Jump to content



Search



Shoutbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup
@  carlie : (30 August 2014 - 06:27 PM) Vet211060 - I Guess They're Not That Shameful After All : - ) Congrats On Some Positive Adjudication
@  vet201060 : (30 August 2014 - 04:24 PM) Dav Sent Letter Saying I Am 100% Effective Oct 2013
@  MarkInTexas : (30 August 2014 - 12:35 PM) Wish There Was A "like" Button For Some Of These Comments.......
@  MarkInTexas : (30 August 2014 - 12:26 PM) Amen To That!
@  vet201060 : (28 August 2014 - 09:55 PM) Va Is So Shameful!!
@  artlouis : (27 August 2014 - 11:36 AM) Code 7019
@  vet201060 : (26 August 2014 - 11:41 PM) Damn Post It Notes
@  vet201060 : (26 August 2014 - 11:41 PM) True That
@  Asiadaug : (26 August 2014 - 07:46 PM) I Have Yet To Deal With Any Piece Of Va That Isn't A Dysfunctional Mess...ebenefits, Claim Filing, Billing...and To Think Our Tax Dollars Are Used To Perpetuate That Calamity!
@  carlie : (26 August 2014 - 05:39 PM) notorious kelly - loved your shout ! ! !
@  GlassRose1500 : (26 August 2014 - 03:40 PM) Would Someone Add Smc Housbound Plus Smc A&a Regular And One Smc K For Me? I Can't Seem To Do That Math!
@  Notorious Kelly : (26 August 2014 - 03:12 PM) Ebenefits Is Not A Thermometer In The Rectum Of Your Claim; It Is A Post-It Note That May Or Not Be Updated Or Accurate. Try Not To Obsess ;)
@  mcassidy : (26 August 2014 - 01:25 PM) Osa
@  Jaluluah11B : (26 August 2014 - 10:05 AM) My Reconsideration Finally Showed Up On Ebenefits As A New Claim.  gathering Evidence.  [font=Arial][size=3]Automated 5103 Notice Response Needed. [/size][/font]
@  vet201060 : (26 August 2014 - 10:00 AM) Went From Pending Decision Approval To Review Of Evidence Today, I Need To Stop Looking At It. Drives You Crazy Waiting
@  GlassRose1500 : (25 August 2014 - 09:30 PM) @coriemboh I Get My Best Claim Advice Here, But My Dav Guy Gets The Best Intel Once The Claim Is Filed
@  coriemboh : (25 August 2014 - 08:57 PM) The Average Processing Time Is 9 Months More Or Less. Every Time I Call The 800#, I Get A Different Answer. Goe, Roe....make Up Your Mind!
@  coriemboh : (25 August 2014 - 08:56 PM) I Just Want To Know Ballpark Figure Of How Much Longer My Claim Will Take. The Bills Are Piling Up. Adds To My Anxiety And Depression. Sure Wish I Could Tell Bill Collectors The Same Things Va Tells Me!
@  coriemboh : (25 August 2014 - 08:54 PM) @glassrose1500-No, I Don't. I Put In For Representation A Few Days Ago, But I'm Sure That End Won't Pan Out Until The Claim Is Closed.
@  GlassRose1500 : (25 August 2014 - 12:11 PM) Would Appreciate Feedback On My Smc Draft - Posted In The Smc Section! Tkx!

Photo
- - - - -

At A Loss


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

#1 kirk192

 
kirk192

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 12 posts
 

Posted 12 August 2012 - 01:03 PM

7 years ago I was diagnosed with a brain tumor. I was 9 years out of service, however, there where 3 other men from my Team of 40 with the same afliction. One has since passed. I filed my claim in March of 07.

It was denied 6 months later. I apealed and it was again denied. I filed suit in the court of veterans appeals and it was remanded with specific instructions to have me undergo another C&P exam. The BVA said that the "respectfully disagree" with the court order and simply denied the claim. However, they gave me specific reasons as to why the claim was denied. I filed suit again, and, again it was remanded. I have since submitted medical information that contridicts thier admitted lay opinions as to why my claim was denied. First submission was directly to the VA RO, I even got them to sign confirmation of receipt. That information was "lost" with no explination. I then sent it all myself with signature confirmation. It was received.

