
1981-82 will be sent a self-administered fertility questionnaire, slightly
modified from that given at baseline (pages 159-193, USAFSAM-TR 82-42). The
instrument will be identical in format but will only collect interval data
since the baseline collection effort in 1981-82. Except for the 200 replacement subjects, individuals will only be contacted once.
Consultation with respondents has occurred (see paragraph 9a above). Specific time burdens for each of these questionnaire instruments are shown below.
As noted, a decrease of more than 1,000 hours has been realized relative to
the baseline effort in 1981-82. The time estimates are based on the mean time
required for administration of the same instruments to the same or similar
populations at baseline. Adequate time has been included in the Information
Collection Budget for these tasks.

�Table 1
BURDEN ESTIMATES FY85/86

Source
(USAFSAMInstrument

Number of
Respondents

Duration

TR 82-42) 1981/82 1985

(Hours)

Difference
1981/82 vs
1981/82 1985
1985

Total

Study Subject
(Baseline)

pp 1-153

1532

200

1.5

2298

300

-1998

Spouse
(Baseline)

pp 159-193 1500

200

0.75

1125

150

-975

Spouse Pol low-Up Modified
(Interval
from pp 159History)
193

0

2600

0.5

0

1300

+1300

786

+779

Telephone
Questionnaire

Modified
from pp 275276

69

7863

0.1

6.9

Next of Kin

Not being
used

85

0

1.5

127.5

Net Difference (in hours)

0

-127.5
-1021.5

14. The above decrease in burden is due to program modification from the requirements of the baseline data collection phase.
15. The results of the requested data collection will not be published as raw
data; rather, they will be statistically analyzed by SAIC under contract to
the U.S. Air Force prior to publication . All statistical methods and procedures are in accordance with the protocol of the study which underwent
extensive peer review and was approved by the Agent Orange Working Group. After
the data have been analyzed, a report will be prepared for public release in
early 1987, just prior to the start of the next follow-up phase. These same
questionnaires will be readmfnistered in 1987, and the results of the analysis
of the new data released in 1989. Data collection using these instruments will
begin as soon as they are approved and continue until the end of the first
follow-up phase in February 1986. The second follow-up phase will begin in May
1987 and continue until March 1988. Additional follow-up data collection efforts will take place in 1992, 1997, and 2002, in accordance with the
previously approved study plan.
B. Collection of Information Employing Statistical Methods
1. All 1278 of the Air Force personnel who were directly involved in the aerial spraying of herbicides in South Vietnam from 1962-1971 have been identified
and all 1256 who survived their tour of duty were included in the study. No
subsampling was used in the "exposed" group. Approximately 20,00 personnel
from C-130 equipped units in Southeast Asia were selected as potential comparison subjects. The "nearest-neighbor" matching technique of Kupper was used to

�select an 8:1 matched set of comparisons for each "exposed" Individual (matched
on age, sex, rank, and military occupational category). After the order of the
matched set was randomized, the first willing comparison and the "exposed"
Individual were Invited to participate 1n the study. Thus, all "exposed" Individuals and a random selection of the comparison group were Involved 1n the
baseline and follow-up data collection phases of the study. Details are provided below:
Table 2
Respondent Selection
Exposed
Population
Selected for Potential Use
Selected for Data Collection 1n 1981-82
Selected for Data Collection in 1985

1256
1256
1256
1202*

Comparison
20000
10048
1256
1202

*54 have died

Table 3
Response Rates
Group

1981-82

Exposed Group

97%

Comparison Group

93%

2. The statistical methods used for sample selection were described in paragraph Bl above and are more fully discussed in attachment 4 which is taken from
the Study Protocol (USAFSAM-TR 82-44). After the comparison "universe" was
selected, "nearest-neighbor" matching resulted in a selection of an eight-member set of comparisons for each exposed individual (matched for sex, race, age,
and military occupational category). A single comparison was then randomly
selected for participation in the data collection effort. No estimation was
required and no stratification techniques were used. Accuracy of data collected in the baseline was achieved through reviews of medical records and
birth/death certificates. Similar procedures will be used during the follow-up
phases. No unusual problems requiring more specialized sampling procedures
occurred. After the second follow-up phase (1987), further data collection
efforts will only occur at 5-year intervals.
3. Response rates in the baseline collection phase were quite high and are
expected to remain so throughout the follow-up phases of the effort. Ninetyfive percent of the individuals who participated in the baseline expressed a
strong desire to remain in the study. Nonresponse in the exposed group can not

�be corrected through the Inclusion of additional Individuals since the entire
"universe" was Included 1n the study. Extensive statistical approaches to the
assessment of bias arising from differential participation and other factors
are Included 1n the requirements of the contract with SAIC. All of these Issues of cohort selection, sample size, statistical analysis, frequency of data
collection and appropriateness of the study have been evaluated and approved by
the Agent Orange Working Group.
4f Pretesting of the data collection Instruments for the follow-up phase of
the study will not be necessary since they are Identical to the questionnaires
used at baseline. The only modifications occur 1n changing dates ("1981" or
"1982" to 1985) and the collection of Interval fertility data (1982-1985)
rather than life-long data. Similar modifications of specific questions will
be needed 1n the 1987 questionnaire to reflect 1985-1987 Interval data.
5. Consultants for Statistical Aspects of the Study
Peer Review Groups
Reviewing Agency
1.
2.
3.
4.

University of Texas, School of Public Health
A1r Force Scientific Advisory Board
Armed Forces Epidem1olog1cal Board
National Research Council, National Academy of
Sciences

Date
Jun 1979
Aug 1979
Aug 1979
Dec 1979

Advisory Committee of the Agent Orange Working Group
Robert Miller, M.D., Chairman
Chief, Clinical Epidemiology Branch
NCI, NIH (Room 8C41)
7910 Woodmont Avenue
Bethesda MD 20814
Telephone: (301) 496-5785
Science Applications International Corporation (Contractor)
James Striegel, Ph.D.
8400 Westpark Drive
McLean VA 22102
Telephone: (703) 821-4600
National Opinion Research Center (Subcontractor)
Mary C. Burich
University of Chicago
6030 South Ellis
Chicago IL 60637
Telephone: (312) 962-1033

�20324

JA

Reevaluation of Assurance of Confidentiality, Project Ranch Hand II
AF/SG
1. We have reviewed the issue of granting full confidentiality
to the study pwrticipants in the Ranch Hand II study. There
has been no significant change in the legal issues regarding
the granting of full confidentiality since our initial recommendations to you in 1980 and 1981. We recommend that there
be no change to the current grant of strict confidentiality
with the two exceptions,
2. This recommendation is based upon a review of the current
case law, statutory and regulatory law, and the public policy •
issues governing the protection of the public health and
safety. Even though there is no federal statute mandating
the disclosure of information obtained during the course of
the Ranch Hand II study* we still remain subject to complying with a valid court order for production as well as
adhering to the court supported proposition that "the pro-.
tective privilege ends where 'the public peril begins".
(Tarasoff v. The .Regents of the University of California ,
551 PZd 334 [~&lt;5al 1976J).
3. The statutory authority relied upon by the CDC/VA in
granting full confidentiality to their Agent Orange study
participants is applicable only to CDC epidemiological
and other specified research projects. It has no applicafMnn Tn fln Air Frvrr* «rnriy. Fiirfhermnra , if -I c our opinion
that this statute does not grant any protection to the CDC
in resisting a valid court order for production, nor does
it grant immunity to the CDC in complying with the principles ennunciated in Tarasoff when the public health and
safety are involved. The CDC determined that it was not
necessary to state these possible, though remote, exceptions
co the promise of full confidentiality. We believe that
these exceptions should be stated in any notice of confidentiality.
4. If you desire further discussion on this matter, please
let us know.

THOMAS 3. ERUTCM
Major Gsnsrd, US..'...?
The Ju;i"'r&gt; .'Iciv;^^ "snared

�FACT SHEET

INTRODUCTION

The USAF School of Aerospace Medicine, Brooks AFB, Texas, is conducting
the study.
You are being invited to participate in this study because of your specific duties and period of assignment in Southeast Asia.
PURPOSE
To determine whether there is a causal relationship between your duty in
Southeast Asia and adverse health experience.
METHODS

An in-depth health questionnaire will again be administered to you by a
member of the health evaluation team from the National Opinion Research Center
(NORC).
A complete profile of your current health will be obtained by physical
examination which will be conducted by the Scripps Clinic and Research Foundation in La Jolla, California.
An additional questionnaire and physical examination will be given by
these same organizations in 1987. Other examinations are planned for 1992,
1997 and 2002.
Your travel expenses (including food and lodging) for the physical examination will be paid by the Air Force. Lodging will also be provided for
accompanying family members, but their food and travel expenses are not covered
by the Air Force.
A stipend of $100 per day will be paid to participants who are not on
active duty, Government employees, or otherwise precluded by law from receiving
such a stipend.
Confidentiality is to be strictly maintained. However, legal confidentiality of medical information is always based on the proposition that "the
protective privilege ends where the public peril begins." Therefore, serious
medical problems which impact public health and safety or a judicial order to
release medical data will be the only circumstances in which information on a
particular study participant would be released. The Air Force and the Justice
Department were successful in preventing the release of health data from the
first examination during a major court case in 1984.
If for example, a participant were found to have typhoid fever or tuberculosis and his illness directly impacted the health and safety of others, a

�committee composed of a physician (who is a specialist in the illness in question), a physician of the participant's choosing, a flight surgeon, an Air
Force lawyer, and a representative from the participant's occupation win be
formed to review the information. Before any information is disclosed, the
committee must determine that the findings Jeopardize the public health and
safety.
These same confidentiality procedures were provided during the first examination in 1982, and no problems arose. No one was grounded or had his job
adversely affected by his participation in the study. There is no reason to
suspect that this examination phase of the study will be any different.
BENEFITS TO YOU

You will receive a comprehensive health review and physical examination of
top level, executive caliber at no cost to yourself.
You will be completely informed of all examination procedures, you can
decline to take any specific portion of the examination that you wish, and you
will be completely informed of all examination results.
The information from this study will be provided to your personal physician if you so request.
Questions concerning the study may be referred in writing to the USAF
School of Aerospace Medicine, Epidemiology Division, Brooks AFB, Texas 782355000, or if more convenient, the information may be provided by phoning AUTOVON
240-2H14, or within the state of Texas call collect at (512) 536-3309, or from
outside the state of Texas call toll-free 1-800-531-7231.
Please complete the attached locator card and advise the USAF School of
Aerospace Medicine, at the above address and phone number, of any address or
phone number changes.

�V. Epidem1olbg1c Study Design; Matched Cohort
A. Design Considerations
The goal of this study clearly mandates a comprehensive ep1dem1olog1c
approach, Incorporating mortality, .and historical, current, and followup morbidity studies* Exposure to herbicides during the 1962-1971 time period may
have Initiated, long-term health effects that may or may not be progressive.
If such effects are detectable! by a review of the subject's past medical
history, and can be verified*,',direct links to compensation Issues can be
made.\ turhent health status, a:S mirrored by a large number of recent VA
claims* and Inquiries, 1s of major Interest, because such claims and Inquiries
may Indicate medical conditions that night be confirmed by a comprehensive
physical examination. If analyses of both mortality and morbidity data yield
only Indetermlnant or weakly suggestive findings, It may be that sufficient
time has not yet passed for substantial emergence of longterm health effects.
This dictates a requirement for a follow-up element to the study.
Methodological shortcomings are Inherent In each element of this comprehensive study. To some extent, the classical deficiencies of each particular ep1dem1olog1c approach are compensated by the concurrent use of the other
elements. For example, the low chance of identifying a relatively uncommon
disease solely by the use of a mortality study is offset by the inclusion of a
current morbidity study. The relatively quick feedback that can be attained
from current morbidity and mortality studies will serve to better define the
follow-up study, and will help to alleviate problems that arise as a result of
changes 1n diagnostic criteria and methods over time. Nevertheless, problems
that can affect ascertainment of disease In all phases of the study will
remain. Inaccurate patient recall of antecedent events, the distortion of
information by knowledge of anticipated symptomatology, and participant or
observer knowledge of their exposure status can only be corrected to a limited
extent by review of records for symptom validation and "blind" assessment protocols. In addition, fundamental problems dealing with adequate selection of .
a control group and limiting loss to study can influence any comprehensive
epidemiologlc investigation. These and other pitfalls in study design will be
discussed in more detail in Section VIII.
The management of this project will be conducted through standard Air
Force Research and Development procedures, including program monitors at Air
Force Headquarters and Air Force Systems Command, and a Program Management
office at Brooks AFB, Texas. Contract monitors will insure that all contractual efforts are conducted according to strict quality assurance procedures,
and an on-s1te monitor will insure that the physical examinations are conducted in strict accordance with the study protocol.
Since the study has three elements and confronts a health issue with
incompletely specified or uncertain endpoints, strong potential bias, and
severe time contraints, the following design represents the best overall
framework for achieving validity. The design process is complex and in itself
Mine dependent.

