Jump to content



Search



Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup

@  Tbird : (28 November 2014 - 11:03 AM) Thank You Britton That Means A Lot To Me!
@  arng11 : (26 November 2014 - 11:30 AM) Everyone Enjoy The Holidays And Be Safe.
@  eagle1012004 : (26 November 2014 - 10:10 AM) Have A Happy Thanksgiving All!!!
@  Tbird : (22 November 2014 - 04:54 PM) Tbird Accepted To 2015 Conference: V-Wise: Another Entrepreneurship Project Of The Whitman School Of Management Http://ow.ly/ej9Qg
@  Tbird : (22 November 2014 - 04:13 PM) Arng11 Thank You For Your Contribution To Our Funding Campaign.
@  britton : (22 November 2014 - 02:57 PM) Thank You Ms T For Starting This Web Site For All Veterans, You Helpd Me And My Family And I'll Be Forever Gratful To You & Hadit.com
@  Tbird : (22 November 2014 - 08:19 AM) Thank You All For Helping With The Funding The Site. It Is Really Helping!
@  Tbird : (22 November 2014 - 08:18 AM) Britton Pm Me And I. Can Check This Out For You
@  britton : (22 November 2014 - 06:44 AM) What Does ''you Missed Your Quota For Postives Votes Today'' Mean??
@  coriemboh : (19 November 2014 - 08:29 AM) Hold Time For Peggy Was Approximately 1 Minute. That Was 17 Minutes Ago. They Really Need To Change This Hold Music.
@  Tbird : (17 November 2014 - 02:42 PM) Stretch Thanks For The Extra Contribution To Our Fundraiser This Month.
@  maxwell18 : (16 November 2014 - 09:04 PM) I Still Have To Bitch About The Navy Hosp Cutting My Meds By 2/3 On My Norco. I Contacted Customer Service Or What Ever You Want To Call It Who In Turn Contacted The Navy Hosp Pensacola Commander Who In Turn Did Nothing. Thanks To All The People That Are Affair Of There Jobs And I Feel That Medical Malpractice Should Come Into Place. I Guess Just Do What Ever They Want To Because They Can, But Don't Give A Sh T For The Vets That Suppose To Being Supporting From All The Military  organizations. This Is Not The Way They Have Been Trained And Promised To Do. 
@  carlie : (16 November 2014 - 11:26 AM) Delayed Onset Tinnitus - Ref To Va Training Letter 10-028 - Link - Http://veteranclaims.wordpress.com/2014/05/06/single-Judge-Application-Va-Training-Letter-10-028-Delayed-Onset-Tinnitus/
@  carlie : (16 November 2014 - 11:03 AM) Here's A Good Tinnitus Link To Check Out From M21-1 Change Dated Jan 10,2014 - Http://veteranclaims.wordpress.com/tag/section-B-Duty-Military-Occupational-Specialty-Mos-Noise-Exposure-Listing-Fast-Letter-10-35-Tinnitus-Hearing-Loss-Vbms-Rating-Decision-Tools/
@  Asiadaug : (16 November 2014 - 02:08 AM) "rolled" Not Ruled! :)
@  Asiadaug : (16 November 2014 - 02:07 AM) Thanks. I Have Seen The Fast Ltr 10-35 And Have Seen Cases Where The Va Has Apparently Agreed That Tinnitus Can Have Delayed Onset. I Did Not In Looking Over The Fast Ltr See Where They Had Ruled 10-028 Into That. And, I Am Not Sure In The Vas Issuance Of ‘policy’ Type Letters How They Might Roll In Previous Instructions Into Newer Ones. Maybe There Is Some Intranet Traceability Capability? I Was Just Curious As There ‘appeared’ To Be Conspicuous Absence Of That 10-028. I Am Assuming 10-028 Was Written In 2010. But It May Be I Should Not Assume Anything.
@  carlie : (15 November 2014 - 05:56 PM) Asiadaug - You Might Be Looking For Fast Letter 10-35, Http://www.hadit.com/forums/topic/40962-Va-Fl-10-35/ Also Check Out This Link To Links For Delayed Onset Tinnitus - They All Refer Back To Fast Letter 10-35, Https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=Chrome-Instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=Utf-8#q=Tinnitus, Delayed Onset, Va Fast Letter
@  Tbird : (15 November 2014 - 07:50 AM) Asiadaug Searched All Over For Va Training Letter 10-028 But No Luck So Far.
@  Asiadaug : (15 November 2014 - 02:12 AM) Several Cases I've Run Across Mention Va Training Letter 10-028 With Apparent Discussion About Delayed Onset Of Tinnitus. I Have Been Unable To Locate That Trng Ltr. Any Suggestions?
@  Tbird : (12 November 2014 - 05:56 PM) Stretch Thanks For Contributing To Our Fundraising Campairg