I called the AMC several weeks later and they told me that they where waiting for my file from my Regional office. I went to my regional office and they told me my file was at the AMC. I went to the DAV and they said that my file was at AMC and refused to call and verify. Have called my Senator and gotten the standard "we are looking into it".

Anyone have some suggestions?

Advertise Here

 

#2 MarkInTexas

 
MarkInTexas

    E-5 Petty Officer 2nd Class

  • First Class Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 180 posts
 

Posted 12 August 2012 - 04:55 PM

Maybe use the VONAPP application in eBenefits? I have been "doubling" my efforts by mailing copies and also sending the same information online. eBenefits tends to "log" the information as received much more often than they do my mailed-in information.

Just a thought.

Mark

#3 qwiksting

 
qwiksting

    E-5 Petty Officer 2nd Class

  • Chief Petty Officers
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 223 posts
 

Posted 12 August 2012 - 05:09 PM

Not going off topic, but do you have a number to the AMC?

#4 deanbrt

 
deanbrt

    E-8 Senior Chief Petty Officer

  • Senior Chief Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 769 posts
 

Posted 12 August 2012 - 06:25 PM

Get rid of DAV and go with the American Legion to start.

Or call Amy Kretkowski at the following...

http://hoeferlaw.com/

#5 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28634 posts
 

Posted 13 August 2012 - 08:43 AM

" I was 9 years out of service, however, there where 3 other men from my Team of 40 with the same afliction. One has since passed."


That is way beyond a mere coincidence.


What was your MOS and possible nexus?

Have they too filed for VA comp?


Reason I ask- about 2 years ago a few male vets found they had all developed breast cancers, and began to contact each other. The only common grounds they had was that they were all stationed at Camp LeJuene many years ago.

http://www.tampabay....icle1013675.ece

President Obama recently signed the LeJeune Legislation and VA has already Sced one vet due to the bad water situation at Camp LeJeune.

My point It is very unusual for 1O% ,as in your case, of a team to develop the same disability,such as these Camp LeJeune vets did.



Did you and your team come into exposure to non ionizing or electromagnetic radiation?

Or any chemical that could potentially have caused the tumors?

Is this a glioblastoma tumor?

These types of claims can succeed with a strong inservice nexus to something that could cause the tumor, with no other know etiology, and with a strong Independent Medical Opinion.

“The medical opinion provided by Dr. S.L., however, is not speculative. This opinion states that, on an at least as likely as not basis, the Veteran's exposure to electromagnetic radiation led to his development of a cerebral meningioma. The examiner discussed pertinent medical and family history and the opinion is supported by adequate rationale. As such, it is considered probative. “

http://www.va.gov/ve...es1/1108804.txt



“However, the Board finds that the issue of whether radiation
exposure caused the Veteran's brain tumor need not be reached
because the evidence indicates that the Veteran's brain tumor
onset during his service. Dr. R.J.S., a physician who treated
the Veteran for his tumor, noted that the type of tumor that the
Veteran had was slow growing and he asserted that "[t]he
malignant transformation took place at least 10 to 15 years prior
to diagnosis." Since the Veteran's glioblastoma was diagnosed
only approximately 3.5 years after his service, this put the
onset of the malignant transformation squarely within the
Veteran's period of active naval service. Dr. R.J.S.'s opinion
that the malignant transformation that led to the Veteran's fatal
brain tumor took place during the Veteran's service was not
refuted by any evidence of record. Dr. R.J.S.'s opinion was
corroborated by that of Dr. P.W., another of the Veteran's
treating physicians, who also noted that the Veteran's tumor was
of a slow growing type and that it was "quite possible" that
the tumor developed during the Veteran's service but remained
asymptomatic until after he left the Navy. A third physician,
Dr. J.A.D., also opined that it was "not uncommon for these
tumors to be present for many years at a lower grade" only to
convert to a more malignant grade at a later time, such as after
continued exposure to external agents damaging to DNA. “

ORDER

Service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is
granted.

http://www.va.gov/ve...es1/1100285.txt

Edited by Berta, 13 August 2012 - 08:46 AM.