17

�B. Selection and Ascertainment of the Populations for Study
(1) The Exposed Military Groups
(a) Operation RANCH HAND Personnel
Operation RANCH HAND personnel flew C-123 aircraft in RVN
during 1962-1971. Data from hand-compiled lists obtained through the RANCH
HAND Association (a reunion organization), Air Force personnel records, unit
historical records, and actual C-123 flight orders, place the herbicide
exposed population at approximately 1264 Individuals. Of those personnel
confirmed as RANCH HAND participants, 25% are still on active or reserve duty,
with the remainder being composed of retired, separated, or deceased persons.
To identify all RANCH HAND participants, an-indepth search was conducted of
all organizational records stored at the Military Records Division, National
Personnel Records Center (NPRC), St. Louis, Missouri.
Introductory letters will be sent to the last known address
of all Identified persons, and nonresponse will be pursued by cross-locator
systems available within the government (e.g., Social Security Administration,
VA, Internal Revenue Service). Significant efforts will be made to account
for at least 99% of the total population (see Figure A-2, Section XV).
Because of the limited number of RANCH HAND personnel, no subsampllng of the
exposed group 1s planned in any phase of the study. All members will be
strongly encouraged to participate In all phases of the Investigation.
All RANCH HAND personnel are males currently ranging in age
from 30-69 years (mean » 42.4 years). The normal C-123 crew composition was
one pilot, one copilot/navigator (both officers), and one spray equipment
console operator (enlisted) 1n the rear of the aircraft. The aircrew officerenlisted ratio is 2.2:1; however, the Inclusion of RANCH HAND support personnel (predominantly enlisted) 1n the stMdy will make the overall officerenlisted ratio 1:1.7. Approximately 98% of the officers and 92% of the
enlisted men were Caucasian. Attempts have been made to Identify all maintenance personnel assigned to the RANCH HAND units. Maintenance of the RANCH
HAND aircraft was performed within a step-wise organizational structure.
Routine daily maintenance (primary) was conducted by flight line support
personnel who were often dedicated exclusively to RANCH HAND operations. More
extensive maintenance (secondary) was carried out by consolidated support
units at the base level, which were also responsible for non-RANCH HAND C-123s
as well. Major aircraft overhauls and modification were conducted by maintenance units at Clark Air Base, Philippines. The maintenance personnel In
these centralized units were not directly assigned to RANCH HAND, and their
exposures to RANCH HAND C-123 aircraft and herbicide cannot be 'validated.
From 1962 through 1964, the primary flight line maintenance teams were dedicated to RANCH HAND aircraft, and these Individuals have been Identified by
the mechanisms described above. In 1965, flight line maintenance was performed by personnel of the centralized maintenance organization (secondary),
and It is not feasible to adequately Identify all of these Individuals from
available records. After 1966, the RANCH HAND organization transferred their

18

�base of operations to a new location, and primary maintenance was once again
performed by personnel assigned specifically to RANCH HAND. These individuals
have been readily identified. Thus, maintenance personnel directly assigned
to RANCH HAND will be included in the study. These complexities are summarized in Table 4.
Table 4
FEASIBILITY OF IDENTIFYING AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE
PERSONNEL (TOTAL POPULATION) EXPOSED TO HERBICIDE ORANGE

Primary
Maint Personnel

Secondary
Maint Personnel2

Jan 1962-Jul 1964

Yes

No

Aug 1964-Dec 1966

Yes/No3

No

Jan 1967-Oct 1971

Yes

No

Time

Hndividual assigned to RH; total number (denominator) known
individual not assigned specifically to RH, although may have serviced the
aircraft; denominator not ascertainable
3
other documents permit ascertainment of a portion of this group
Because of the significant combat hazard associated with low, slow flying
missions, some early RANCH HAND crewmembers were elite volunteers (see RiskTaking Bias, Section VIII, C). In fact, RANCH HAND crewmembers comprised one
of the most highly decorated units during the RVN Conflict. Anecdotal stories
reveal that most crew members were, on occasion, heavily exposed to Herbicide
Orange due to normal or combat induced equipment malfunctions within the aircraft. Many former RANCH HAND personnel are expected to be currently employed
in the aerospace industry as commercial airline pilots, airline managers, and
flight mechanics. RANCH HAND personnel still on active duty are expected to
be found in senior management positions.
(b) Alternate Exposed Populations
(I)

Introduction

The principal investigators, members of all of the peer
review committees, and independent consultants have clearly recognized that
the statistical power of this RANCH HAND study 1s suboptimal for the detection
of specific uncommon conditions or diseases* This limitation is inherent
because the size of the RANCH HAND population is fixed at approximately 1200
individuals, and 1t cannot be Increased.

19

�A brief review of alternate military populations is in
order to highlight the significant advantages of the RANCH HAND population.
The desire to achieve more optimal statistical power by merely increasing the
size of the population under study must be balanced with a careful analytic
process which assesses the exposure level of alternate populations, and categorizes them as either additive or nonadditive to the RANCH HAND study population.
(2) U.S. Army Ground Personnel
Some U.S. Army personnel were undoubtedly exposed to
herbicides during their duty in Vietnam; however, the objective ascertainment
of exposed individuals is not possible. Any attempts to identify individuals
assigned to combat units which may have been exposed would result in an
unacceptable degree of misclassification since U.S. Army personnel records do
not exist which would allow the accurate identification of soldiers below the
battalion level. This lack of demoninator data, and the high degree of misclassification in determining the exposure status of Army troops makes this
population unsuitable for inclusion in the framework of the RANCH HAND Study.
(1) Ancillary Air Force Groups (Non-RANCH HAND Personnel)
Air Force handlers of herbicide drums in RVN were
exposed to herbicides because of drum leakage. As the drum handlers were ad
lib participants, no personnel designator was assigned to these individuals,
thus prohibiting computer tracking and identification. The size of this population is unknown, but it is expected to be small (less than 200), as the
majority of drum handlers are known to have been Vietnamese. Additional
groups such as U.S. Army helicopter crews, casual observers (both Army and Air
Force), and experimental fighter-bomber personnel who may have occasionally
conducted spray operations were also potentially exposed.
However,
population-at-risk determinations for all of these groups cannot be made, and
any identification of individuals exposed in these situations must rely on
self-selection or incomplete ascertainment. Also, the selection of suitable
control groups for a study of these individuals is difficult If not impossible.
(£) U.S. Marine Corps Troops
On 16 November 1979, the GAO released a report which
suggested that a herbicide-exposed population of nearly 22,000 U.S. Marine
Corps troops could be Identified, and that this identified group would be
appropriate to study. Records exist which locate Marine Corps battalion headquarters near the C-123 spray paths. The GAO. made several Improper assumptions to conclude that all of the identified marines were in fact exposed.
Specifically, all battalion troops were assumed to be located at the battalion
headquarters. Further, the effect of prevailing winds on the direction of
spray drift, and the photodegradatlon of the chemicals were not considered by
the GAO. The National Research Council panel considered the GAO analysis, and
proposed a study of 5900 marines who were "near" spray paths on the same day

20

�as the spraying. The '"exposed" group was to be contrasted with the mortality
experience of 212,000 presumably unexposed controls (also marines). The RANCH
HAND study described in this protocol consists of approximately 1200 exposed
individuals and 6000 controls for the mortality study phase. Despite the fact
that the RANCH HAND Study involves a smaller sample size than the proposed
Marine effort, the RANCH HAND Study is more powerful statistically. Specifically, lower exposure to herbicide by a conservative factor of from 1/10 to
1/1000 and misclassification in Marine exposure groups renders the Marine
Study far less powerful than the RANCH HAND effort. As described in Section
VI, misclassification and decreased exposure are seen to be independent
factors additively decrementing Marine Study statistical power. Even when all
21,900 marines within the herbicide spray paths up to 28 days following the
spray operations are considered exposed, the RA1O HAND Study is noted to be
significantly superior.
Conclusions
The Operation RANCH HAND participants are the most
suitable of the military populations to study in evaluating the longterm
effects of herbiclde/dloxin exposures. The RANCH HAND group had a much higher
level of exposure which was sustained over a prolonged period of time. This
Increased level of exposure implies that RANCH HAND personnel would be more
likely to develop more acute and chronic symptoms from the exposure, and would
manifest them sooner than the other exposed military personnel. The addition
of significantly less exposed and/or misclassified groups to the RANCH HAND
population for the attractive purpose of Increasing statistical power would
constitute an egregious dilutional error.
(2) Control Group (Not exposed to Herbicide Orange)
A review of all specialized flight units present in Southeast
Asia during the RVN conflict, reveals clearly that there is no absolutely
ideal control group for the RANCH HAND population. C-130 aircrew members and
support personnel were selected because of sufficient population size, similar
training profiles, and psychologic similarities to the RANCH HAND group.
Total ascertainment of the C-130 population is being conducted by
computer and hand selection for specific military flying organizations, and
foreign country service, during the Interval from 1962 thru 1970. Over 2.3
million personnel records have been reviewed, and the approximate C-130 population size Is 23,978 Individuals. Aircrew members who flew C-130 aircraft in
Southeast Asia during 1962-1970 were selected as controls for the RANCH HAND
• aircrew population. The C-130 flight line maintenance population were ascertained from personnel records by similar mechanisms, and served as the spe'•: £lf1c control population for the RANCH HAND support personnel. The proporj; jtlons on active duty, and non-active duty status are expected to parallel the
f patterns In the exposed group.
*•
Another possible control group, the non-RANCH HAND C-123 popula: tlon, is known to be too small (approximately 3000) to provide adequate sampling flexibility and replacement -under the proposed matched variable concept

21

�(see below and Section VI). Also, many of the RANCH HAND aircraft were reconfigured for transport and Insecticide missions and thus, the non-RANCH HAND
C-123 crews responsible for these other missions may have been exposed to
significant Herbicide Orange residue In these aircraft. Therefore, this group
may not have been truly unexposed to herbicides, and was discarded as an
appropriate control population. Crewmembers of C-7 transport aircraft were
also considered as a potential control group; however, because of small sample
size (1000-2000) and the fact that they served 1n RVN only during the post
1967 era, they were also dropped from consideration.
'
The normal crew composition of a C-130 1s three officers and two
enlisted personnel. The control group Is considered to- be "pure" from the
standpoint of lack of occupational exposure to herbicide. The entire control
group will be considered MnonvolunteerM-w1th respect to abnormally high combat
risk. While 1n general they will possess lifestyle characteristics and socioeconomic backgrounds similar to the exposed group, their overall combat
morbidity/mortality and the resultant stress influences upon general health
may be slightly less than in the exposed group. For those separated and
retired C-130 controls, similar proportions to the exposed group are expected
to be employed in the aerospace industry. Known and estimated factors of the
control and exposed populations are summarized in Table 5.
(3) Matching Procedures and Rationale
Each member of the exposed group has been computer matched to a
set of C-130 controls comprised of approximately 10 individuals using three
variables. Since the L,;O groups are highly selected and inherently similar
with respect to many variables, very close matches are feasible. This
epidemiologic design incorporates a matched concept because: (1) a matched
cohort design will provide maximum test power throughout the entire study, and
(2) statistical intergroup comparisons may be made without normalization by
three key variables known to effect symptom frequencies of interest, thus
providing greater power for complex statistical .testing. It is apparent that
following the match, both exposed and control populations will be very nearly
identical with respect to the three influencing variables so that a replacement concept is feasible (see F below). In the event that frequent match
breaks occur, stratification techniques can be used.
The selection of the control group produces an inherent match for
equivalent SEA experience, and additional matching has been conducted for (1)
age, by year of birth and closest month possible, (2) Air Force Speciality
Code (AFSC) as an absolute match, and (3) race (Caucasian versus nonCaucasian) as an absolute match. Specific rationale for these variables is as
follows: (1) the age match controls for the many clinical symptoms and signs
associated with advancing age, (2) AFSC controls for officer-enlisted status
(as well as crewmember-noncrewmember status), a variable strongly linked to
educational background, current socio-economic status, and moderately linked
to age (5 year median difference) and socio-economic background, and (3) race
controls for differences in chronic disease development, socio-economic background, etc.

