Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses -"The mission of the Committee is to make recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on government research relating to the health consequences of military service in the Southwest Asia theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War."  

On Monday, Nov. 17 , 2008  the Congressionally-mandated Research AdvisoryCommittee on GulfWar Veterans’ Illnesses released a landmark report.

This report is now "the source" for information on Gulf War Illnesses. The RAC members sacrificed a lot to do this right, and they deserve credit.

However, if you look at the RAC Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses page that has a list of "Gulf War Illnesses Links" that include "U.S. Congressional Committee Reports and Hearings", you find something is missing.

Nowhere on that page are any links to the 6 May 1994 Senate Veterans' Affair's committee hearing that introduced the discovery that the anti-nerve gas drug, pyrisdostigmine is made more toxic by specific insecticides that were used in the Gulf War. This from the same Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses that announced on 17 November, 2008, that pyrisdostigmine and pesticides were the most likley cause of Gulf War Illnesses.

How come?

 

========================Under construction ==========================

 

Still writing and reading it .....

 

So far I the only one thing I strongly disagree with in this report is on page 168:

 

" Investigators who first identified synergistic effects of combined exposure to PB and pesticides hypothesized that the increased toxicity observed was due, in part, to competitive alterations in the capacity for liver and plasma hydrolyzing enzymes to effectively neutralize the chemicals.16,17 ".

 

16. Abou-Donia MB, Wilmarth KR, Abdel-Rahman AA, Jensen KF, Oehme FW, Kurt TL. Increased neurotoxicity following concurrent exposure to pyridostigmine bromide, DEET, and chlorpyrifos. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1996; 34:201-222.

17. Abou-Donia MB, Wilmarth KR, Jensen KF, Oehme FW, Kurt TL. Neurotoxicity resulting from coexposure to pyridostigmine bromide, deet, and permethrin: implications of Gulf War chemical exposures. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1996; 48:35-56.

This is not true. I first "identified synergistic effects of combined exposure to PB and pesticides". 

 

See this: Duke University Researcher Confirms Synergism Findings of J. Moss.

 

Now the feds will pump out millions to research the interaction based on the wrong hypothesis by a followup-researcher that "increased toxicity observed was due, in part, to competitive alterations in the capacity for liver and plasma hydrolyzing enzymes to effectively neutralize the chemicals".  I discovered these interactions based on concepts that have nothing to do with the above mechanisms.  Maybe I was wrong, but my hypotheses lead to the discovery, not the above, so what do you thnk is right?

 

Maybe I just make this stuff up:

 

******************************************************************************************

Return-Path: <lea.steele@va.gov>
Received: from eastrmimpi03.cox.net ([68.1.16.121])
          by eastrmmtai102.cox.net
          (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP
          id <20081123221046.RSTX26850.eastrmmtai102.cox.net@eastrmimpi03.cox.net>
          for <jimmoss@cox.net>; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:10:46 -0500
Received: from mtaksc1.ksc.net.va.gov ([152.133.26.45])
 by eastrmimpi03.cox.net with IMP
 id imAk1a01x0yPJ0w01mAlSF; Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:10:46 -0500
X-VR-Score: -240.00
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=LH-sld6iAAAA:8 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8
 a=cfZq8f64vJh8WfbEth4A:9 a=2B4zeAIx1x9PfbdfG2wA:7
 a=-K4xy9eu_RaBjTIoKRfX5zh6s_YA:4 a=Om1yH493_g0A:10 a=WyaOPL2SiBcA:10
 a=4vB-4DCPJfMA:10 a=uv1ck3d6JtEA:10 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=pTWUZu-HAiuZa5Qh4yQA:9
 a=LCW1wLM613KNIyfXU40A:7 a=N73gY3mGEOUb6k0njc7A1ucjv4UA:4 a=37WNUvjkh6kA:10
X-CM-Score: 0.00
X-SBRS: None
X-MID: 140378598
X-IronPort-AV:E=Sophos;i="4.33,654,1220241600";
  d="scan'208,217";a="140378598"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C94DB8.5325CA65"
Subject: RE: p168 of Gulf War report 
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:10:42 -0600
Message-ID: <354B98D9A8C9D3408186AFC565C91FF602FB9D9B@VHAV15MSGA1.v15.med.va.gov>
In-Reply-To: <001301c94aaa$2e4eed30$8aecc790$@net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: p168 of Gulf War report 
Thread-Index: AclJd584zVv9KG0iRCaA0v7Q6K54MAA+B5wQAA2NyOAAwie8QA==
References: <000301c94978$3ad7e3a0$b087aae0$@net> <354B98D9A8C9D3408186AFC565C91FF602FB9D97@VHAV15MSGA1.v15.med.va.gov> <001301c94aaa$2e4eed30$8aecc790$@net>
From: "Steele, Lea" <Lea.Steele@va.gov>
To: "James I Moss" <jimmoss@cox.net>