#6 Pete53

 
Pete53

    Moderator/HadIt.com Elder

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21810 posts
 

Posted 13 August 2012 - 04:02 PM

Good luck welcome to Hadit

#7 midnight340

 
midnight340

    E-5 Petty Officer 2nd Class

  • First Class Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 120 posts
 

Posted 13 August 2012 - 04:34 PM

You are at the right place, listen to the folks here and keep posting everything!

Do not give up, do not ease up on this. You deserve better than the treatment so far. Hang in there, and keep at it. Good luck.

#8 broncovet

 
broncovet

    E-9 Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Master Chief Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3618 posts
 

Posted 14 August 2012 - 08:07 PM

Kirk posted:

" I filed suit in the court of veterans appeals and it was remanded with specific instructions to have me undergo another C&P exam. The BVA said that the "respectfully disagree" with the court order and simply denied the claim. "


Are you kidding? This is like the BVA giving their boss the middle finger.


I think you should consider filing a "Writ of Mandamus" compelling the BVA to comply fully with the Court of Veterans claims. The BVA isnt allowed
to "disagree" with the Court of Veterans claims, their job is simply to carry out the CAVC orders.

Compliance with the CAVC orders is not voluntary. Its mandantory. Only the Federal court, or an en banc decision can subsume a CAVC order, a BVA judge can not.

Edited by broncovet, 14 August 2012 - 08:10 PM.


#9 broncovet

 
broncovet

    E-9 Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Master Chief Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3618 posts
 

Posted 14 August 2012 - 08:15 PM

To add, the VA was found in contempt of court for non compliance with the Courts orders:

http://www.purplehea...pt of Court.pdf

#10 kirk192

 
kirk192

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 12 posts
 

Posted 15 August 2012 - 07:13 AM

Not going off topic, but do you have a number to the AMC?


Yes I have a couple of numbers

1)Toll free information line 1-866-258-0341
2) Direct line (the one they will answer) 1-202-565-5436
3) Director Keith Wilson 1-202-530-9400
4) Asst. Director Keith McQuaid 1-202-530-9462

#11 kirk192

 
kirk192

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 12 posts
 

Posted 15 August 2012 - 07:41 AM

I have filed suit and it has been remanded based on the non compliance of the original court order. All of the pertenent information has been submitted and received. however nobody seems to be able to tell me where it stands, or why after 3 mos. there has been no movement.

As for my MOS-I was a Navy SEAL. I have made the medical nexus to oxygen toxicity, the cell damage, and distortions in the DNA which causes abnormal growth in the regeneration of damaged cells.

#12 kirk192

 
kirk192

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 12 posts
 

Posted 16 August 2012 - 08:48 AM

I have gotten a response from the VA who after a week and a half has gotten a response from AMC. AMC says they are going to "research it". I guess I will wait a week then go to the top.

#13 Commander Bob

 
Commander Bob

    E-9 Master Chief Petty Officer

  • HadIt.com Elder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1613 posts
 

Posted 16 August 2012 - 09:53 AM

... First submission was directly to the VA RO, I even got them to sign confirmation of receipt. That information was "lost" with no explination. I then sent it all myself with signature confirmation. It was received.

I called the AMC several weeks later and they told me that they where waiting for my file from my Regional office. I went to my regional office and they told me my file was at the AMC. I went to the DAV and they said that my file was at AMC and refused to call and verify. Have called my Senator and gotten the standard "we are looking into it".

Anyone have some suggestions?



I see a pattern in the VA's SOP...
Good luck, hang in there, 'kirk192', and best wishes for resolution.