22

�• rv**"i*

••&gt;• ••• ••

-*:
="T w- ,-u:"-!-.- .•.:

* '&lt;*' ' s

---.---,"•:.. ;•. , ' •. '

.

'&gt; ^Tabl* 5

&gt;ARISON OF THE STUDY GROUP TO POSSIBLE CONTROL GROUPS BY

'

KNOWN AND ESTIMATED FACTORS
KNOWN FACTORS

POSSIBLE CONTROL GROUPS

STUDY GROUP

RANCH HAND C-123

Non-RANCH HAND C-123

C-7

C-130

POPULATION SIZE

1264

3000

1200

23,978

OFFICER/ENLISTED RATIO

1:1.7

1:2

1:2

1:2

AIRCRAFT FUEL (AV-GAS)
fNJ

YES (+JP-4)*

YES (+JP-4)*

YES

NO (JP-4 only)

OCCUPATIONAL HERBICIDE
EXPOSURE

YES

YES/NO**

NO

NO

OCCUPATIONAL INSECTICIDE
EXPOSURE

2+

0

0

0

COMBAT HAZARD

4+

3+

3+

2+

RVN-IN COUNTRY ASSIGNMENT

4+

4+

4+

2+

ESTIMATED FACTORS

*In 1968, aircraft were modified with a JP-4 booster.
"Contaminated aircraft reconfigured for transport may have resulted in exposure to non-RANCH HAND personnel

�The Inherent match fop SEA experience controls for combat-Induced physiologic, psyehophys1o1og1c, and other related morbidity and mortality disorders.
Additionally, this Inherent match may reflect the effects of alcohol consumption, the use of chemoprophylactic and/or Illicit drugs, and the acquisition
of tropical diseases associated with life In SEA. The comparisons of the
exposed (RANCH HAND) subjects and their selected sets of controls are detailed
In Appendix Table A-4. Only 4 of the ten categorical AFSC/case strata had
less than ten controls for each exposed subject. The group of Caucasian
pilots had a mean of only 9.5 controls per exposed subject, due to the extreme
ages of several Individuals, and the strata of Black pilots and other Black
officers had means of 2.7 and 5.0 controls respectively. However, since there
were only seven black officers 1n the exposed group and only thirty controls,
high numbers of tight matches could not be achieved. Black enlisted aircrewmembers had a mean of 9.8 controls each.
(4) Computer Science and Statistical Details of the Matching Process
As described above, the matching for this project has been performed using
three variables: occupational category, race and age. Five occupational
categories (officer/pilot, officer/navigator, officer/other, enlisted/flight
engineer, and enlisted/other) have been used to reflect socloeconomlc status
and aeronautical rating. The variable of race has been dichotomized Into
black and non-black. Ten matched controls have been selected for each exposed
subject, regardless of current vital status. The computer method applied to
select the control subjects Is an adaptation of a procedure studied by Raynor
and Kupper (Nearest Neighbor Matching on a Continuous Variable, Technical
Report, Department of Blostatlstlcs, University of North Carolina, 1979). As
the first step, the RANci! HAND and control groups were partitioned Into ten
strata using the categorical occupational and race variables. The Raynor and
Kupper matching procedure was then applied Heratively within each of the
strata to match for the continuous variable of age, given In months. The
Raynor-Kupper procedure Involves the following steps:
STEP #1. The RANCH HAND cohort in a given strata is randomly permuted.
STEP #2. The first RANCH HAND subject in the permuted set is selected for
matching.
STEP #3. The closest available control is assigned to the selected RANCH
HAND subject using the absolute value of the difference between the months of
birth of the RANCH HAND and the control subjects. If the closest available
control is further than 60 months from the selected RANCH HAND subject, a
blank is assigned. Tied assignments are broken randomly.
STEP #4. Step #3 is repeated for all RANCH HAND subjects in the strata
proceeding down through the permuted set, until the entire RANCH HAND cohort
is exhausted.
STEP #5. Steps #1 through #4 are repeated ten times for each RANCH HAND
subject to construct a 1:10 study set. At the completion of the matching
activity, the RANCH HAND - Control study matrices for each of the ten occupation-race strata can be diagrammatically represented as in Figure #1.

24

�i

•

Figure 1. MORTALITY ANALYSIS COHORTS

RANCH HAND COHORT

10

V,J

Ci.i

C

Ci 3

l,2

V* 1 J
1 3
»

p

R2

p
°2 , 1

°2,2

R3

C-i , 1
^3 ,

^3,2

r, ,3
^2
r.
** 3

R,

Ci» !

^»f ,2

•••••

r&lt;»

1200,1

C

l,10

^2,&lt;t

^2, 10

^3,^

3,10
^ , 10

l200,2

C

1200,i»

12QO,10

Figure 2. MORTALITY MATRIX
RANCH HAND
COHORT

CONTROL COHORTS c

i,2,m'
c

j,5,m'

R

i200

C120o,i,m' C120o,2,m' ***

In each row of this matrix the controls are ordered from nearest to farthest in terms of age of the matched RANCH HAND person. The next operation
defining the control group involved randomization of all of the controls in
each row of each stratum matrix to negate the ordering by age. Then, the
first five members of each control set for each RANCH HAND person are identified as being subjects in the mortality portion of the study. The resulting
occupation-race strata matrices now have the form shown In Figure 2.
In Figure 2, Cj^' or Cj^^1 may be equivalent to any
to the randomization process.

of Figure 1 due

Table 6 summarizes the results of the matching process, and Appendix Table
A-5 provides a more complete statistical description of the process. In these
tables, the age difference between the month of birth of the control and the
month of birth of the RANCH HAND person, (counting months from 1900) and the
cumulative number of controls and the cumulative percentage with this difference are shown.

25

�Table 6. RESULTS OF THE MATCHING PROCESS (1:10)
Age Difference (in Months)

Cumulative
Number of Controls

Cumulative Percent

0

8612

70.6

1

10287

84.3

2

10749

88.1

3

10984

90.1

4

.11167

91.6

5

11322

92.8

6

11410

93.5

12

11688

95.8

24

11921

97.7

36

12028

98.6

48

12129

60

12197

'

99.4

100.0

(5) Study Group Selection Procedures
(a) Mortality Analysis
A 50% random sample of each control set will be drawn and
used to comprise a 1:5 mortality analysis, as described in section (4). The
vital status of each subject In this sample and of all exposed subjects will
be ascertained at a minimum frequency of every five years for the 20 year
duration of the study. Those individuals dying of combat causes will be
excluded from the mortality analysis as it is assumed that combat death is
independent of herbicide effect. Further, the known differential combat death
rate between the RANCH HAND and control groups can be attributed to the
hazardous and unique nature of the RANCH HAND mission. Twenty-two RANCH HAND
personnel (15 officers and 7 enlisted) died 1n combat. Medical record reviews
will be accomplished to assess the illness experience of these individuals
prior to combat mortality.
(b) Historical Morbidity Study
Retrospective or historical health data will be gathered on
each exposed subject and from the first randomly selected mortality control
from his set by questionnaire techniques. Living but noncompliant controls in

26

�the historical morbidity study will be replaced by a compliant control
selected from the control set. In order to avoid an information gap for data
on deceased individuals, surrogate interviews will be obtained from the first
order next-of-kin of exposed and control subjects dying of noncombat related
causes between the date of their assignment to Southeast Asia and the initiation of this study. Since the validity and accuracy of surrogate derived data
may not be equivalent to data obtained directly from living study subjects and
their spouses, these data will be subsetted for analysis. All available medical records, (military, VA, and civilian) will be reviewed for all subjects
selected for this morbidity analysis.
(c) Prospective Morbidity Study
A baseline physical examination and review of systems will
be conducted, and a prospective or followup approach will be used to assess
the current state of health of study subjects using a series of questionnaires
and physical examinations over the next 20 years. Each 1iving exposed subject
and the randomly selected primary control will be included in the questionnaire and physical examination phases. In this prospective study of morbidity, primary controls who are deceased, unaccountable or unwilling to participate in the followup studies, will be replaced by a willing subject from the
remainder of the control set (Figure 3). The selected control for a RANCH
HANDER dying of a noncombat cause will be retained throughout the questionnaire, physical examination, and followup phases of the study. Since the
control's vital status and volunteerism should be independent of the matching
sequence, many primary controls should enter the study. The remaining members
of the control set will be used as replacement candidates for possible use
later in the study (see section F below). All replacement controls will be
clearly identified for the purposes of subset analysis so that population
differences, if any, between the first randomly assigned selectees
(noncompliant) and the replacements (compliant) can be assessed. Specific
rules and procedures for study entry are found in Table A-6 and Figure A-3 of
the Appendix.
(d) The Interrelatedness of the Comparison Groups
It should be clear from the foregoing discussion that the
study populations of the mortality, historical morbidity, and prospective followup phases are highly related but different. Once selected, the mortality
control cohorts will remain unchanged throughout the 20 years of observation.
The population under study in the historical morbidity phase will initially be
a randomly selected subset of the mortality comparison group; however, some of
these primary controls may be decreased or noncompliant for the voluntary
aspects of this phase of the study. In this phase, noncompliant controls will
be replaced, but deceased controls will not, as surrogate Interviews with the
rrext-of-k1n will be used to reconstruct morbidity data. The subsetting and
replacement procedures create the difference between the mortality and historical morbidity comparison groups. The population 1n the prospective morbidity
phase is the comparison group from the retrospective phase plus additional
replacements for the deceased controls. Thus, It 1s clear that the comparison
groups are slightly different, but they would be identical if no deaths
occurred since 1962 and all primary controls were compliant.

27

�Figure 3.
SELECTION PROCEDURE FOR THE QUESTIONNAIRE,
PHYSICAL EXAMINATION, AND FOLLOW-UP STUDY
LIVING
RANCH HAND
INDIVIDUAL

CONTROL INDIVIDUALS

Randomly Selected
Mortality Controls
JL

I
**

1:1

t

t
t
*
**

Deceased
Unwilling
Volunteer
Replacement Candidates
C. Overview of Statistical Methodology

The design of the study 1s presented In schematic form In Figure 4.
R' refers to RANCH HAND personnel and C" 1 refers to the collection of all possible control Individuals. As defined, r and C" will contain individuals who
are deceased of noncombat causes. Combat deaths are excluded from R' and C".
Since C" is approximately 20 times larger than R', a randomized subsample C 1
and C" will be obtained. C 1 will be constructed from C" by computer selection
of the ten matched controls for each exposed study subject. As previously
noted, close matches will be mide for the variables of age, AFSC, and race.
The matched controls will form tin cohorts, Ci through C 10 , as shown in Figure
1. A 50% random sample from each of the matched control sets of 10 will be
selected for inclusion in the mortality assessment so that a group, C' is
obtained that consists of 5 matched controls for each exposed subject. These
controls will be designated as initial replacement candidates for the morbidity and follow-up studies. The remaining individuals in the control set will
be additional replacement candidates in the event that replacement must occur
beyond the members of the mortality set (see Figure 3). C 1 w1H be constructed without regard to whether the individual is currently living or dead
so that an assessment of noncombat mortality can be accomplished.