Photo
- - - - -

"is Due To", "more Likely Than Not", "at Least As Likely As Not" What Do These Mean?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
5 replies to this topic

#1 Tbird

 
Tbird

    Founder HadIt.com established 1997

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 133 posts
 

Posted 15 December 2010 - 03:45 AM

"is due to" (100% sure)
"more likely than not" (greater than 50%)
"at least as likely as not" (equal to or greater than 50%)
"not at least as likely as not" (less than 50%)
"is not due to" (0%)

http://www.hadit.com...help_guide.html

#2 JHawks

 
JHawks

    E-5 Petty Officer 2nd Class

  • First Class Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 155 posts
 

Posted 15 December 2010 - 08:16 AM

I recently had a C&P where the examiner stated "is as likely as not 50/50"

What would the RO rater do with that?

#3 cooter

 
cooter

    E-8 Senior Chief Petty Officer

  • Senior Chief Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 967 posts
 

Posted 15 December 2010 - 06:51 PM

That would be a good plus with all the other evidence you have for your claim. Especially, when the rater see's that the examiner is one of thier own Dr.
Good Luck JHawks!


#4 acesup

 
acesup

    E-5 Petty Officer 2nd Class

  • First Class Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 108 posts
 

Posted 15 December 2010 - 10:52 PM

This is some great info, thanks for posting it.

The phrase that bothers me, and doesn't really seem to get enough attention, is that crap about "unable to opine without resorting to mere speculation". From what I'm gathering, that is a below-the-belt way for a sneaky C&P nurse to basically try and taint any opinions you have from actual medical professionals (not N.P. doctor wannabes). They seem to be trying to use it in the context that not just they, but any medical person could not offer an opinion in your favor based on any medical or historical facts.

Is there any official VA information on that "mere speculation" copout phrase?

Further, and even more exasperating, on my C&P report the N.P. uses the "mere speculation" statement for a number of conditions I am claiming, then each time she proceeds to give an opinion anyhow, just a negative one. So in fact, she is admitting she can't give a valid opinion, but she turns around and tries to shoot me down. Why should her "mere speculation" carry any probative weight whatsoever? At the point where a C&P N.P. says they can't give an opinion, the VA should tell them to just shut the heck up.

I have some great nexus letters from actual doctors. I hope they will be given more value than the rantings of a second-rate digital rectal examiner who hasn't enough confidence in her knowledge to actually offer a true opinion.

JHawks, everything I've seen tells me that when a C&P examiner gives you the "at least as likely as not" opinion, you're probably very likely to see SC for that condition. Best of luck!

#5 Vync

 
Vync

    E-9 Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Master Chief Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1688 posts
 

Posted 16 December 2010 - 08:08 AM

acesup,
In my opinion, "unable to opine without resorting to mere speculation" is inserted by the examiner so they do not have to spend any more time on your case. Instead, they go to lunch, leave for the day, or whatever. In the case of your NP, they probably were heading to the movies.

Your right about probative weight. The RO swears up and down by having the correct jargon (per T-bird's first post). They will not accept a private opinion labeled 'probably", which in all right should mean 50/50 and they treat it negatively. Regarding "mere speculation", should it also mean 50/50? I had one claim where I was given "mere speculation", but the RO awarded SC based on relative equipoise and a lot of supporting evidence.

#6 carlie

 
carlie

    Moderator/Admin/HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22280 posts
 

Posted 16 December 2010 - 11:52 AM

Further, and even more exasperating, on my C&P report the N.P. uses the "mere speculation" statement for a number of conditions I am claiming, then each time she proceeds to give an opinion anyhow, just a negative one. So in fact, she is admitting she can't give a valid opinion, but she turns around and tries to shoot me down. Why should her "mere speculation" carry any probative weight whatsoever? At the point where a C&P N.P. says they can't give an opinion, the VA should tell them to just shut the heck up.

I have some great nexus letters from actual doctors. I hope they will be given more value than the rantings of a second-rate digital rectal examiner who hasn't enough confidence in her knowledge to actually offer a true opinion.


acesup,

The C&P report by the N.P., will more likely than not be signed off on
by a MD.

When the decision maker applies weight to the evidence, hopefully they will pay attention
to the "great nexus letters from actual doctors" realize this puts the medical evidence in
relative equipoise and apply the BOD, in your favor.