Bob

#14 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28634 posts
 

Posted 16 August 2012 - 02:26 PM

“As for my MOS-I was a Navy SEAL. I have made the medical nexus to oxygen toxicity, the cell damage, and distortions in the DNA which causes abnormal growth in the regeneration of damaged cells. “

I am a civilian so I am making an assumption- did you get oxygen toxicity due to diving as a seal?

Also, I a making an educated guess and might be wrong- is this your BVA case?

http://www.va.gov/ve...es4/1139754.txt

I have only seen a few times where the BVA goes against the CAVC.

Do you have a lawyer representing you?

I have friend who is a former Diver for Navy so I am sure that I posted the training letter BVA mentions,in this decision , in our Fast letter/training letter forum for him some time ago as the VA was questioning his hearing loss as due to diving during the Vietnam War.

I will check.

#15 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28634 posts
 

Posted 16 August 2012 - 02:35 PM

One more question:

do your medical records reveal your brain tumor is a soft tissue sarcoma?

If so, did you serve in Vietnam?

STS (Soft tissue Sarcomas) are service connected in any incountry Vetnam veteran if their medical definition is found in the STS list here at hadit. There are about 34 STS types that VA will SC as presumptive to Agent Orange.

#16 kirk192

 
kirk192

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 12 posts
 

Posted 17 August 2012 - 05:22 AM

I did not serve in Vietnam.

#17 kirk192

 
kirk192

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 12 posts
 

Posted 17 August 2012 - 05:32 AM

“As for my MOS-I was a Navy SEAL. I have made the medical nexus to oxygen toxicity, the cell damage, and distortions in the DNA which causes abnormal growth in the regeneration of damaged cells. “

I am a civilian so I am making an assumption- did you get oxygen toxicity due to diving as a seal?

Also, I a making an educated guess and might be wrong- is this your BVA case?

http://www.va.gov/ve...es4/1139754.txt

I have only seen a few times where the BVA goes against the CAVC.

Do you have a lawyer representing you?

I have friend who is a former Diver for Navy so I am sure that I posted the training letter BVA mentions,in this decision , in our Fast letter/training letter forum for him some time ago as the VA was questioning his hearing loss as due to diving during the Vietnam War.

I will check.


Yes this is my case. I already recieve 10 % for hearing due to diving. Can we talk? I submitted VA Training Letter 07-04 in rebuttle to the last denial.

#18 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28634 posts
 

Posted 17 August 2012 - 07:50 AM

I found a similiar BVA case, where the issue of 9 years after service to diagnosis of
oligodendroglioma
was granted.
(by a different ALJ at the BVA)


In that case the VHA oncologist supported the claim.

In your case it states:


"In their joint motion for remand, the parties argue that the examiner did not provide a sufficient rationale for her opinion; specifically, they argue that it is unclear whether the examiner's conclusions were the result her own knowledge, or whether she had researched medical literature and her conclusions reflect the limits of current medical knowledge. They have requested that the case be remanded so that the examiner can clarify her opinion. The Board respectfully, disagrees. "

BS to that-I went through this crap many times with the VA.

What were her credentials? Did the BVA ever send your case to the VHA oncologist for an opinion?

Did you have a lawyer at the CAVC and if so, will they continue to support and appeal your claim?

I found some statements in your BVA decision that appeared to be unsound and almost aggregious.

It will take me some time to go over the notes I have taken already on the decision and I will get back here with my opinion and how I feel the BVA decision could be appealed.

However, this claim might well take another IMO as the IMO you had did not conform to the IMO format here at hadit.

But an IMO cannot be presented to the court at this point.


Are you able to handle the cost of an additional IMO, if the court would grant another joint remand?

Joint remands from the CAVC are the only way to open the door for more evidence.

I hope others here will take the time to look over this veteran's decision.

In part it states:


“The Board finds that a remand is unwarranted. As a factual determination, the Board finds that there is sufficient evidence to conclude both that the examiner's opinion is based on the limits of current medical knowledge concerning the causes of brain tumors and that a remand would not provide any additional information that would provide any possible basis to grant this claim. Further, the Board finds that neither point cited by the parties of the joint motion is required to make a medical opinion "adequate" in this case. Simply stated, the parties of the joint motion are adding additional requirements to a VA medical opinion that are simply not required under VA law, particularly in light of the facts of this case. “

I think those statements and other nuances to this decision should be appealed ASAP at the CAVC.