 

From: Steele, Lea [Lea.Steele@va.gov]
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 5:11 PM
To: James I Moss
Subject: RE: p168 of Gulf War report 

Jim,

I apologize for the poor choice of words in that sentence.  It was originally intended to refer to the first 2 studies in the table on pp 170-171 (since they hypothesized, and discussed in some detail, the possible role of metabolic interference).  There was no  intention in this section to assign “credit” for the first discovery of interactive effects, more  generally, of PB with other compounds.  I did know your study was before Dr. Abou- Donia’s.  That sentence was intended to indicate that a role for metabolic interactions  had been suggested early on (in the “first” studies listed in the table), as a prelude to the  report’s discussion of studies that later specifically demonstrated metabolic interactions  (including Abou-Donia’s 2008 study).  You might have noticed that the report, overall,  shied away from playing up anyone’s individual role in the Gulf War research effort.  The  intention was to emphasize research findings, as opposed to investigators.

 

But I do see that the sentence conveys the impression that the Abou Donia studies were  “first” to demonstrate PB interactive effects, in general.  So we dropped the ball there.   We should have said something more along the lines of   “one of the early teams to  identify synergistic effects…” or “the first listed in the table, to identify synergistic  neurological effects,” or something along those lines.  

 

I’m very sorry, and will be sure that it is reworded if there is a 2nd edition of the report  (we’ll keep track of this and any other problems that emerge as more people read  through this).  We tried extremely hard to be precise with the wording in the report, as  you might have noticed from all the qualifiers and caveats used throughout. There was  certainly no intention to minimize your contribution.  Don’t know if you noticed that we  did cite your 1996 study when indicating that DEET interactions with AChE inhibitors  may occur though mechanisms other than AChE inhibition (p.154)

 

I am particularly sorry that this might have soured whatever positive sense of vindication  you might have gleaned from having your work supported by the overall analysis of the  research and findings of the report.   You have more than paid your dues in all this. 

Sincerely,
Lea

_______________________________________________
Lea Steele, Ph.D.
Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Voice: 785-350-4617
Fax: 785-350-4616
website: www.va.gov/RAC-GWVI

 

-----Original Message-----
From: James I Moss [mailto:jimmoss@cox.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 6:52 PM
To: Steele, Lea
Cc: JimMoss@cox.net


Subject: RE: Treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

I have watched the RAC with pathological obsession since the day you all started.  I've been waiting for this report since 1994.  It never came  because the "others" panels before the RAC could not manage to open up to  all the science, and at the same time, maintain rigor.  This report is now  "the source" and I am very pleased with most of it.  I'm sure you sacrificed a lot to do this right, and I hope you get well deserved credit.

I did download the report right away, and have started to do the "real read".

 

So far I have seen only one thing I disagree on.  Page 168 (I think) states:

"Investigators who first identified synergistic effects of combined exposure to  PB and pesticides hypothesized that the increased toxicity observed was due, in  part, to competitive alterations in the capacity for liver and plasma  hydrolyzing enzymes to effectively neutralize the chemicals.16,17"

This is wrong.  I "first identified synergistic effects of combined exposure to  PB and pesticides", not the authors of ref 16 and 17.  I have an Abou-Donia  recording on my web page that has him saying "we confirmed Dr. Moss' results". Two U.S. Senators were sitting there (Rockefeller and Simpson).