28

�FIGURE 4

DESIGN SCHEMATIC
EXPOSED

R

ro
vP

MORTALITY ANALYSIS

UNUSED

QUESTIONNAIRE

PHYSICAL EXAMINATION

�Referring again to Figure 4, R and C indicate living RANCH HAND members and primary matched controls. If mR 1 Is the proportion of R 1 found to
be deceased, then
R - (1 - mR'jR1
The questionnaire will provide data concerning specific symptoms and
other findings In the R and C groups. Thus, various questionnaire finding
rates 1n R, SR, will be calculated and compared with the corresponding rates
1n C, so
The questionnaire will allow allocation of RANCH HAND personnel Into
those with symptoms on questionnaire, Indicated by RS, and those without, R?.
Similarly, the control J/idlviduals will be placed Into symptomatic, Indicated
CS, and asymptomatic, C*S~ groups.
The physical examination performed on Individuals from R and C will
allow estimation and comparison of rates of physical findings in these
groups. Rates of abnormal physical findings can be symbolically Indicated as
fR and fc for RANCH HAND and control groups respectively.
Comparison of
these rates is very Important and details will be discussed below.
Let fRs be the rate of physical findings among RANCH HAND personnel
with findings by questionnaire and let fR$ be the rate of physical findings
among RANCH HAND people with no findings on their questionnaire. For most
disease processes it would be expected that fR$ should be a larger rate than
fRS*. If fRs 1s observed to be equal to or less than fRjf, an Interpretation of over-reporting may be warranted, although the possibility of subclinlcal disease is recognized. Rates fcs w-|1 fr,$" will also be estimated, and
and
comparisons between fR$, fc$» fRS and fcr 1 De accomplished.
The eight rates IDR', me', SR, Sc, fRS, fR$, frs»
and their refinements fully characterize chls study. As depicted in. Figure
"vertical comparisons of these rates provide relative risks mR'/mr,'.
SR/SC, fR/fc» fRS/^CS ancl ^RS/^CS" which are of central importance in defining herbicide effects. "Horizontal comparisons" relate fR to
SR» fRS to f RS» fC to -C and fCS to fCS"'
Specifically, the
ratio fR/SR is the ratio of physical findings to reported symptoms in the
RANCH HAND population. This ratio may be contrasted with the ratio fr/sc
and if fR/SR is less than fc/$c over-reporting is suggested. Likewise, if fR$ is less to
than fR$~, over-reporting is further suggested. A
comparison of fR$/fR$
^CS/^CS contrasts the odds of findings given
symptoms in the RANCH HAND population with the odds of findings given symptoms
in the control group. If these odds are lower in the RANCH HAND group, overreporting is again implied. Further discussion of these rates is presented in
Section V.G.
During the questionnaire and physical examination phases of this
study, only one of the five randomly selected mortality study controls will be
used for each RANCH HAND individual. If this control is unwilling to participate, another mortality study control will be used as indicated in Figures 3

30

�and 7. These replacements w i l l b e carefully labelled for purposes of statistical analysis. A detailed discussion of this replacement concept is found in
Section VI.
D. Mortality Study
(1) Introduction
The mortality, retrospective morbidity, and follow-up studies are
components of a "non-concurrent" prospective study used in the observation of
a specially exposed group or industrial population starting from some date in
the past. The initial exposures occurred 11-19, years ago and varied in
Intensity and duration from one RANCH HAND, member to another. Access to
employment, medical, or other types of records is an obvious requisite for
such a study. The classical "case-control", retrospective study is not operative 1n this protocol due to the lack of defined clinical endpolnts. The
mortality study will be conducted in two phases; a review of past mortality,
and a continuing assessment of the death rate in the exposed and control
cohorts over the twenty year duration of the RANCH HAND II project.
Based upon USA vital statistics, 8.6% of the study subjects are
expected to have died between completion of their Vietnam tour and Initiation
of this study. Of these deaths 1n the control group, approximately 30% should
have been due to cardiac causes, 24% to neoplasia, 13% to accidents, 5% to
cirrhosis, and 0.1% to leukemia.
(2) Data Collection Methods
The mortality status of the exposed cohort and the randomly selected controls will be ascertained using multiple techniques including: payments of Veterans Administration Death Benefits, Social Security Administration Records, Air Force Accounting and Finance Center wage and retirement
payments, and interviews with subjects or thetr families. Death certificates,
autopsy reports, and medical records will be obtained for each deceased subject. The International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, 1978, will
be used for coding. At the time of the first followup examination, all participants will be asked to allow an autopsy to be performed at government
expense at the time of their death, and have the tissues forwarded to the
Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, and the results sent to USAFSAM.
(3) Analysis of Mortality Data
(a) Basic analyses
Considering the basic groups R 1 and C 1 1n Figure 4, individuals will be classified into three categories: alive, dead, or unaccounted.
If a large number of Individuals 1n each group are unaccounted for, the study
can obviously be severely biased. Thus, significant effort will be expended
to reduce the unaccounted category as much as possible. At most, 1 to 3
percent of both groups can be allowed to remain unaccounted, with a 1% rate

31

�being preferred. If for example, the mortality rate In C' Is 0.10, then an
unaccountabmty rate of 0.01 could alter the mortality rate by as much as
10%. Whatever the unaccountablllty rates, the pattern of unaccountabmty
must also be compared between groups R 1 and C1. For example, the possibility
of age differences must be examined, particularly 1f the unaccountabmty
rates are high. The following paragraphs discuss the analysis of mortality
under the assumption that low unaccountablllty rates have rendered the mortality analysis meaningful.
Multiple mortality assessments will be accomplished during
the course of this study, one at the beginning of 1 study, using available
the
mortality data on the basic mortality cohorts In C and R 1 (5:1 ratio), and
others using mortality data on R 1 and all controls used In the study (both C 1
and replacements) as controls accumulate prospect1vely. The procedures
described here will be used In all of these assessments.
Henceforth, within the protocol, the term "mortality data"
does not distinguish between that data collected Initially and that data collected In the future.
The mortality data will be analyzed using several different
approaches. Crude age-specific death rates will first be calculated and
tabulated. Age will be divided Into k strata, and person-years will be
observed for each strata as will be the number of deaths 1n each strata. In
this manner a tabular display will be developed as shown In Table 7.
Table 7
STRATIFIED FORMAT OF AGE-SPECIFIC DEATH RATES

Ranch Hand
Person
Years

Deaths

1

PH

mu

2

Pl2

m12

3

Controls

Pl3

Death
Rate

Person
Years

m

r

22

P

ik

2k

Death
Rate

21

P

P23

m

Deaths

m

22

23

r

zk

Since the death rates r^j and r2j are Poisson variables, they
can be contrasted directly. If the relationship of r t j to r2j is found to
be consistent between age strata (within statistical variability), a summary
mortality index may be calculated. One summary index that will be calculated
is the Standardized Mortality Ratio (SMR) which is (Armitage, 1971):

32

�SMR = M x 100

k
P
M =

J-l

"Classical" standardized mortality ratios using national mortality data as the
reference will not be calculated for RANCH HAND II due to the effects of the
healthy worker phenomenon. The term £ rn'ij is the total number of deaths
observed in the RANCH HAND group while I Py r2j is the number of deaths
that would be expected were the age-specific RANCH HAND death rates the same
as the age-specific control death rates. Thus the concern is for an SMR
greater than 100%. If a crude death rate for controls, dc, is calculated as

d

c

k
I

P2j

J-l

then the standardized crude rate for the RANCH" HAND group dRu is
d

RH s MdC'

An approximate statistical test would regard dgx as a Poisson random variable with mean dr,.
An alternative approach to the provision of a proportionate mortality ratio is
that of Breslow and Day (1975). In this treatment, a multiplicative model 1s
Employed, for example:

where Ajjfc is the mortality rate, e-j Is the contribution due to population
differences (RANCH HAND versus Control), $j is the contribution due to age

33

�group, and ^ 1s the contribution due to length of time 1n RVN, etc. The
statistical approach here 1s via maximum likelihood.
Logistic models (Walker and Duncan, 1967) have been extensively studied at USAFSAM for application 1n cardiovascular disease analysis.
These models, 1n the herbicide context would have the form

where
P
A
T
R
E

= probability of death
• age 1n years
= length of time 1n RVN
= Indicator variable for race
= exposure variable

and where o lf 61, 1»1,2,... are coefficients to be estimated from the data.
Testing for a group difference can be accomplished by estimating Bi, and the
Interaction coefficients such as 05. If all interaction coefficients
involving the exposure variable E are zero and E is treated as a 0/1 variable,
Cox (1958a, 1958b) has shown that tho most powerful test for non-zero ei,, in
the setting of matched pairs, is McNemar's test. This latter test makes full
use of the paired design of the study. For McNemar's test, the data are cast
into a 2 x 2 table as shown in Table 8. In this table, "a" Is the number of
pairs in which both members have died, "b" is the number of pairs in which
only the RANCH HAND person has died, etc. Using McNemar's test, the test
statistic

X2

b +c

is calculated and referred to the chi-square distribution with one degree of
freedom. Cox (1966) and Meittinen (1969) provided extensions of McNemar's
test for R controls per exposed (R-to-1 matching). Of course the above analyses will be accomplished considering all deaths, and deaths by specific
cause.
As previously discussed, RANCH HAND personnel may be characterized as risk
takers. This risk taking behavior may be associated with increased mortality
from a variety of causes. On the other hand, herbicide exposure has caused
neuropathy in the RANCH HAND personnel, one could anticipate that this disability would increase the probability of accidental death. Therefore,

34

�Table 8
FORMAT OF McNEMAR'S TEST
CONTROLS
RANCH HAND
PERSONNEL

Dead
Alive

Total

DEAD

ALIVE

TOTAL

a
c
a+c

b
d

a+b
c+d
n

b+d

accidental death rates among RANCH HAND participants will be corrected for
risk taking. This can be accomplished by including assessment of risk taking
behavior in the questionnaire, indepth interview, and psychological
evaluation. Both control and RANCH HAND mortality could be corrected using
these measures, with the resultant rates being less biased and, therefore, a
better indicator of exposed versus control effect.
(b) Morta1ity analysis without covariates.
The first step in the statistical analysis of survival data
is descriptive, i.e., the construction of summary measures which provide a
basis for comparing different exposure groups without any allowance for the
effects of possibly confounding variables (e.g., age) except perhaps for some
limited stratification. Since one must expect many "losses to follow-up",
only methods which take full cognizance of this complication will be considered. It should be pointed out that all the methods described below assume
independence between censoring (e.g., loss to follow-up) and death or morbid
event, although some techniques permit different patterns of censoring 1n different exposure groups.
The life table method can be adapted to obtain a step-function approximation to survival distributions in the presence of censoring
(Chiang, 1968, Gross and Clark, 1975). The failure time distribution is the
function F°(t) which provides the probability of deajfh at or before time t
in the study. The Kaplan-Meier estimator of F°(t) is F°(t) where

- 1 - n [1 - i/R(Ti)]
1eD(t)

In this equation, D(t) 1s the "death set" at time t, I.e., the set of all
Indices i of Individuals who were observed to fail before time t. R(Tf) is
the number of individuals who were at risk just before time Tj, the time of
death (or morbid event) of the 1tn study individual in D(t). A nonparametric approach to testing the equality of survival distributions in a matched