How much time do you have left to file another CAVC appeal and is your CAVC lawyer going to support one?

I do see points that are lacking in the claim but hope others here will see what I see in the BVA decision.

Also-have you ever contacted Dr. Harry Whelan?

http://www.mcw.edu/n...tm#.UC5LzKMczTw

Edited by Berta, 17 August 2012 - 07:52 AM.


#19 kirk192

 
kirk192

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 12 posts
 

Posted 17 August 2012 - 08:14 AM

I found a similiar BVA case, where the issue of 9 years after service to diagnosis of
oligodendroglioma
was granted.
(by a different ALJ at the BVA)


In that case the VHA oncologist supported the claim.

In your case it states:


"In their joint motion for remand, the parties argue that the examiner did not provide a sufficient rationale for her opinion; specifically, they argue that it is unclear whether the examiner's conclusions were the result her own knowledge, or whether she had researched medical literature and her conclusions reflect the limits of current medical knowledge. They have requested that the case be remanded so that the examiner can clarify her opinion. The Board respectfully, disagrees. "

BS to that-I went through this crap many times with the VA.

What were her credentials? Did the BVA ever send your case to the VHA oncologist for an opinion?

Did you have a lawyer at the CAVC and if so, will they continue to support and appeal your claim?

I found some statements in your BVA decision that appeared to be unsound and almost aggregious.

It will take me some time to go over the notes I have taken already on the decision and I will get back here with my opinion and how I feel the BVA decision could be appealed.

However, this claim might well take another IMO as the IMO you had did not conform to the IMO format here at hadit.

But an IMO cannot be presented to the court at this point.


Are you able to handle the cost of an additional IMO, if the court would grant another joint remand?

Joint remands from the CAVC are the only way to open the door for more evidence.

I hope others here will take the time to look over this veteran's decision.

In part it states:


“The Board finds that a remand is unwarranted. As a factual determination, the Board finds that there is sufficient evidence to conclude both that the examiner's opinion is based on the limits of current medical knowledge concerning the causes of brain tumors and that a remand would not provide any additional information that would provide any possible basis to grant this claim. Further, the Board finds that neither point cited by the parties of the joint motion is required to make a medical opinion "adequate" in this case. Simply stated, the parties of the joint motion are adding additional requirements to a VA medical opinion that are simply not required under VA law, particularly in light of the facts of this case. “

I think those statements and other nuances to this decision should be appealed ASAP at the CAVC.

How much time do you have left to file another CAVC appeal and is your CAVC lawyer going to support one?

I do see points that are lacking in the claim but hope others here will see what I see in the BVA decision.

Also-have you ever contacted Dr. Harry Whelan?

http://www.mcw.edu/n...tm#.UC5LzKMczTw


Berta,

I have had a lawyer and won a remand on May 15,2012. I have sent medical articles and wikipedia on O2 toxicity detailing its effects and including early symptoms that went un noticed even by me to includ a detached retna, hand tremors. I still have time to add info, but no one can tell me where I stand. AMC says it is waiting for my file from my RO. My RO says that my file is in DC. My RO has been trying to get it straight but AMC is not responding.

#20 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28634 posts
 

Posted 17 August 2012 - 08:53 AM

Gee-I realized the BVA decision was dated Nov, 2011 and then re read your posts:


"I have filed suit and it has been remanded based on the non compliance of the original court order. All of the pertenent information has been submitted and received. however nobody seems to be able to tell me where it stands, or why after 3 mos. there has been no movement."




WHEW-I am so glad !


"Posted Yesterday, 09:48 AM
I have gotten a response from the VA who after a week and a half has gotten a response from AMC. AMC says they are going to "research it". I guess I will wait a week then go to the top."

