Agent Orange During The Vietnam War

War is an undeniably complex subject and although most people know how they feel about the Vietnam War, it is rare for us to agree on exactly what was right and wrong. Despite this, we have the tendency to support facts, and the fact in this case is that Agent Orange had detrimental effects wherever it was spread. Agent Orange is a herbicide that was used by the United States Military during the Vietnam war, it is made up of equal parts 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Its purpose was to destroy forests and enemy crops during the war (Agent Orange, 2015). Although this substance was already considered an environmental hazard, it was later found that the manufacturing of Agent Orange resulted in a dioxin byproduct. When exposed to dioxins, humans experience
a number of negative effects, including reproductive, developmental, immune system, and hormone problems. In addition, dioxins are linked to a number of cancers (World Health Organization, 2016). This is a global issue because multiple countries have been impacted by Agent Orange and the problems it created are long lasting.
The Science
The dioxin found in Agent Orange is known as TCDD or 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.
It is produced during the manufacture of trichlorophenol into herbicides such as 2,4,5-T (Agent Orange, 2015). Although Agent Orange use was originally very restricted, its use grew as the war continued (Casten and Ford-Martin, 2011). To the left there is a picture of a plane spraying Agent Orange (Agent Orange, 2015). Although all of us encounter dioxins in our daily lives in the form of foods (such as fish), we are not around large amounts of dioxins in the way the soldiers and citizens were. Exposure to Agent Orange is more significant than exposure to the other 419 dioxin related compounds because Agent Orange contains TCDD which is the most toxic, and therefore has more harsh effects on living organisms (World Health Organization, 2016). Contamination was first seen in surface water as well as soil and the surface of plants (Banout, 2014). Due to this, animals that are low on the food chain are exposed to Agent Orange. The contaminant began to accumulate in the tissues of the animals through the process of bioaccumulation. In fact, several studies have shown links between environmental exposure and high levels of dioxins in animals in both terrestrial and aquatic habitats. As seen in the image to the right (Biomagnification, Bioaccumulation, and Research Motivation, 2015). This is problematic because if the surfaces of common plants are exposed from runoff or soil contamination
and humans may be exposed This consumption could start with a patch of grass, eaten by an insect, which is then eaten by a chicken. When the chicken is consumed by humans, they receive high concentrations of the dioxin due to the process of biomagnification (Banout, 2014). Once dioxins accumulate in the body, it is hard to get rid of them because they tend to have a half life of about seven years (Agent Orange Association of Canada Inc., 2009.) Higher than normal concentrations of dioxins have negative impacts; for example, when humans are exposed to TCDD they may experience hormone imbalances because dioxins are considered endocrine disruptors. In addition, dioxins have also classified as human carcinogens since 1997 because exposure can result in cancer (Agent Orange Association of Canada Inc., 2009). Dioxins are also considered mutagens and teratogens because they bind to the intracellular receptors of the nuclei in our cells. Once they get into the nucleus of the cell the damage the DNA which can lead to cancer or birth defects. According to the Agent Orange Association of Canada, “it could also alter the DNA's instructions to make normal enzymes, hormones, and other proteins, which could lead to any of a number of diseases” (2009). There was not major concern for the effects of Agent Orange until 1969 when an acute study of mice populations found that the herbicide resulted in birth defects. During this time, the United States operated under the innocent-until-proven-guilty principle which meant that Agent orange was not thought to be dangerous until we had proof; the chemical was still used until 1985 (Agent Orange, 2015). According to an article from the Environmental Encyclopedia, Agent Orange had such widespread effects that “There is growing speculation that nearly everyone who was in Vietnam was eventually exposed to some degree—far less a possibility for those stationed in urban centers or on the waters” (Casten and Ford-Martin, 2011). Over 50 years later, citizens of Vietnam are still seeing the effects, with an estimated three million people who are currently affected by the military tactic (Cohn and Mirer, 2013).
Political Viewpoints
The United States government was slow to react to the crisis that Agent Orange caused. Veterans had to file law suits just to receive medical treatment. People and environments worldwide were affected, but nowhere took as much of a hit as Vietnam and the United States government did not do enough to make up for this destruction. The long term poisoning of soil in Vietnam has resulted in what are known as “hot spots” and it can be argued that by using these chemicals on civilian populations, the United States violated the agreed upon protocols of war (Cohn and Mirer, 2013). Overal,l United States troops sprayed about 20 million gallons of herbicides including Agent Orange over almost 10 years and 4 million acres of land (Agent orange, 2015). Not only did the United States ignore the detrimental effects of the chemicals they had sprayed, they also took a long time to provide compensation and what they have done is still not enough. The United States Ambassador to Vietnam, David Shear, has said, "Agent Orange remains among the most sensitive issues in U.S.-Vietnam relations” (MacLed, 2012). Due to the amounts and concentrations of the chemicals sprayed, it is not hard to believe that there is still some around. Parents have not only suffered numerous medical issues but they have seen birth defects and the same issues being passed down to their children. It was not until 2007 the the United States finally reached an agreement with Vietnam and began helping them clean up the dioxin in their environment (Agent Orange, 2015).
The United States government and the companies producing Agent Orange may not have been aware of its effects during production or use. Even after use of the chemical was stopped, more research needed to be done before it was clear exactly what the affects have been. After the effects were determined the United States government put a lot of resources into repairing the damage that was done. Although work was done to help clean up Agent Orange, there were also other issues to address. The United States started an 1.6 million dollar effort to help clear bombs and landmines from the Vietnam area ( MacLeod, 2012). In addition, and environmental cleanup was started in 2007 and dangerous chemicals such as Agent Orange are no longer used (Agent Orange, 2015). According to one article “The U.S. Congress has appropriated $63 million to help Vietnam locate spots where Agent Orange was used, assess environmental effects and help with cleanup” (MacLeod, 2012). It is clear that despite confusing circumstances and tension between countries the United States did enough to help with the problem Vietnam faced as a result of herbicide spraying during the war. It is clear that the usage of Agent Orange had harsh and unintended consequences.
If the United States was not using the innocent-until-proven-guilty principle the entire situation could have been prevented or at least if more research had gone into the effects of Agent Orange during its use we could have decreased the amount used. Although the politics of war and international relations are complex, it seems obvious to me that it is the United States responsibility to repair the chemical damage done to both the people and environments of Vietnam. In the future, I think it is vital that we do not make this mistake and that any issues that do arise are handled quickly. In saying that, it is easy to say what we should have done and a lot harder to know what to do at the time. The takeaway from this disaster is that chemicals should be tested before use, especially before widespread use, and especially if they contain any ingredients that could potentially harm humans or our
ecosystems.