35

�pair study has been developed by We1 (1980). His statistic Is a generalization of the Gehan (1965a) statistic. A second test for homogeneity of survival distributions for dlscretlzed failure data 1s the test for marginal homogeneity In a KxK table due to Stuart (1955). Thirdly, the McCullough Model
and test may be used on the KxK array to test for marginal homogeneity and
stochastic ordering.
(c) Mortality analysis with covarlates.
These methods allow adjustment of mortality rates or morbidity rates using covarlates such as age, race, length of time 1n RVN, AFSC,
risk taking score, etc. For t.he purposes of this discussion 1t will be
assumed that the covarlables are categorical, that there are only two such
covaMables and the covarlables do not Interact In affecting the hazard of
death or morbidity. These assumptions can all be relaxed using available
methods.
The hazard function h^(t) for the 1th Individual 1n the
study is the function which provides the conditional probability of death or
morbid event in the time interval (t, t+dt) given his survival up to time t.
The function H,(t) where

t
Hl(t) = /

»H(T)dT

0

is called the cumulative hazard for the ith individual. It 1s readily shown
that the failure time distribution F?(t) is given by:
F°(t) = 1 - exp(-Hi(t))
From this last equation it follows that hi and F° are transforms of each
other, hence the dependence of F° on covariables may be modeled via h^.
This may be accomplished as follows. Let X-j(t) and Y^(t) denote discrete
valued stochastic processes pertaining to the ith individual and describing
two covariates of interest (e.g., one may be an exposure variable and the
other may be covariate such as age or crew position). A basic model for
hazard is:
hi(t) = exp [5Xi(t) + nYi(t)]
where 5 and n are "log-relative risks". This model may t* extended to allow
for any number of possibly interacting factors. Inference about log-relative
risks may be drawn using either an approach derived fro* 0. R. Cox (1972) by
E. Peritz and R. Ray (1978) or using an approach descrirvd by Frank (1977).
Another model, termed the proportional hazards model, is c*ven by

36

�Mt) • *

The proportional hazards model has been discussed, for the special case that
Xi(t) does not change with time, by Cox (1972). A test for the equality of
survival distributions in a matched pair study which incorporates the
proportional hazard model has been given by Breslow (1975). A test of fit for
the proportional hazards model is given by Schoenfeld (1980).
E. Morbidity Study
(1) Genera1 Cons i derat1ons
A vigorous attempt to determine the morbidity experience of all
exposed subjects and their primary controls will be undertaken using questionnaires, indepth personal interviews, and physical examinations. A waiver will
be requested from the U.S. Attorney General so that medical information collected during the conduct of this study may be exempted from subpoena into
Federal Court. Total confidentiality of medical information will be granted
to subjects who are not on active duty, and partial confidentiality will be
given to active duty subjects with release of information to the DOD only in
instances where there is a public safety or national security risk. The schedule and method of contact with the study subjects is depicted in the Appendix
Table A-7.
(2) Questionnaire Methods
All living exposed subjects and their primary controls will be
offered a comprehensive personal and family health questionnaire administered
in the subject's home by a civilian contractor.
In addition to subject interviews, a face-to-face interview will
be conducted with the current spouses of the subjects to obtain a more accurate and complete assessment of fertility and reproductive function. Reproductive information that will be collected includes but is not limited to the
number of live births, the number of still births, the number of miscarriages,
the number of children conceived, the number of abnormal offspring, and the
total years of marriage. Previous spouses of divorced or remarried subjects
will also be interviewed to obtain similar data. Interviews with the first
order next-of-kin of deceased subjects will provide morbidity data on the subject prior to his death. Whenever subjects, their spouses or next-of-kin will
not consent to participate in a face-to-face interview, attempts will be made
to elicit the Information by telephone.
The questionnaire 1s an important part of this study because noncompliance rates for the physical examination and its face-to-face medical
interview are expected to be substantially greater than non-compliance with
the initial questionnaire. The questionnaire serves a four-fold purpose: (1)
to capture baseline personal and medical data on subjects who might be noncompliant for subsequent physical examinations, (2) to serve as a cross-reference

37

�source for objective data obtained at the time of physical examination, (3) to
obtain a targeted medical Inventory, Independent of the physical examination
process, and (4) to obtain health perception data to serve as a foundation for
the replacement strategy. As depicted In the Appendix, Figure A-2, only an
estimated 40% of the RANCH HAND population will participate In the examination, while at least 65% will respond to the questionnaire. The Information
collected by questionnaire from these additional 309 Individuals and their
controls will provide valuable morbidity data which would otherwise be lost.
The questionnaire (see Section XI) will emphasize Identification data, RVN
tour history, dermatologlc conditions, neuropsychlatrlc conditions^ fertility
aberrations, genetic defects 1n offspring, sensory defects, and personality
factors. A targeted medic?:i ^nv^ntory will be Included In the questionnaire,
and will Inventory symptoms prior to, .during, and after duty In RVN as well as
those currently manifested. It will take approximately six months to complete
all Initial questionnaires on both groups. The questionnaire will be "fieldtested" by the contractor on former Air Force personnel with RVN experience.
Specific questions on the questionnaire will be directed to verifiable
Information, wherever possible. Questionnaire development and refinement,
Including specific response verification procedures have been pursued through
civilian contract. Questionnaire data will be cross-linked and Integrated
with medical record Information and physical examination findings. Questionnaire data from Individuals not completing all phases of the study will not be
discarded, but will be Incorporated within the entire data base where statistically appropriate. Each participant will be asked to sign release forms so
that all civilian health records, including those of dependents, can be
obtained and reviewed as necessary. Attempts will be made to obtain pathological reports and specimens following surgical procedures. Federal health
records on all family members on file in the NPRC will be retrieved. For
retired members, and separated members with VA privileges, all available VA
medical records will be obtained. All retrieved medical records will be
reviewed, scored, compared to questionnaire data for reliability, and then be
entered into a repository system. I 'antified participants who are nonresponsive to questionnaire will be pursued to determine status, disinterest,
moribund state or death, etc. These individuals will be cross-referenced in
other federal record systems in an attempt to achieve total ascertainment.
Death certificates and autopsy reports will be retrieved on all dead exposed
and matched control subjects fo • the mortality analysis. Birth/death certificates will be sought for all offspring.
(3) Physical Examination
A voluntary comprehensive physical examination will be offered to
all individuals in both the exposed and primary control groups within one year
of questionnaire administration. The condition for entry into the examination
phase of the study will be the completion of the baseline questionnaire. In
the event that the primary control does not complete both the questionnaire
and the physical examination, a replacement will be selected from the control
set [See Figure 3 and Section F(3)J. Statistical testing will be conducted by
a variety of techniques on both questionnaire and examination findings. At
the time of physical examination, an extensive physical examination, medical

38

�history, and review of symptoms will be conducted. A standardized protocol
will be used to insure comparability of data. This will provide crossreference data to the initial questionnaire and to medical record data, if
retrievable. Specific response verification and bias indicator questions will
be included in this interview as well.
(a) Examination Parameters
A comprehensive physical examination will be conducted on
all willing participants. The examination will be structured as outlined
below and 1n Section XII and will be performed at the earliest practical time
following the completion of the questionnaire. The close sequencing of these
study components will limit the development of major symptoms in the interval
between the questionnaire and the examination. Examinations will be performed
under contract at a single civilian medical center having dermatologic, neurologic and electromyogram/ nerve conduction capabilities. Informed consent
forms will be obtained for all procedures. Physicians and technicians will
handle all participants without a knowledge of exposed or control status, and
will conduct the examinations by standardized protocols to minimize variability. Medical students, Interns, and residents will not be allowed to
perform these examinations, and specialty trained neurologists and dermatologists will perform the appropriate portions of the examination. An onsite
monitor will Insure that the examination protocol 1s followed. All laboratory
tests will be subject to rigid quality control. Laboratory and physical
examination data will be measured on a continuous scale whenever possible in
order to improve statistical power 1n the analysis.
Under special circumstances, additional testing will be accomplished. Karyotyping of the Individual and his family members will be considered if clinical history or physical examination findings are suggestive of
this need. Most well conducted studies have shown that, when present,
chromosomal abnormalities due to TCDD are transient. If on detailed analysis
of the baseline examination and questionnaire, reproductive areas are heavily
affected, routine karyotyplng may be included in the test battery for the
followup phases of the study. TCDO analysis on blood and urine will be
considered in the future provided that (1) strong cause and effect relationships can be ascribed to Herbicide Orange and (2) high resolution mass
spectrometry technology achieves 10 femtogram sensitivity with high isomeric
specificity. Serum, urine, and semen specimens will be obtained from all
participants, aliquoted, and preserved at -70°C for possible analysis in the
future. These serum and/or urine specimens will also be used for analysis of
porphyrin metabolites If analytic techniques make this a feasible diagnositc
procedure. Extensive Immunologlc function analyses will be conducted on a
randomly selected group of subjects.
Physical examination and laboratory data will be placed in the
member's coded master file for detailed cross-analysis to questionnaire data.
Information Identifiable to the subject will not be released without his consent in accordance with the Privacy Act. However, 1n accordance with Air
Force regulations, active duty flying personnel and active duty air traffic
controllers found to have conditions which are disqualifying for flying duty
will be temporarily "grounded" pending resolution of the medical condition.

39

�Physical Examination Profile
General Physical Examination
FBS, 2 Hr Post Prandial
Urinalysls
BUN/Creat1n1ne
Cholesterol/HDL
Trlglycerides
Serum Protein
Electrophoresls

Hemoglobin
Hematocrlt
White Blood Cell Count
and Differential
Platelet Count
RBC Indices
Sedimentation Rate
Prothrombln Time

CPK
ECG
Chest X-Ray
VDRL/FTA
Cortlsol Differential
Thyroid Profile (RIA)
Pulmonary Function
Studies
Blood Alcohol

Dermatologlc Examination
Urine Porphyrins
Urine PorphoblUnogen
Delta-aminolevulenlc Add
Neuro-Psychiatric Examination
General Neurologic Examination
Psychological Battery:

Nerve Conduction
Velocities

MMPI
WAIS
WRAT

Halstead-Reitan
Wechsler Memory Scale Subtests
Cornell Index
Reproductive Examination
LH, FSH, Testosterone
Semen Analysis
Neoplastlc/Hepatlc Examination
SGOT
Alkaline Phosphatase
SGPT
LDH (Isoenzymes 1f elevated)
GGTP
Hepatitis B Antigens/Antibodies
B1l1rub1n, Total and Direct
Additional Studies (Individuals with abnormal history or examination)
Karyotyping
Immunoelectrophoresls
Hepatitis A Antigens/
Bilateral profile and fullAntibodies
face photographs
Anti-Nuclear Antibody
Skin Biopsy
Quantitative Immunoglobulins Additional Consultations
as Required
Immunologic studies (conducted on a randomly selected group of subjects)
Enumeration of B and T Cells B and T Cell Function
Enumeration of Monocytes

40

�(4) Analysis of Questionnaire and Physical Examination Data
The Questionnaire and Physical Examination will produce data of
three types: (1) dichotomous, (2) polytomous and (3) continuous.
Dichotomous (e.g., present/absent) rates will be evaluated using
the tools described above for mortality analysis. For example, the questionnaire will provide data concerning the first occurrence of disease states by
age, and standardized rates and relative risks may be calculated. The occurrence of such findings can be related to age, time spent in RVN, exposure, and
other variables using logistic models followed by McNemar's test where appropriate. These tests will examine the presence or absence of group effect and
allow assessment of the statistical significance on non-unity relative risks.
Polytomous findings will occur in both questionnaire and physical
examination responses. As an example consider retinal findings categorized
into four grades, and studied as a function of age and exposure group as represented in Table 9. In this table the XJJK'S are counts of occurrence.
In analyzing tables such as these, techniques as described by Bishop,
Fienberg, and Holland (1975) will be used. Specifically, if m^ is the
expected value of x-fj|&lt;, general log-linear models of the form
in mfjk = u + u^i) + u2(j) + u3(k)
+ ul3(1k) + u23(jk) + u123(ijk)
will be used, where u^i) is the effect of RANCH HAND membership alone on cell
frequency, u12(ij) is the effect of an interaction on RANCH HAND membership
with retinal grade, etc. This model can work with dichotomous as well as
polytomous data. Under appropriate conditions on expected values of entries
1n Table 9, the pairing in the study design can be used with the data being
organized as shown in Table 10. In Table 10, N-JJ is the number of pairs
such that the exposed person has retinal grade i, and the control person has
retinal grade j. Appropriate tests for this setting are indicated by Fleiss
(1973) and McCullough (1978).
With regard to continuous variables, the intended method follows
Carpenter (1977) who found substantial gains in analysis efficiency by matching cases, subsequently employing covar lance analysis to remove non-controlled
effects. The conditional logistic regression model for relative risk,
Holford, White and Kelsey (1978), Is also applicable and will be used.