The AMC has the reputation of being the Black Hole for claims.

Are you comfortable with giving us your CAVC docket number for the joint remand?

CAVC info is public and we could read the remand on line.

Did the SCUBA or Drager Unit ever involve prolonged exposure to vinyl chloride ?

#21 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28634 posts
 

Posted 17 August 2012 - 12:12 PM

I went over your BVA decisions carefully and hope others too will chime in here.

This BVA decision was unlike anything I have seen since the VCAA defined and established our rights as claimants in 2000 .

I feel the BVA gave no medical rationale to disregard the buddy statement as to your inservice tremors:

“According to the National Institutes of Health, normal aging and low blood sugar are two common causes for hand tremors. Stress, anxiety or fatigue can result in postural tremors, though these tremors will go away when the stressor or fatigue is alleviated. However, brain damage can also be the reason for a hand tremor. A stroke or brain tumor, which can disrupt normal brain function, are also possible causes.”
http://www.livestrong.com/article/18976-causes-hand-tremors/


“Cerebellar tremoris caused by brain damage from a stroke, tumor, or degenerative disease, such as multiple sclerosis. Chronic alcoholism can also cause cerebellar tremor. Cerebellar tremor is most pronounced in the hands during a particular action, such as reaching out for something or touching the tip of your nose. Cerebellar tremor may also be called intentiontremor.

http://www.localheal...d-tremor/causes
Brain Tumors
  • According to The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, each year approximately 2,000 children in the United States are diagnosed with a brain tumor. The type of brain tumor, size and location will produce different symptoms. A brain tumor in the cerebellum, or back of the brain, can cause hand tremors in children as well as other symptoms such as headaches, difficulties walking, and vomiting in the morning without nausea.

http://www.ehow.com/...-children_.html

If your tumor is parietal, that rests just over the cerebellum at the back part of one's head.

Tremor-Causing Injuries
  • A physical injury to the motor center of the brain or a stroke can contribute to hand tremors. Brain tumors can press against the motor center and cause tremors. Injuries to the nerves of the arm or shoulder can also create muscle weakness and cause hand tremors.
http://www.ehow.com/...nd-tremors.html


Your BVA decision states:
“The first evidence of any problem appears in October 2006, nearly a decade after the Veteran's active service. “

However this BVA decision contradicts the medical facts involving this type of tumor:

However, the VHA oncologist also noted that small
cancers and pre-neoplastic lesions can remain dormant for an
extended period before growing aggressively and, therefore,
concluded that it was "reasonable" to regard the tumor as
having been present during the Veteran's military service in
1991.

In summary, and affording the Veteran the benefit of the
doubt, the evidence suggests that the he has low-grade
oligodendroglioma which had onset during service.
Accordingly, the Board concludes that low-grade
oligodendroglioma was incurred in service.

ORDER

New and material evidence has been presented to reopen a
claim for service connection for low-grade oligodendroglioma
with seizures.

Service connection for low-grade oligodendroglioma with
seizures is granted.

Source: http://www.va.gov/ve...es2/1015944.txt

The BVA stated in your case
:
“the medical opinion of Dr. E.K. provides limited evidence against this claim, clearly indicating that the Veteran received multiple neurological examinations during service, more than would a typical servicemen during his military service, due to nature of the ….” The IMO was poorly prepared. A BIG problem for the claim.

“In a February 2007 letter, the Veteran's neuro-oncologist, Dr. F.H. states generally, while he and his colleagues are not sure what the cause of the Veteran's brain tumor is, it may have been caused by his use of an oxygen re-breather in service. “ He didnt give a full medical rationale."may" or "May not" statements are too speculative in IMOs and have no probative value.

The VA Neurologist (not an oncologist) gave no medical rationale or treatises, or medical abstracts to bolster her opinion of August 2010.

“Finally, she stated that there is no evidence that she can find that would support the Veteran's theory that toxins from the re-breathing device caused chromosomal changes leading to an anaplastic brain tumor. “

This begs the question, what Drager unit toxins could have caused the tumor?
How were the units cleaned? Was the cleaning fluid a potential toxin or carcinogenic?
Were the paper glass fibre fllters carcinogenic after long term use in the gear?

