Veterans Affairs Committee on March 19th, 2013

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

We were kind of taken aside. When I arrived in Saudi Arabia we amalgamated with the British because I was in a little group and the Brits had already inoculated their people. From nurse to nurse we discussed the fact that these are ordered, and by the way, it's hush-hush, a secret, but it's anthrax. It's botulinum toxoid. It's the plague. You take it, you shut up, and it's not documented. Then you turn around and go and inoculate your group and you don't tell anyone what you're giving them.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

You mentioned that VAC challenges every doctor willing to discuss or identify what has happened to you and willing to treat you.

Could you explain what you meant by that and the details surrounding that challenge? What is the motivation for it as you understand it?

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

Madam, if you went on a trip healthy and you came back sick wouldn't you want to know what happened and where it happened? Is it life threatening? Is it a bug that's going to leave in 10 days? It's human nature.

When someone who is in the medical system gets ill, the first thing you want to know is what happened. That is just the way I am. Of course, I researched and analyzed my symptoms. Through my work I was helping other veterans find doctors because when you leave DND you're on your own. As the general said, once that uniform is off.... It took me eight months to get a GP and that was thanks to my mother.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

You've obviously kept in touch with a number of your comrades, a number of veterans. You've also described some of the symptoms that you experienced while you were in the Gulf. I'd like to know what your day-to-day life is like at this moment.

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

It's a life of existence. The joie de vivre is gone. It's trying to get through each day. I have multiple various chronic illnesses: chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, multiple chemical sensitivity—very serious. I had back surgery when I was in the military in 1994, and it went wrong. They treated me as a malingerer, that it was all in my head and that I was just a Gulf War whiner. They didn't treat me for a month. I turned out to have severe osteomyelitis of the spine, of the psoas muscle. It went into the spine. It went everywhere. I was in the hospital for four months. My mother thought I was going to die.

Over and above that, when I told you I had gynecological bleeding during the Gulf War, it continued really badly after I came back to Canada to the point where I had to have blood transfusions. That's how much I was bleeding. Then I was told, “You're cutting your veins. You're just falsifying the blood results.” How dare they? How dare you guys do this? We're sent over healthy and we come back ill. Because I was already so ill in the Gulf, my immune system was shot. I couldn't fight infection. I couldn't fight any of these things any more.

Now I've got gut problems, really bad GI, as they say in the report, these presumptive illnesses that the Americans have come forth with, severe chronic pain, severe chronic fatigue. It's very hard for me to concentrate. You should see my apartment. In just trying to organize for this, it looks like a battlefield. I can't stay focused. The brain is in a fog all the time. It's photophobia. I can't drive at night. My eyes can't handle it any more—

[Marie Richard]

—or go over bridges.

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

—or go over bridges. I have these weird phobias I never had before. It's brain damage from the exposures.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peter Stoffer]

Ms. Richard, thank you very much.

We'll now finish our questioning for this round with the parliamentary secretary, Eve Adams.

We have another witness coming up very shortly.

Ms. Adams.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Thanks very much, Ms. Richard, for preparing for this and coming. I know it would take a great deal of work. We're very happy you were able to join us, and that your mom and your brother are here. Every time we send members of the armed forces to fight, the family also endures the angst. The service of our veterans would not have been possible without the assistance and the love of the families, so thank you all for coming.

I know we're pressed for time. Ms. Richard, I don't know if you've had an opportunity to review the study. Veterans Affairs commissioned an independent scientific committee to examine depleted uranium. That study was then peer reviewed and it came up with seven conclusions. If I were to read each of the seven conclusions to you, and I apologize for being so quick, could you please tell me if you agree with that conclusion or if you disagree?

The first conclusion of the study is:

Depleted uranium (DU) is potentially harmful to human health by virtue of its chemical and radiological effects.

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

Absolutely.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

The second conclusion of this study is:

Within a military setting, the highest risk of exposure to depleted uranium is in those who were: in, on or near vehicles hit with friendly fire; entering or near these burning vehicles; near fires involving DU munitions; salvaging damaged vehicles; or involved in clean up operations of contaminated sites.

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

Absolutely, and medical staff.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

The third conclusion is:

It is unlikely that Canadian soldiers have been exposed to levels of depleted uranium which could be harmful to their health.

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

That's false.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

The fourth conclusion is:

There is no consistent evidence from military cohort studies of adverse health effects that could be attributed to depleted uranium.

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

I don't agree with the cohort study, so I will disagree.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Which one don't you agree with?

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

You're catching me off guard here, but for instance....

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

I don't mean to put you on the spot. You're most welcome to send it in afterwards. I don't mean to put you on the spot.

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

Could the clerk remind me of the question?

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

No problem.

Number five is:

There is no strong evidence of adverse health effects reported in larger civilian studies with longer follow-up periods in populations with increased exposure to uranium (e.g. uranium production and fabrication workers).

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

I think that's false.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Are you aware of strong evidence of adverse health effects reported in larger civilian studies?

[Lt (N) Louise Richard]

There have been quite a number of them in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Iraq, with birth defects, the 800% rise in cancers. It's been very documented.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Number six is:

Our finding that exposure to uranium is not associated with a large or frequent health effect is in agreement with the conclusions of other expert bodies.