41

�Table 9
FORMAT OF CATEGORICAL REPRESENTATION OF RETINAL CHANGES
RANCH HAND PERSONNEL

CONTROLS

"^x^Age Category
Retinal Category^Xs"x^

1

2

3

1

*l'.l

X

112

X

2

X

121

X

122

3

X

131

X

132

4

X

X

1

2

3

4

1U

X

211

X

212

X

213 X 21"+

X

123- X 12»»

X

221

X

222

X

223 X 22«f

X

V

1 tl 1

4

133

113

V

1 li j?

X

13&gt;»

V

1 ^4 3

1l4l4

v
A

231

X 2t4l

y
A

232

V

v
A

233

V

9l4!?

y
A

23i*

V

9^4^

9l4t4

Table 10
FORMAT OF PAIRING FOR GRADES OF RETINAL FINDINGS
.Control Grade
RANCH HAND Grade"

1

1
N U ^ 1 2 "13

2

N21

3

N

31

N22 N23
N

32

N

33

4

(5) Analysis of Fertility/Reproduction^Data. The herbicides under
consideration in this study have been alleged to effect fertility and/or
reproductive functioning. An attempt will be made to address these allegations by analyzing at least three primary variables: the total number of
conceptions since exposure in RVN, the number of miscarriages in spouses since
exposure in RVN and, the number of abnormal offspring since exposure in RVN.
The interview with current and former spouses will provide much more accurate
information on fertility and reproductive functioning than if similar data
were obtained from the male subjects themselves. The study questionnaire will
provide the numbers of miscarriages, abnormal offspring and of live births.
The sum of the number of miscarriages, still births, and live births will
provide an estimate of the total number of conceptions. If differing divorce
rates are found in the RANCH HAND and control groups, this may render the
average number of years of marriage and the distribution of the years of
marriage different in the two groups. This will be investigated and adjusted

42

�for if need be, either by analyzing total number of conceptions divided by (or
normalized by) the number of years of marriage, or by using a more detailed
covariance analysis. Further, the ratio of the number of miscarriages to
adjusted total conceptions will be calculated and compared, as will be the
ratio of the number of abnormal births and adjusted total conceptions.
In summary, the following statistics relating to fertility will
be calculated and analyzed at the very least:
TOTAL
CONCEPTIONS = Rive Births + IStill Births + #Miscarriages
NORMALIZED
FERTILITY
INDEX
MISCARRIAGE
FRACTION

ABNORMALITY
FRACTION

TOTAL CONCEPTIONS
YEARS OF MARRIAGE
# MISCARRIAGES
TOTAL CONCEPTIONS
# ABNORMAL OFFSPRING
TOTAL CONCEPTIONS

F. Follow-up Study
(1) Study Adaptations
Following complete data analysis of the initial mortality and
morbidity studies, adaptive or restrictive health surveys will be developed
and administered to all follow-up study subjects three, five, ten, fifteen and
twenty years after the initial questionnaire. Similarly, a condensed physical
examination profile that will achieve adequate sensitivity and specificity for
prospective diagnosis will be developed. The adaptive physical examination
will be offered to all follow-up participants, and will also be conducted in
years three, five, ten, fifteen, and twenty (see Appendix, Table A-5). An
interim examination in year three 1s essential in this study because the age
group under study is approaching that portion of the mortality/Illness incidence curve with the steepest slope. A lapse of five years between the first
two examinations could easily miss significant development of disease in the
intervening years. Ample precedent for Interim examinations can be found in
the Framlngham cardiovascular disease study, and In the follow-up evaluation
of West Point graduates being conducted by the Air Force.

43

�(2)

Entry Criteria

All exposed or control Individuals completing the baseline
questionnaire and physical examination will be entered Into the follow-up;
further continuation will depend upon the member's willingness/ability to
participate 1n additional health surveys and condensed examinations. Specific
study entry rules are detailed In Table A-6 and Figure A-3 of the Appendix.
(3) Loss to Study; Key Issues
Loss of participants over time adversely affects any epidemiologic study In two ways. Ar the sizes of the study groups decrease, statistical power also declines, and bias 1s Injected Into the study If losses are not
randomly distributed in the study populations. It 1s reasonable to assume
that in this study, losses will be non-random with greater non-compliance
among individuals who perceive their health as "well," since there is less
incentive for this group to continue participation. As shown in Figure 5,
such a differential pattern of loss will alter the population, and skew the
frequency distribution curve.
Most previous epidemiologic studies have approached the problem
of declining statistical power by beginning the study with multiple controls
per exposed subject, and passively allowing attrition to occur throughout the
study period. However, this approach does not address the problem of bias.
This study will take an active approach to both of these problems by using a
replacement concept. As a control is lost to study, a replacement will be
chosen from the original set of ten matched controls. The replacement will be
selected from the control set, and will have a perception of health similar to
that of the lost control (Figure 6). The replacement strategy will maintain
statistical power and the integrity of the matched design despite loss to
study in the control group, and will correct anticipated bias while minimizing
the number of required physical examinat'ons.
At the initiation of the follow-up study, loss of an exposed member will not be cause to cease surveillance of his primary matched control.
In the event of a control loss (for reasons other than death), another control
from the set will be brought to study (Figure 7), the comprehensive questionnaire will be administered, and a baseline physical examination performed.
If a control is noncompliant for one portion of the study and is
replaced by another control, the noncompliant individual will be approached at
the time of subsequent questionnaires and examinations, and encouraged to
reenter the study.
If he reenters, both he and the replacement will be
included in the evaluation. Similarly, noncompliant exposed subjects will
also be aggressively recruited for all subsequent study phases.

44

�FIGURE 5

EFFECT OF NON-RANDOM LOSS TO STUDY IN THE
CONTROL POPULATION

en

N

WELL

*~
HEALTH SPECTRUM

IF CONTROL LOSSES ARE ILL, A SPURIOUS EFFECT
!S ATTRIBUTED TO HERBICIDE EXPOSURE.
IF CONTROL LOSSES ARE WELL, A TRUE/VALID HEALTH
EFFECT IS DILUTED.

ILL

�THE REPLACEMENT STRATEGY
EXPOSED

PRIMARY
CONTROLS

LOSSES

REPLACEMENTS

MATCHED FOR HEALTH STATUS
(DEAD CONTROLS NOT REPLACED

�CONTROL REPLACEMENT FOR THE MORBIDITY
AND FOLLOW UP STUDIES

FIGURE 7

EXPOSED

CONTROL
1000

YEAR 6 -1
• QUESTIONNAIRE DATA
O

RECONSTRUCTED DATA

#• LOSS TO STUDY
PHYSICAL EXAMINATION DATA

�For exposed and control individuals who drop out of the study but
subsequently re-enter, medical data for the intervening years will be reconstructed from questionnaire and interview responses. IN ALL CASES OF LOSSTO-STUDY, INTENSIVE EFFORTS WILL BE MADE TO DETERMINE THE SPECIFIC REASONS FOR
NON-COMPLIANCE, AND DATA FROM REPLACEMENT CONTROLS WILL BE REVIEWED TO ASSESS
COMPARABILITY WITH THE LOST INDIVIDUALS. Medical record reviews of new
entrants will continue throughout the follow-up period.
(4) Study Length
The fpllow-up st-'dy is initially planned for 20 consecutive
years. Procedures, progress, anJ interim results of the study will be monitored by an independent scientific review group, responsible to the Office of
Science and Technology Policy in the White House.
G. Determination of "Disease"
(1) Introduction
Since this study is dealing with an unknown clinical endpolnt
with unknown latency, determination of a disease state by statistical methodology is a prime scientific thrust of the investigation. From the literature,
chloracne is the only generally accepted chronic disease associated with high
exposure to dioxin. The questions of primary interest are: (1) Does a history of chloracne invariably lead to future disease? and (2) In the absence of
chloracne, is there emergence of other attributable diseases? Under a broad
concept of "spectrum of illness", either or both of these conditions are" possible. The clarification of their respective contributions to the natural
history of past or of subsequent "disease" is of significant interest.
(2) Discussion
Inferences about a disease state from this study can be derived
from several logical approaches. Tho'-.e approaches can be grouped into two
categories: (1) those dealing with symptoms which can be used to construct a
symptom complex that may represent disease, and (2) those dealing with physical signs which in themselves rep -esent disease. In the former, one can form
a subset of individuals that have symptoms (e.g., infertility) and study them
during the morbidity and follow-up studies. Focusing on the overall patterns
of alleged symptoms and categorizing them into a symptom complex may identify
those individuals with a disease syndrome, or those at higher risk of developing disease (e.g., genetic disorders, cancer). In the latter approach, data
on abnormal physical signs (e.g., genetic defects in offspring) and laboratory
results can be compared between exposed and non-exposed groups in an attempt
to again establish the presence or absence of disease. By putting this array
of data into a logical decision-making scheme, specific relative risks can be
calculated in the follow-up study, and specific response patterns can be
inferred as shown in Figure 8.

48

�FIGUkE &gt;'•

INTERPRETATION OF HORIZONTAL COMPARISONS
OVERT EFFECT

SUBCLINICAL

MR * Mc

•i = «c

S

R *

S

C

S

F

R -

F

C

F

—
D •—
n

R *

F R O * " Fpc
no
vo

FD O^
nQ

F

F

R S * FCs

MORTALITY/SYMPTOM/
SIGN REGRESSION ON
EXPOSURE

Q
O f*
b
F

C

R

MR = MC
C
s
0D
n "
c
FR = FC

r
•P C
l/o

r
rD
It

= F

S-FC S

F

RS f c FCS

SIGN REGRESSION
ON EXPOSURE
F

OVER-REPORTING

S=FCS

R

NO REGRESSION
ON EXPOSURE SEEN

RS S R"*" F RS u-SR 1

�Again referring to Figure 8, at least three clinical patterns can
defined. These patterns are delineated using relative risks (mr/mc, sr/sc,
fr/fc etc., between group or "vertical" comparisons, referencing Figure 4) and
using within group ("horizontal" study) comparisons such as regressing symtoms
and findings rates against an Index of herbicide exposure, and other comparisons. Specifically, an overt clinical effect would be marked by: an
Increased mortality rate 1n the RANCH HAND group (mr &gt; me), an Increased rate
of symptom formation In the RANCH HAND group (sr &gt; sc), and an Increased rate
of objective medical findings 1n the RANCH HAND group as compared to the
control group (fr &gt; fc). Further, the occurrence of physical or objective
medical findings would consistently relate to symptoms 1n the overt case (that
is, frs &gt; fcs and frs &gt; fcs^, anH finally, in the classic Instance, mortality,
and symptom and sign formation would- be seen to be increased with increasing
herbicide exposure.
A subclinlcal pattern is indicated in the central column of
Figure 8. In this setting, one expects no statistically significant differences in mortality or symptom reporting between the two groups, exposed versus
control. However, one expects a consistent predominance of medical signs 1n
the RANCH HAND group with regression of the signs on increasing herbicide
exposure.
A pattern strongly suggesting over-reporting 1s presented as the
right column of Figure 8. In this setting, there is no difference between the
groups as regards mortality or medical sign incidence; however, more symptoms
are reported by the RANCH HAND group. While in this pattern the RANCH HAND
subjects are reporting more symptoms, objective medical finding rates are not
consistent with symptom reporting. When no regression of symptoms on exposure
level is found, over-reporting is clearly and strongly suggested.
This discussion of response patterns has used regression on an
exposure index in a central way. Development of such an index Is discussed
below. It is noted, however, that a direct index of exposure can be confounded by other factors such as cellular repair mechanisms or bioaccumulation
in adipose tissue with release over time upon weight loss. Use of other factors, such as time since exposure, should help to overcome these confounders.
The strength of any inferences made from these analyses is dependent upon the statistical power inherent in the study. In addition, due to
the possibility of latency being a factor in this study, a negative analysis
at any time within the study does not categorically imply lack of disease,
since sufficient time for emergence may not have passed.
H. Exposure Indices
(1) Exposure Concepts
A major concern in conducting this study is the lack of accurate
exposure data. Although most personnel assigned to RANCH HAND squadrons were
undoubtedly exposed to Herbicide Orange and TCDD, the exposures within the

