Title The Tactical–Commercial Distinction: 2,4,5-T, TCDD, and the Recognition of War-Related Health Harm in the Panama Canal Zone
Author(s) Donna Tornoe
Affiliation Public Health Advocate, Journalist, Author, and Community Researcher.
Country United States of America
Contribution type case study; policy and responsibility analysis; community-based evidence
Thematic area • Theory, Methodology, and Evidence• War and Health
Conference framework connection • Analytical Track AT-01 — provisional title to be defined• Analytical Track AT-02 — provisional title to be defined• Analytical Track AT-03 — provisional title to be defined• Analytical Track AT-04 — provisional title to be defined• Analytical Track AT-05 — provisional title to be defined• Analytical Track AT-06 — provisional title to be defined• Analytical Track AT-07 — provisional title to be defined
Abstract This paper examines the Panama Canal Zone as an underrecognized case of potential military-related herbicide exposure and delayed health recognition among United States veterans. The analysis focuses on 2,4,5-T and its associated contaminant 2,3,7,8-TCDD, a highly persistent dioxin linked to the manufacture of phenoxy herbicides. Rather than treating the distinction between “tactical” and “commercial” herbicides as a purely administrative category, the paper asks how this distinction has shaped the interpretation of fragmented evidence concerning contamination, exposure pathways, and veterans’ health claims.The Panama Canal Zone provides an important case for studying war-related environmental health beyond the conventional Vietnam-centered frame of Agent Orange. Herbicides used, stored, transported, or applied on and around military installations have created exposure opportunities that were not easily recognized within existing administrative classifications. This paper does not argue that classification alone proves exposure or disease causation. Instead, it examines how classification systems influence what evidence is collected, preserved, connected, or dismissed when toxic harm is delayed, dispersed, and difficult to document.Using a historical-documentary and conceptual approach, the paper brings together toxicological knowledge, military and herbicide-use documentation, veterans’ exposure claims, and institutional criteria for recognizing exposure-related health harm. The analysis is organized around an evidence map that includes chemical evidence, administrative categories, geographic context, exposure pathways, health outcomes, and institutional response. This framework makes it possible to evaluate incomplete but converging evidence without reducing the case either to unsupported certainty or to dismissal because records are fragmented.The paper argues that the tactical/commercial distinction may obscure toxicological and historical continuities relevant to veterans’ health. In the Panama Canal Zone case, the problem is not only whether a particular substance was officially categorized as “tactical” or “commercial,” but whether existing categories adequately capture the realities of military-related contamination, long-term exposure, latency, and institutional responsibility. The contribution of the paper is twofold: first, it presents the Panama Canal Zone as a significant case for War and Health research; second, it proposes a method for reconstructing fragmented evidence in cases where exposure is historically plausible, toxicologically significant, but administratively difficult to recognize.
Key points ● The Panama Canal Zone is an underrecognized case for studying potential military-related herbicide exposure and delayed health recognition among veterans.● The tactical/commercial herbicide distinction may obscure exposure pathways that are relevant to toxicological assessment and public health responsibility.● Fragmented historical, toxicological, geographic, and institutional evidence requires an integrated framework rather than dismissal based on incomplete records alone.
Keywords Panama Canal Zone; veterans’ health claims; 2,4,5-T; TCDD; Agent Orange; herbicide exposure; war-related contamination; military pollution; toxicology; exposure pathways; institutional responsibility
Main discussion question How should scientific and institutional frameworks evaluate potential war-related herbicide exposure and delayed health harm when administrative distinctions between “tactical” and “commercial” herbicides obscure toxicological continuities and exposure pathways, and the surviving evidence is fragmented but convergent?
OJS publication link https://pollution-diseases-ojs.org/index.php/pd/article/view/33
Note. Analytical TracksIn addition to the main thematic areas, the conference programme will include several cross-cutting analytical tracks. These tracks will be defined during the preparation of the programme, based on the submitted abstracts and the emerging links between presentations.At the preliminary stage, abstracts may be assigned to provisional analytical tracks marked as AT-01 to AT-07. Final track titles will be announced after the Scientific Committee has reviewed the submitted materials.