There is no wiggle room on who was first.  This is a clip of the principal author stating that he confirmed my findings.  I have the whole meeting tape, conducted by Sens. Rockefeller and Simpson.

 

http://members.cox.net/jimmoss/Duke-Clip-02.mpg

 

Another way to confirm priority of this is to ask the authors, or Rockefeller.

 

This is not trivial.  The originator of the synergism findings (me) hypothesized different mechanisms for the interactions, and confidently extrapolated that to mammals.  Those who have since, and will, follow up on the interaction research, know nothing about my views on these interactions.  There is a universe of difference  between the understanding of the creator of a discovery, and those who duplicate it,  and there may be a universe of difference in the direction of future research, depending on which path is followed.  The bottom line is that most people do not know that PB synergism was discovered on German cockroaches, and that those mechanisms probably lead to the understanding of why it translates to mammals, probably veterans, and probably to the population.

 

Your report is a beautiful work, and very helpful, but if there is a way, I'd like this important historical record to be correct on the above points.

Thanks for all you have done,

Jin Moss
Gainesville
Florida


http://members.cox.net/jimmoss/index.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: Steele, Lea [mailto:Lea.Steele@va.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 1:02 PM
To: James I Moss
Cc: Steele, Lea
Subject: RE: Treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Jim,
I'm checking emails from DC, but it sounds like you didn't see that we released a big report on GWI this week.  Did you see it, and the news stories?  Or are you just waiting to comment until after you read it?

In case you didn't see it, the full report is linked on our website: www.va.gov/rac-gwvi  A lot of the news coverage is still linked on Google news, and the stories hit the mark pretty well on the report contents. 

The report is long (>450 pages!).  I'll have a hard copy sent to you when I get back to my office. 

Will hope you find it all in order.  Your efforts on this have a prominent role in how it turned out.  

Many thanks, and best regards,  

Lea

 

-----Original Message-----
From: James I Moss [mailto:jimmoss@cox.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 6:22 AM
To: rac@bu.edu; 'Beatrice Golomb'; 'Binns, James Jr'; White, Roberta;
Steele, Lea
Subject: Treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Cytotherapy. 2008 Nov 15:1-8. [Epub ahead of print]

Treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients by autologous bone marrow-derived hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a 1-year follow-up.

Deda H, Inci M, Kurekci A, Sav A, Kay?han K, Ozgun E, Ustunsoy G, Kocabay S.


Department of Neurosurgery and Neurology, Akay Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.

 

Background Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal neurodegenerative disorder characterized by progressive loss of spinal cord and cortical motoneurons. Despite improved understanding of the mechanisms underlying ALS, in clinical practice the management of ALS remains essentially supportive and focused on symptom relief. However, over the past few years stem cell research has expanded greatly as a tool for developing potential new therapies for treating incurable neurodegenerative diseases. Methods Thirteen patients with sporadic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (SALS) were included in this study, and bone marrow (BM)-derived hematopoietic progenitor stem cells were used. We selected patients with bulbar involvement and severe loss of movement. Our aim was to put the stem cells into the end of the brain stem and at the beginning of the spinal cord because the blood-brain barrier is intact in ALS and this region was the most affected part in our patients. Under general anesthesia, a total laminectomy was performed at the C1-C2 level. Stem cells were injected to the anterior part of the spinal cord. Results During the follow-up of 1 year after stem cell implantation, nine patients became much better compared with their pre-operative status, confirmed by electro neuro myography (ENMG). One patient was stable without any decline or improvement in his status. Three patients died 1.5, 2 and 9 months, respectively, after stem cell therapy as a result of lung infection and myocardial infarction (MI). Discussion These results show that stem cell therapy is a safe, effective and promising treatment for ALS patients.

 

 

 

 

Back