50

�group must have varied widely. Exposure to herbicides and TCDO by RANCH HAND
personnel occurred almost daily. Anecdotal information suggests that many had
direct skin contact which was repetitive over a long period of time (one-year
tour for most individuals). Further, it is also suggested that most RANCH
HAND personnel felt that the herbicides employed in the operations were not
toxic to animals and man, and hence, they did not exercise the caution in handling these chemicals that is recommended today.
From a historical review of RANCH HAND operations, it appears
most individuals can be classified into one of three groups based on their
likely potential for exposure to the herbicides:
(1) Pilots, Co-pilots and Navigators:low potential
(2) Crew Chiefs, Aircraft Mechanic, and
other Support Personnel:
moderate potential
(3) Console Operators and Flight Engineers:
high potential
The "pilot" group received most of their exposure during preflight checks as well as during the actual dissemination missions. The crew
chief group experienced contact with herbicides during dedrumming and aircraft
loading operations, as well as during on-site repair of the aircraft and spray
equipment. The console operator group was exposed while supervising the loadIng of the aircraft, during ground testing of equipment, and by tank leakage
during dissemination missions.
The available historical records on Operation RANCH HAND indicate
that personnel assigned to the project seldom had a "routine" work schedule or
environment, thus complicating estimates of the level of herbicide and dioxin
exposure. Since actual exposure data (e.g., mg of herbicide/kg body wt) are
not available, an exposure index will be used. The exposure indices will be
calculated for each RANCH HAND individual to obtain frequency distribution,
and will be calculated by evaluating the known factors that would have
influenced exposure. These will include such factors as:
(1) Date of tour with RANCH HAND 1n Vietnam.

(2) Number and lengths of tours in Vietnam with RANCH HAND.
(3) Number of herbicide dissemination missions (as reflected by
flying hours and air medals).
(4) Herbicides employed (records are available that reflect the
amount of each herbicide sprayed each month and year).
(5) Crew position.
(6) Routes of exposure (the major route of exposure for most
RANCH HAND personnel was probably percutaneous, although exposure through
.inhalation may have also been significant).

51

�A crude exposure Index which 1s applicable to the entire RANCH HAND
cohort is expressed with the following formula:
E, • qj X T,

In this formula, Ej is the calculated exposure for the ilL RANCH HAND
member, q\ is the quantity of TCDD-contain1ng herbicide sprayed from aircraft assigned to the iUl subject's base during his assignment, and T^ 1s
the length of the illl subject's assignment (tour length). However, great
care must be exercised when applying the above index. For example, the Index
should be used as an independent regression variable aga'lnst clinical findings
only within occupational strata, to.'avoid confounding occupational effects
with exposure effects. Different degrees of regression between clinical findings and the exposure index can be expected 1n differing occupational groups
since: (a) modes of exposure are likely to be different 1n different occupational categories, (b) sodoeconomic correlates within occupational category
could confound an herbicide effect, and (c) other exposures which could
synerglstically or antagonistically interact with TCDO-conta1n1ng herbicide
may be correlated with occupational category.
Another factor which must be considered when applying this crude exposure
index is the problem on confounding a possible herbicide effect with an effect
associated with tour length. Being in a comabt zone is a major psychophysiological stress, and time spent in such an area may be significantly associated
with changes in long term morbidity and/or mortality. This crude exposure
index, when used alone, could result in a positive regression with disease
incidence or prevalence which is not due to the herbicide exposure.
An
approach that will correct for this potential confounding is to regress
observed medical findings on both EJ and T^ to differentiate the independent effects of herbicide exposure and combat zone experience.
The values of qi and Tj needed to calculate Ej are generally available
from government records. Specifically, tour dates are available from military
personnel records, and the quantity of herbicide sprayed is available for the
period January 1965 through April 1970 from the "HERBS TAPES." These tapes
are comprised of computerized data obtained from actual spray mission
reports. This material provides the date, base of mission origin, amount and
type of material sprayed (Herbicides Orange, Blue, or White) and location of
the intended spray target. Estimates of the amount of herbicide sprayed prior
to 1965 may be available from procurement records for Herbicides Purple, Pink,
and Green, which were sprayed exclusively from Tan San Nhut Air Base from 1962
through 1964.
Animal data imply that TCDD is the most toxic component in the herbicides used
in RVN. By using qi, the amount of herbicide sprayed, one is using a variable that roughly correlates with TCDD exposure. However, it would be highly
desirable to be able to analyze observed health effects in terms of specific
TCDD exposure. The material sprayed from 1965-1970 had significantly lower

52

�TCDD contamination then did those herbicides manufactured and purchased prior
to 1962 and used from 1962 through 1964, but due to data limitations from a
scarcity of Herbicide Purple, Pink, and Green samples, TCDD concentration
profiles for those chemicals cannot be quantitatively determined. However, it
may be feasible to develop estimates of the degree of contamination based upon
the TCDD concentration from military and manufacturers' data.
As another approach to examining the effect of TCDD itself, one might consider
stratifying the exposed cohort by date of assignment 1n Vietnam, expecting
that those assigned earlier were more heavily exposed to TCDD. While it may
well be true that earlier assignees were exposed to higher TCDD concentrations, it is unlikely that differences between "early" and "late" assignees,
if they occur, can be reliably attributed to TCDD concentration changes, since
several potentially confounding variables exist: '(a) volunteerism among early
assignees, (b) differing assignment patterns between early and late RANCH
HANDers (TOY vs long term pattern) and (c) different RVN living conditions.
It is preferable to use an exposure index which 1s more closely tailored to
the specific individual than the crude index discussed above. While T| is
subject specific, qj is a value which refers to all individuals on the base
during the period of time represented by 1\. A refined index for ground
crew can be expressed as:
E i = F. X q i X C X T1
• :
7

x where,
f"'.
?v
".

Fj = Average flights per day served by the iitL ground crew member.
°,1 - Average quantity of herbicide dispensed by flights served by the
ij-ll ground crew member.
C = Estimated TCDD concentration of the herbicides in use during the
iM subject's tour of duty.
TI = Time spent in TVN in days for the ilil ground crew member.
The variable F^ can be estimated by dividing the number of RANCH HAND
flights per day by the number of crew chiefs during the time period T-j. All
other variables are estimated as with the crude index.
A refined index is also possible for aircrew members and is expressed as

;n

fOl1OWS :

E1 = M 1 X D 1 X q 1 X C X P 1

* total number of missions flown by the iJill air crew member.
= average duration of missions flown by the ilP. air crew member.
* average quantity of herbicide dispensed per flight served by the
ilil air crew member.
= estimated TCt)D concentration of the herbicides 1n use.
= a cr-?w position weighting factor.

53

�As with the refined ground crew Index, this refined aircrew index cannot
directly calculated in a strictly quantitative sense using available govern,
ment records, since records to specifically link missions with particular
individuals are not available to objectively determine MJ and Dj. He
ever, reasonably accurate estimates of these parameters may be feasible uslni
questionnaire data. Also air medal awards may allow an Indirect estimate,
The crew position parameter PI must also rely upon estimations. While t|
specific crew duties of each subject are known, the differential exposur
associated with the crew positions within the C-123 aircraft were hot detq'/
mined during RVN spray missions. The 355th TAS/Spray Branch, Rickenbacher
OH is presently using the C-123 aircraft, configured with the A/A 45 .
^
Internal Dispenser and attempts to as'sess Pj can be made. Air flow measure
ment and herbicide simulant deposition studies conducted by Meek are perfor
during the course of four C-123 flights. However, difficulties with tf
measurement equipment limit the validity of the value of the data in an exposure index. Further work along these lines could yield a more quantitative,
position weighting factor, Pf, for each individual.
Refined ground crew and air crew exposure Indices can be used singly or
combination with the crude exposure Index first presented; however, as wltj
the crude index, confounding must be avoided when the refined indices are us'ej
in statistical analyses.
The exposure indices listed above are, of course, only applicable to the Ram
Hand cohort. As mentioned, a positive regression of disease Incidence
prevalence with increasing exposure index will strongly support herb1ci(
causation. We do not wish to minimize however the role of RANCH HAND versus
control group disease incidence/prevalence differences as Indicators of :)
herbicide effect. A major component differentiating the RANCH HANDers fre
the controls is the increased residence of RANCH HANDers in the RVN Itself^
If within country time does not correlate with disease incidence, RANCH HANpJ
versus control disease incidence differences may be strongly related tc
herbicide. If in-country time is significant as a disease correlate, this It
itself will be valuable information with regard to assessment of the RVfl
experience.

54

�VI. Special Statistical Considerations
I
1

The previous discussion has outlined, the general statistical approach
followed by this protocol, and has outlined planned analytical methods and
inferential strategies for the mortality, questionnaire and physical examina; tion study phases. This section provides an indepth consideratior of some
j . special statistical study aspects.
$

A. Fa1se Report ing/Mis rep resentat i on

|
Since concern for compensation could unconsciously or consciousl
| influence symptom reporting, and since press reporting itself can st
* anxiety-based symptom formation, a discussion of false reporting is iridi| cated. A data pattern indicating overreporting has already been discussed
f&gt;" Section V. The goal here is to understand the effect of misrepresentation on
I estimates of relative risk and the odds ratio. Let S stand for presence of a

symptom, and T denote its absence. This false reporting may be represented as
1n Figure 9.
Figure 9
FALSE

REPORTING/MISREPRESENTATION

TRUE STATUS

s

r

Total

A

B

A+B

C

D

REPORTED STATUS

C+D
B+D

A+C

The proportion of correctly classified positives is defined by A/(A+C) and is
lied the sensitivity of the classification scheme; the proportion of corly classified negatives D/(B+D) 1s called the specificity.
When there 1s non-differential misrepresentation, that is, when the
isitivity and the specificity are the same among the exposed and nonexposed,
fehe bias Induced in the estimate of relative risk will be-toward the null
talue. The situation is summarized by Figure 10.

55

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="30">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="4687">
                  <text>Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="49809">
                  <text>&lt;p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;"&gt;The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;For more about this collection, &lt;a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a"&gt;view the Agent Orange Exhibit.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="1">
      <name>Text</name>
      <description>A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.</description>
      <elementContainer>
        <element elementId="52">
          <name>Box</name>
          <description>The box containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18689">
              <text>060</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="53">
          <name>Folder</name>
          <description>The folder containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18690">
              <text>1599</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="54">
          <name>Series</name>
          <description>The series number of the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18692">
              <text>Series III Subseries III</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
      </elementContainer>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="18691">
                <text>Supporting Statement with Attachments</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="18693">
                <text>Air Force Health Study</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="18694">
                <text>Ranch Hand crew</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="18695">
                <text>Marine Corps exposure</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="1">
        <name>ao_seriesIII</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="2631" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="1437">
        <src>https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/13fbf0049313bcfb2a85c2e6d63bab19.pdf</src>
        <authentication>906870d51324bec1e84cf13cccb50f40</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="60">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="63386">
                    <text>Item ID Number

01597

Author
Corporate Author
Roport/Alticlo TitlO Typescript: Mortality Analysis, Power Comparison of
the Ranch Hand Study to the Marine Population
Considering Misclassification and Relative Exposure

Journal/Book Title
Year

000

°

Month/Day
Color

n

Number of Images

1

DOSCrlptOD NOtOS

Includes a handwritten observation.