Where was the diving done? Is it a Superfund site now?

Was the diving predominately done in water that also catched run offs from toxins from factories, farms, etc that could have been carcingens that lingered on the wet suits?


Problems arise when a claimant states a potential theory of entitlement ,yet, a claimant should raise EVERY single potential theory of entitlement.

“In their joint motion for remand, the parties argue that the examiner did not provide a sufficient rationale for her opinion; specifically, they argue that it is unclear whether the examiner's conclusions were the result her own knowledge, or whether she had researched medical literature and her conclusions reflect the limits of current medical knowledge. They have requested that the case be remanded so that the examiner can clarify her opinion. The Board respectfully, disagrees. “

Would the BVA disagree that the actual VHA oncologist , as within the above cited BVA decision, should in fact be requested to prepare an opinion?



“As a factual determination, the Board finds that there is sufficient evidence to conclude both that the examiner's opinion is based on the limits of current medical knowledge concerning the causes of brain tumors and that a remand would not provide any additional information that would provide any possible basis to grant this claim. Further, the Board finds that neither point cited by the parties of the joint motion is required to make a medical opinion "adequate" in this case. Simply stated, the parties of the joint motion are adding additional requirements to a VA medical opinion that are simply not required under VA law, particularly in light of the facts of this case. “

What “limits” of medical knowledge on etiologies of brain tumors are they citing?

Training Letter 07-04 is referenced by the veteran and by the BVA. Although the TL does not specify brain cancers in divers,
the VA didnt SC IHD in Vietnam veterans until many decades after their service (Nehmer decision)

But Training Letter 07-04 is a moot point for this claim.

“The Board needs more than a theory from the Veteran to remand this case for a medical opinion, which it does not have. “
You had evidence (the buddy statement) .

“Simply stated, in this case there is even the absence of any speculative article from even nonmedical sources indicating some remote possible connection between an oxygen re-breather and cancer. We are dealing with a theory of entitlement with no medical or factual foundation at all. “

I feel the buddy statement ,supported with above references as to the tremors, should have been given more weight.

You have some links above that an IMO doctor might well be able to use to support the inservice nexus.

On remand other theories of entitlement could be raised, such as was diving done in an area that was contaminated with run offs of cleaning fluids, fertilizers, herbicides , or any other toxins that were carcinogenics.

Where was the diving mainly done?




“On review of the evidence in this case, notwithstanding the Board's prior determination, the Board finds that a medical opinion should not have been obtained in this case in the first instance, as the evidence indicating that the disability at issue may be associated with the veteran's service is simply too speculative.”

I think that is a very arbitrary and capricious opinion from this BVA lawyer.

Then again- Hell the VA thinks most of our claims are mere speculation until we provide them with evidence.

As a claimant myself I found that NOTHING is impossible . the BVA employs lawyers, who are not doctors, and I have never seen this type of BVA unfounded rhetoric in a BVA decision since the years prior to the VCAA.

I won 2 SC claims recently whereby the diagnoses of 2 disabilities (due to AO) never even appeared in my husbands SMRS or his Medical records.NOTHING is impossible.

“While the Veteran has claimed that other Navy SEALs have developed brain tumors, suggesting that there is something about the nature of their service that has caused their illness, he has unfortunately provided neither VA nor his treatment providers any information about these individuals such as their names, dates of service, and the type of brain cancer from which they allegedly suffered. Without such information, the Veteran's claims are, as the examiner stated, "speculation only." A general claim that other SEALs also developed brain cancer, therefore, my brain cancer was caused by service (a "cancer cluster argument") is too vague for the Board to be able to develop further, despite the potential significance. "The VA's 'duty' is just what it states, a duty to assist, not a duty to prove a claim with the claimant only in a passive role." Gobber v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 470, 472 (1992). VA cannot be expected to obtain the medical records of former Navy SEALs to see how many have brain cancer or perform scientific studies on the long term side effects of equipment issued by the armed services without some evidence, which is simply totally lacking in this case. “

With that information, the H VAC might request input from the IOM. It also could lead to support for your claim if any of these vets have found the nexus factor,via an IMO or research.

