Evidence of meeting #60 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 report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
As an Individual
I believe that there's real concern amongst the veteran population. Why we have this problem I don't know, but I'm convinced it's not related to depleted uranium.
Conservative
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
Okay.
On that point, you mentioned in your testimony—in fact, you stopped yourself at one point to say—that the next little section was based on hearsay, when you talked about some of the biologics or the organic phosphates. Because you're here as an expert, as a doctor in the area, I'd ask you to put aside hearsay or speculation and respond from your own research or your own background: have you seen any peer-reviewed studies that would attribute a cause to Gulf War syndrome or some of the symptoms that manifest themselves as a syndrome? Specifically, is there any peer-reviewed study that actually attributes a cause, as opposed to speculation?
As an Individual
No. About 99% of the attention has been on depleted uranium, and I haven't seen any studies that would indicate causation. I may have missed them, because I'm a radiobiologist and so tend to be more conscious of the radiobiological literature. In relation to this, then, the information I picked up, I picked up when I was a member of the Ministry of Defence review group. Things may have been published subsequently of which I'm unaware.
Conservative
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
Quickly and finally, you're a radiobiologist and an expert in toxicology, as you've said, and have studied that. Given the fact that there's now a lot of research on DU and other research on Gulf War syndrome, do you feel that—and this is related a little to Ms. Papillon's question—to address some of the symptoms, these real symptoms that our veterans are struggling with, it is best to try to focus on the appropriate treatment for them, as opposed to the root cause, which may never be attributable to one source?
As an Individual
Symptomatic treatment, palliative symptomatic treatment, yes, fair enough, but it would be really nice if we knew what caused it, because if you know the causation, then you can develop treatment regimes that are designed to stop the problem.
Perhaps she was referring mostly to treatment of the symptoms, but it's difficult. The symptoms are so varied: lassitude, inability to sleep, inability to concentrate, disparate weaknesses, muscle weaknesses, and disparate body pains. The spectrum of symptoms is very wide and is not even consistent between one individual and another. I don't know how you approach this, but I think we do need to find out what caused it. I'm pretty sure of that.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Peter Stoffer
Thank you, Mr. Priest.
Now we'll go on to Mr. Chicoine for four minutes, please.
NDP
Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC
Thank you.
Could you provide us with more details about your last conclusion?
When Dr. Morisset was here, he also seemed to say that it was very unlikely that uranium was the cause of the seemingly recurring health problems of our veterans from past wars. Actually, from one war to another, we see veterans with health problems and the symptoms are not exactly the same. But some symptoms come back anyway. Depleted uranium was also far down Dr. Morisset's list.
You also talked about organophosphates, which might be a more likely cause of health problems. What other possible causes can you think of?
As an Individual
Mr. Chairman, can I make a suggestion here? Rather than my trying to recall some of these things, would it be permissible for me to go away at some stage and then come back and answer your question in written form?
Could I actually go back and try to identify some of these specific things and provide the committee with a written response to that question? Would that be acceptable? Because it's to one side of my normal area of competence, I'm not too happy about officially saying things here, and I'd prefer to have the opportunity to go back, look at this properly, and give you a proper and thought-through response to that important question.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Peter Stoffer
Mr. Priest, that would be most welcome. Please take your time. At your convenience, any additional information you can provide us would be most helpful for all members of our committee.
Thank you.
NDP
Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC
I would also be very happy with an answer in writing. I think it is important to try to find other causes of those health problems.
I would imagine that, in light of the report, depleted uranium will not be completely ruled out as a possible cause of those problems, as Dr. Morisset mentioned as well.
According to your results, in light of all the studies that have been done, can we completely rule out depleted uranium as a cause? Is there still a small chance that it is the cause of veterans' health problems?
As an Individual
Politicians would like science to provide absolute answers. They do it all the time, whether on mad cow disease or whatever. The reality is that scientists look at the evidence available at the time, and they draw a conclusion from the evidence available at the time. All the evidence I have leads me to the conclusion that DU is not responsible. Am I excluding the possibility that something in the future may come up that would make me change my mind? I cannot completely exclude that possibility, but I think it's highly unlikely.
NDP
Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC
Thank you.
You dealt with everything I wanted to discuss.
Did you have another quick question to ask, Irene?
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
We're spending an inordinate amount of time in this committee looking at DU, and I'm beginning to feel that it's time that is not well spent, given what you Dr. Morisset have had to say. I would really like to look at something that is meaningful and pursue a study that has real relevance and impact in regard to veterans. From what you've said in regard to other toxins, I'm right back to feeling that we're spinning our wheels here.
As an Individual
One problem you might run up against, which we ran up against—and I have to be careful what I say sometimes—is that some of the operational issues in the Gulf are secret. In other words, you receive information, and they say that you can't talk about these agents because they're secret. They use them in order to prevent problems with agent X or Y, and if people knew that we had these anti-toxins and things like this, then they would become less effective. You do run up slightly against that sort of barrier.
I've never seen an exact description of what was given to the veterans in terms of prophylactic treatment or in terms of the way in which things behaved, so I'd have to be a bit careful. But I agree with you. If there's an ongoing concern, then it should be aimed at trying to find the things that are most likely to have caused the problem rather than spending an inordinate amount of time on the thing less likely to have caused the problem.
I guess there are some people who are quite happy that everybody's concentrating on depleted uranium. It's a cynical view, but true.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Peter Stoffer
Now we go on to the parliamentary secretary, Ms. Adams, for four minutes, please.
February 26th, 2013 / 10:10 a.m.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Thank you very much for appearing before us today.
As a refresher, it was actually opposition members' calls regarding the issue of depleted uranium that resulted in the Minister of Veterans Affairs establishing an independent scientific review committee tasked singularly with reviewing depleted uranium. At the time I recall very well many of the members who are present today raising concerns that the work we are doing is underwhelming, perhaps. I suppose that's what they're getting at. These were the very same people saying that there was some heinous, horrible thing going on that needed to be studied. So a proper methodology was developed. The minister struck an independent scientific review committee that examined all known literature on this subject. That report was tabled, made public. It was peer-reviewed by you and some others, and that is how you come to be here today, sir. I thank you for your work.
Can you tell me, was there unanimity amongst the reviewers of the report?
As an Individual
I don't know, because I didn't talk to the other reviewers.
As an Individual
So I can't answer that. I could have contacted my colleague at IRSN in France, but I didn't. Peer reviewers should never talk to each other; it completely skewers the process.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Absolutely. Thank you very much for pointing that out and putting that on the record.
Dr. Priest, in 2001 you authored a report entitled, “Toxicity of depleted uranium.” In that report you state:
Exposure to radiations emitted by uranium metal presents a negligible radiological hazard. Completely surrounding a worker with depleted uranium for 8 h a day for a year would not result in radiation doses that exceed the maximum annual occupational dose limit for radiation workers.
Is that true?
As an Individual
Yes. That's why it's used as a shielding material around some radiotherapy machines. It's light. You can shield with it better than with lead. It self-shields because you get gamma rays from the middle of the uranium. They never get to the edge of the uranium because it's shielding itself. You only get gamma rays coming out from the edges of the depleted uranium. So you don't get very high doses.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
That's why earlier today you mentioned that you would happily wear a watch that was made of uranium.
Conservative
Eve Adams Conservative Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
Except for it tarnishing....
Your research indicates that if uranium maintains indefinite contact with the skin that such a dose is not large enough to produce tissue damage. That's correct also?