Wednesday, May 23, 2001

Page 1598 of 1608

�MORTALITY ANALYSIS
POWER COMPARISON OF THE RANCH HAND STUDY TO THE MARINE POPULATION
CONSIDERING MISCLASSIFICATION AND RELATIVE EXPOSURE^
POWER TABLE
RANCH HAND
POWER
1-B

,92

ASSUMPTIONS

MARINE STUDY POWER

%
MISCLASSIFICATION

EXPOSURE LEVELS
RELATIVE TO RANCH HAND
1/10
1/20 1/100 1/1000

M
,17
0
,36
,16
10
,28
,13
25
RH STUHY Pnp. 1,200; 6,nrin (1-5)
MARINE STUDY PHP, 21,900: 196,100
NORMAL INCIDENCE OF DISEASE = 0,01
DISEASE INCIDENCE IN RH = 0,02
LINEAR DOSE - RESPONSE
MISCLASS, OF MARINE CONTROLS EXCLUDED

,07
,07
,06

,05
,05
,05

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="30">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="4687">
                  <text>Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="49809">
                  <text>&lt;p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;"&gt;The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;For more about this collection, &lt;a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a"&gt;view the Agent Orange Exhibit.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="1">
      <name>Text</name>
      <description>A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.</description>
      <elementContainer>
        <element elementId="52">
          <name>Box</name>
          <description>The box containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18675">
              <text>060</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="53">
          <name>Folder</name>
          <description>The folder containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18676">
              <text>1597</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="54">
          <name>Series</name>
          <description>The series number of the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="18678">
              <text>Series III Subseries III</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
      </elementContainer>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="18677">
                <text>Typescript: Mortality Analysis, Power Comparison of the Ranch Hand Study to the Marine Population Considering Misclassification and Relative Exposure</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="18679">
                <text>Air Force Health Study</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="18680">
                <text>Marine Corps exposure</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="1">
        <name>ao_seriesIII</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
  <item itemId="2513" public="1" featured="0">
    <fileContainer>
      <file fileId="1349">
        <src>https://www.nal.usda.gov/exhibits/speccoll/files/original/4cad9e104281ea21aa6d58077c25dc9a.pdf</src>
        <authentication>6089c4098b1b8003a618435654fe0d69</authentication>
        <elementSetContainer>
          <elementSet elementSetId="4">
            <name>PDF Text</name>
            <description/>
            <elementContainer>
              <element elementId="60">
                <name>Text</name>
                <description/>
                <elementTextContainer>
                  <elementText elementTextId="63298">
                    <text>Item ID Number

01474

Author
Corporate Author
ROpOrt/ArtlOlO TltlO Typescript: Notes and diagrams regarding TCDD
exposure

Journal/Book Title
°°00

Year
Month/Day
Color

n

OOSOrfptOD NOtOS

Typescript and diagrams regarding TCDD exposure,
Australian Senate Committee on Science and the
Environment, Ranch Hand versus Marine exposure

Tuesday, May 15, 2001

Page 1474 of 1514

�PARAMETERS OF TCDD EXPOSURE
HERBS TAPE
ACCURACY

ENVIRONMENTAL FATE
OF TCDD

PERSONNEL PROXIMITY TO SPRAY
VIA RECORDS REVIEW
ECOLOGIC MODELING

�ISSUE: CAN A VALID HERBICIDE ORANGE (TCDD) EXPOSURE ALLOCATION BE MADE
FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL (GROUP) IN PREPARATION FOR A STUDY OF GROUND
PERSONNEL?

EXPOSURE ALLOCATION OUTCOMES

STUDY OUTCOMES

VALID

TRUTH

MISCLASSIFIED

INDETERMINANT

BIASED

POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE
NOT TRUTH

�EXPOSURE ALLOCATION METHODS
SUBJECTIVE MEANS:
* QUESTIONNAIRE TECHNIQUES
OPINION: INTENTIONAL MALATHION EXPOSURE BY SIMILAR AIRCRAFT IN
RVN HAS CREATED A POSITIVE IRREVOCABLE BIAS
® SOLICITATION FOR "EXPOSED" VOLUNTEERS
OPINION: UNCORRECTABLE SELECTION BIAS

�EXPOSURE ALLOCATION METHODS

OBJECTIVE MEANS:
e RECORD REVIEWS IN SELECTED OCCUPATIONAL GROUPS
OPINION: BIAS, MISCLASSIFICATION POSSIBLE, SMALL SAMPLE SIZE ASSURED
® PROBABILISTIC DETERMINATION VIA HERBS TAPES AND RECORD REVIEW
FOR TIME/DISTANCE ESTIMATES
OPINION: MISCLASSIFICATION ASSURED; SELECTION BIAS PROBABLE, TRUE ERROR
RATES IMPOSSIBLE TO MEASURE; VALIDITY COMPROMISED

�PROCESS OF EXPOSURE ALLOCATION INFLUENCES:
&gt; COHORTS (STUDY AND COMPARISON) TO BE SELECTED
&gt; METHOD(S) OF COHORT SELECTION
&gt; SAMPLE SIZE OF COHORTS
» STATISTICAL POWER
&gt; OPERATION OF CONFOUNDERS (MALATHION, COMBAT STRESS, ETC.)
\ SCIENTIFIC/LAY ACCEPTANCE OF STUDY

�SOME STUDY OPTIONS BASED ON EXPOSURE DILEMMA
9 PERFORM A "RVN EXPERIENCE STUDY"
® DECLARE AGENT ORANGE STUDY NOT DOABLE '
© BOTH OPTIONS ABOVE
» DETERMINE FEASIBILITY OF USING OCCUPATIONAL GROUPS
• CONDUCT AGENT ORANGE STUDY BASED UPON PROBABILISTIC EXPOSURE
• ABOVE OPTION, ADD COHORT(S) FOR "RVN EXPERIENCE STUDY"

�OPINION
BASED UPON
$ WORLD LITERATURE: ZERO TO LOW INCIDENCE OF HEALTH CONSEQUENCES,
RARE OR DIFFICULT TO MEASURE CLINICAL ENDPOINTS
® FACT OF UNESTIMATABLE ERROR "RATES FOR EXPOSURE ALLOCATION IN GROUND
TROOPS BASED UPON HERBS TAPES
@® YIELDS A STUDY OF UNKNOWN ABILITY (POWER) TO DETECT A EFFECT
USE OF PROBABILISTIC MEANS TO DETERMINE EXPOSURE

IS
SCIENTIFIC HOKUM

�AUSTRALIAN SENATE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND THE ENVIRONMENT
CONCLUSIONS
LITTLE LIKELIHOOD AUSTRALIAN TROOPS WERE DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY EXPOSED
TO HERBICIDES
DIRECT EXPOSURE TO MALATHION WAS HIGHLY PROBABLE IN THE MAJORITY OF CASES
EXPOSURE TO ANTIMALARIAL DRUGS WAS ROUTINE
ANY ADDED CARCINOGENIC/TERATOGEN1C.BURDEN ON AUSTRALIAN TROOPS WAS
RELATIVELY SMALL '
BASED ON CURRENT DATA,
"THERE IS NO CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT BIRTH ABNORMALITIES,
PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS AND MORTALITY ARE EXCESSIVE AMONG
VIETNAM VETERANS."
ALL FUTURE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT STUDIES WILL ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF VIETNAM
SERVICE, NOT SPECIFIC CHEMICAL EXPOSURE

�KEY ITEMS OF CONSIDERATION
MARINE STUDY RELATIVE TO RANCH HAND STUDY

"EXPOSED " MARINES RECEIVED AN AVERAGE EXPOSURE 1/1000 THE AVERAGE DOSE
RECEIVED BY RANCH HAND PERSONNEL

MARINE EXPOSURE ALLOCATIONS BASED ON DISTANCE FROM SPRAY PATHS LEAD TO
SERIOUS MISCLASSIFICATION OR BIAS

MARINE EXPOSURE ALLOCATIONS BASED ON TIME IN A SPRAY AREA SUBSTANTIALLY
ALTER THE SIZES OF THE STUDY AND CONTROL POPULATIONS AND LEAD TO SERIOUS
MISCLASSIFICATION

�CONCLUSIONS
RANCH HAND VERSUS OR PLUS THE MARINE POPULATION
• OVERWHELMING ALLOCATION PROBLEMS FOR "EXPOSURE-NONEXPOSURE" IN MARINES
- MISCLASSIFICATION BY 6AO 8RITERIA = OILUTIONAL EFFECT
- ALLOCATION BY PERSONAL HISTORY = BIAS
• MARINE EXPOSURE 1/1000 OF RANCH HAND EXPOSURE
« MARINE - RANCH HAND POPULATIONS DIFFER BY HOST FACTORS; AGE, RACE,
EDUCATIONAL LEVEL, ETC
•• BY CONSIDERATION OF EXPOSURE DIFFERENTIAL AND MISCLASSIFICATION, RANCH HAND
STUDY FAR MORE POWERFUL THAN INDEPENDENT MARINE STUDY OR ADDITIVE
STUDY TO INCLUDE MARINES
•• ADDITION OF MARINE POPULATION TO RANCH HAND POPULATION = UNACCEPTABLE SCIENCE

�MORTALITY ANALYSIS
POWER COMPARISON OF THE RANCH HAND STUDY TO THE MARINE
POPULATION CONSIDERING MISCLASSIFICATION AND RELATIVE EXPOSURE *
POWER TABLE
MARINE STUDY POWER

ANCK HAND
POWER
1-B

%
MISCLASSIFiCATION

EXPOSURE LEVELS
RELATIVE TO RANCH HAND

•

1/10 1/20 1/100 1/1000
.87

0
10
25

ASSUMPTIONS: RH STURY POP. 1,200; 6,000 (1:5)
MARINE STUDY POP. 21,900: 196,100
NORMAL INCIDENCE OF DISEASE =0.001
DISEASE INCIDENCE IN RH - 0.004
LINEAR DOSE - RESPONSE
MISCLASS OF MARINE CONTROLS EXCLUDED

.38
.33
.26

.17
.15
.13

.07
.06
.06

.05
.05
.05

* INCORRECT POPULATION
NUMERICS BASED ON
ENVIRONMENTAL FATE
OF TCDD

�</text>
                  </elementText>
                </elementTextContainer>
              </element>
            </elementContainer>
          </elementSet>
        </elementSetContainer>
      </file>
    </fileContainer>
    <collection collectionId="30">
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="1">
          <name>Dublin Core</name>
          <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="50">
              <name>Title</name>
              <description>A name given to the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="4687">
                  <text>Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
            <element elementId="41">
              <name>Description</name>
              <description>An account of the resource</description>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="49809">
                  <text>&lt;p style="margin-top: -1em; line-height: 1.2em;"&gt;The Alvin L. Young Collection on Agent Orange comprises 120 linear feet and spans the late 1800s to 2005; however, the bulk of the coverage is from the 1960s to the 1980s and there are many undated items. The collection was donated to Special Collections of the National Agricultural Library in 1985 by Dr. Alvin L. Young (1942- ). Dr. Young developed the collection as he conducted extensive research on the military defoliant Agent Orange. The collection is in good condition and includes letters, memoranda, books, reports, press releases, journal and newspaper clippings, field logs and notebooks, newsletters, maps, booklets and pamphlets, photographs, memorabilia, and audiotapes of an interview with Dr. Young.&lt;/p&gt;&#13;
&lt;p&gt;For more about this collection, &lt;a href="/exhibits/speccoll/exhibits/show/alvin-l--young-collection-on-a"&gt;view the Agent Orange Exhibit.&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </collection>
    <itemType itemTypeId="1">
      <name>Text</name>
      <description>A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.</description>
      <elementContainer>
        <element elementId="52">
          <name>Box</name>
          <description>The box containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="17684">
              <text>055</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="53">
          <name>Folder</name>
          <description>The folder containing the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="17685">
              <text>1474</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="54">
          <name>Series</name>
          <description>The series number of the original item.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="17687">
              <text>Series III Subseries II</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
      </elementContainer>
    </itemType>
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="17686">
                <text>Typescript: Notes and diagrams regarding TCDD exposure</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="49">
            <name>Subject</name>
            <description>The topic of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="17688">
                <text>human exposure</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="17689">
                <text>AVHS</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="17690">
                <text>Ranch Hand</text>
              </elementText>
              <elementText elementTextId="17691">
                <text>Marine Corps exposure</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
    <tagContainer>
      <tag tagId="1">
        <name>ao_seriesIII</name>
      </tag>
    </tagContainer>
  </item>
</itemContainer>