“In this case, the examiner provided a rationale, citing the problem the Board has noted above: there is nothing that supports the speculation that the Veteran's brain tumor was caused by service. We cannot ask the examiner to provide any more "supporting data" if there is simply no supporting data to be found. We are asking the examiner to prove a negative. “

The internet has thousands of medical studies and treatises that do not support many nexus factors,such as http://www.bmj.com/c.../bmj.d6387.full
(after all the hoopla that cell phones cause cancer, this study says they dont.)

“even if we ignore the findings of the VA medical opinion, the case must be denied in light of the total non-probative value of the evidence the Veteran has submitted to support his nexus. “

I feel the buddy statement was highly probative and that the IMO was very poorly prepared and a better IMO (following our IMO criteria here at hadit) might certainly help this claim succeed.

This claim needs more leg work but you are keeping it in the appellate process and that is great!

Edited by Berta, 17 August 2012 - 12:20 PM.


#22 kirk192

 
kirk192

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 12 posts
 

Posted 18 August 2012 - 07:35 AM

Gee-I realized the BVA decision was dated Nov, 2011 and then re read your posts:


"I have filed suit and it has been remanded based on the non compliance of the original court order. All of the pertenent information has been submitted and received. however nobody seems to be able to tell me where it stands, or why after 3 mos. there has been no movement."




WHEW-I am so glad !


"Posted Yesterday, 09:48 AM
I have gotten a response from the VA who after a week and a half has gotten a response from AMC. AMC says they are going to "research it". I guess I will wait a week then go to the top."

The AMC has the reputation of being the Black Hole for claims.

Are you comfortable with giving us your CAVC docket number for the joint remand?

CAVC info is public and we could read the remand on line.

Did the SCUBA or Drager Unit ever involve prolonged exposure to vinyl chloride ?


Berta I would very much like to send you all I have prepared and submitted. we are going in circles with the same info. meaning you are telling me what I have already done

#23 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28634 posts
 

Posted 18 August 2012 - 08:26 AM

“Berta I would very much like to send you all I have prepared and submitted. we are going in circles with the same info. meaning you are telling me what I have already done "

Then I assume you already have the American statistics on incidence rates this form of cancer, ….(very startling info compared to the 3 men in your team)

You have carefully researched where the team did the most diving, to see if this was a contaminated site, you have the detailed specifications for the Drager Units, as well as researched anaplastic oligodendroglio thoroughly,(the DNA component you mentioned is very significant-I researched that too )
you have accessed similar cases at the BVA, and if you dove in the Gulf or Kuwait tributaries you already know how toxic those waters were,
and have submitted anything at all that could advance your claim to the BVA.

I got the impression from the BVA denial that they only had the IMO you sent to them and the buddy statement.

It would therefore be redundant for you to send to me what you say is the same information I am 'telling you' about. I have spent almost 9 hours so far researching your claim and all of the factors it involves.Thanks for letting me know you already have this info.

I dont handle claims issues off the hadit board and I am sure your lawyer has questioned VA already
as to why they did not consider
“all I have prepared and submitted.”

Men and women this veteran's case is important for 2 reasons
....
because not only is the incidence of this type of cancer alarmingly unusual in this vet's other SEAL teammates,
I feel the BVA for some bizarre reason, crapped all over his rights,in their denial and if they do that to any one of us, they could do it to more of us.

However I will withdraw further comments on this. Others will chime in and help you.

.

#24 kirk192

 
kirk192

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 12 posts
 

Posted 18 August 2012 - 09:48 AM

Thank you Berta. We are on the same page. One more question. What does the BVA, VA, AMC consider "Expeditious" as court remand claims are supposed to be handled expiditously?




Advertise Here