Evidence of meeting #59 for Veterans Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was studies.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
We're saying that the levels at which they might have been exposed, based on the likelihood—
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
Yes, presumptive.
The effect—okay, those are linked, and I have to point it out. The level at which they may have been exposed would not have led to adverse health effects. This is what we're saying.
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River, BC
Right.
Again, just to reaffirm what I started off, if this is one reason that we can eliminate off the list, this is what this is serving to do at the end of the day. It's not to say they're not having health issues and we need to address those, but at least this is eliminated and we can move on and find out what else is wrong.
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
You're entirely correct, and as long as a veteran has these symptoms and feels this is a cause, you'll never be able to treat the person properly. That's basically what you said.
Conservative
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Peter Stoffer
Thank you, Mr. Zimmer.
That concludes round one, and now we'll go on to round two, which is a four-minute round. We'll start with Ms. Mathyssen please.
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Again thank you, Dr. Morisset. I have a number of questions and I'll try to be succinct.
We've talked extensively about the belief that there's a connection between DU and cancer, but it seems to me that the most serious effects that we should be concerned about are the very ones that are connected to the chronic symptom-based illnesses because they are very real. You indicated it was very hard to pinpoint a cause when we're looking at these symptoms, these realities, of former CF personnel.
To what degree is their treatment going to be undertaken by the military? I ask this question because you said that the CF health system is better than the civilian system. Even if they retire and leave the service, are they going to be looked after by Canadian Forces personnel?
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
Canada does not have the same system as the U.S., which is their extensive network of veterans hospitals, essentially treatment centres, and so on. When a soldier leaves the forces and is officially known as a veteran, then he's treated in the civilian health sector. We do not have that kind of comprehensive health care system that looks after the veterans in the same way as the Americans have.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
So if these symptoms persist, the veteran cannot forward look to long-term care in a veteran facility. That individual is cut off.
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
Certain facilities exist, and I don't know what is offered. The one thing is they do not have access to the health care system of the Canadian Forces, so they seek service from civilian physicians.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
In the report you said there needed to be better physician training in this connection. I worry about those veterans, because for them this reality—the headaches, the fatigue, the sleep disturbances—is very real. It seems to me that perhaps we're chasing the wrong thing here and we need to reconsider what we do for these veterans and how we ensure that their service is being respected in terms of how they're treated even after they retire.
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
The doctor in me will respond. I agree with you completely. Canada has a good health care system. We all say that and we pat ourselves on the back. But I think one of the problems is that when it comes to veterans who have problems that are unique to veterans, not necessarily unique, and I correct myself because some of those symptoms, these illnesses, PTSD and so on, are not unique to the military. You see all these things in the civilian sector, but a civilian population is not necessarily tuned to the reality of what kind of life the soldier may have had. The soldier has had a health care system that has looked after him, but when he leaves and becomes a veteran in a civilian world, it's not the same. Whether improvements could be made to that is the bottom line of your question. Probably yes.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Peter Stoffer
Thank you, Ms. Mathyssen.
Thank you, sir.
Now we'll go to Mr. O'Toole, please, for four minutes.
Conservative
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Dr. Morisset.
Part of the challenge of going last is that a number of my colleagues covered some of the issues. As Mr. Zimmer said, I see the report as helpful in breaking down two aspects. One, is it possible CF members were exposed? Two, what are generally the impacts of DU?
I have a question on both. On the Doha fire, on page 11 you looked at both fire response and the effect of the smoke plume, and from looking at all of those groups in the total possible effect it was your conclusion that it was unlikely there was any exposure near a level that could cause an impact on a soldier. Is that correct?
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
Yes.
The Doha fire was investigated very thoroughly by the Americans. It was their fire and it was their DU weapons and they had many more troops there. They did a very comprehensive review. I read that report three or four times. What they determined based on their live fire and all of these previous studies, the aerosolization studies as they call them, on how depleted uranium forms small particles and how they get into the air.... This is an aerosolization study. That formed the basis of their investigation and it was they who concluded that the level of exposure to the Canadian soldiers was x. It was not just the Canadian soldiers, it was anyone who may have been downwind of that plume. That level, to put it in perspective, was less than one millisievert.
One millisievert is the level that is considered to be absolutely safe and tolerable by the entire population of the world. That's the World Health Organization, ICRP, all of these organizations that have nothing to do but to make sure that they set proper levels for radiation with respect to the health of the populations. So it's less than one.
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
It's on that basis that we say it was level three. There was some exposure likely, sure. There was fire there, there were particles, they were more or less downwind. They may have had some.
Conservative
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
I'm conscious of time. Certainly, as several of my colleagues on the committee have mentioned, we do have veterans who served our country with distinction but, as Madame Papillon described it, have persistent symptoms. A lot have idiopathic illnesses, illnesses that essentially can't be attributed. It's been suggested by Mr. Casey and Mr. Zimmer that this report allows us to look at new avenues of what possibly could be causing these symptoms.
Do you find that's a conclusion you can draw from this study that given the unlikelihood of exposure, and the unlikelihood of DU presence with any of our soldiers, we should be exploring other possible causes of some of these idiopathic illnesses?
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
You should track away from DU for sure.
I'll answer as a doctor. If I had a patient who had come to see me and he had the symptoms that we're describing as chronic multi-symptoms and so on, and said, “Doctor, I'm convinced that it's depleted uranium”, and I would have read this report and I knew what I know now, my obligation to that soldier would be to say, “It's not that. Let's look at some other cause. Maybe we won't find that cause, but let's look at a form of treatment that will help you. It's not guaranteed, but it's where you have the best chance of being treated.” This is that whole question of the various treatment modalities for the chronic multi-symptom illness. That has been reviewed very recently.
I mentioned earlier that a report has just been released by the Institute of Medicine in the United States that is seminal, and I would suggest that you read it, the summaries at least. It basically states in black and white that yes, these soldiers have these symptoms, and yes it's a recognizable entity, but no, we don't know the cause, and maybe we'll never find the cause even, although we have studied it to death. This is what this report says in essence.
It also says that there are various treatments that can be given that have a chance of helping these soldiers. That to me is what we should be doing, providing the proper treatment for our veterans. It's that simple.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Peter Stoffer
Thank you, Dr. Morisset.
For the final round, we have Mr. Chicoine for four minutes.
NDP
Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have one or two questions. Afterwards, if I have any time left, I will share it with Ms. Papillon.
I have a question on technology, in response to Mr. Lobb. I think you mentioned a little earlier that nothing can measure the degree of exposure to depleted uranium or radiation.
Chairman of the Committee, Scientific Advisory Committee on Veterans’ Health
I have to interrupt you. Perhaps you might want to put your question another way.
It is not possible for an individual to say that at such and such an exact moment and in such and such an exact place, he was exposed to a precise amount of depleted uranium or cadmium.