vern2

Just an update. I am not sure that my email to Ms. Hickey accomplished anything except to make me a target since I "complained". The audacity of a Vet to complain after he has only been on the hamster wheel since 2003! Heck we keep some Vets on the wheel until they die! I have had the C & P exams, but no movement. Strange that I have been "re-evaluated" three times for my SC HTN (rated 30%) Hmm! wonder if trying to screw me. Repeat: NEVER BELIEVE OR TRUST ANYTHING THE VA STATES TO YOU. Ah, feel better. Back on the WHEEL. Maybe I should wait another year and then check again?? Just kidding! :sad:

Sounds like hypertensive heart disease, but the HTN leads to heart disease. My cardio doc stated that my HTN had the effect of causing the heart disease. Can you get the VA doctors to connect the two conditions. separate ratings as noted by other posts. The fact you have had stents leads me to suspect you have CAD as well. Your 10% EF is a cause for alarm! Is the enlarged heart or blockage or what is the cause? Need to get this checked out ASAP! Review your SMR and see if any notice or complaints of heart issues while on AD. The usual VA tactic is to deny if not noted while on AD. How do you overcome this? Finding a nexus is the key. Did you have any ECG, EKG while on AD? If you can get a cardio doc to connect the HTN and subsequent heart disease then makes your appeal much stronger. Is all your medical care done at VA?

This is sample of qualifications letter that I recently sent to VARO. This is copied from Chris Attig web site. You may want to insert names, etc. as I did. Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Affairs Claims Intake Center P.O. Box 5235 Newnan, Georgia 30271-0020 Date: XXXXXXX Dear VARO: I am requesting the information listed below for all my Compensation and Pension Exams conducted by the VA since XXXXX. I hereby request that a copy of the C & P Examiners resume, CV list of publications, list of specialties, etc. Such that his/her experience and qualifications may be examined, reviewed, questioned and/or challenged. I specifically request that any and all information stored in VetPort-or any other system of records-that pertain to the Examiner’s credentialing as a medical professional since the Examiner’s date of first employment and/or association with the VA- be included in my C-file (Electronic VBMS and/or paper file) and specifically examined by the BVA and CAVC to determine the adequacy of the Examiner’s so-called expertise. 38 U.S.C. 7402; 38 CFR part 46; VHA handbook 1100.19; VA handbook 5005, Part II, Chapter 3; VHA DIRECTIVE 2012-030. Furthermore, I object to the following aspects of the VA Examiner’s opinions in exams conducted by (insert VA examiners name and date of exam(s).These exams were conducted at the C & P clinic at the (insert location). The lack of support in the opinion with scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge, and how it relates to the conclusion being sought. The lack of facts, tests, or data on which to base the opinion. The lack of evidence demonstrating the Examiner’s conclusion is the product of reliable principles and methods. The Examiner’s failure to reliably apply medical, scientific, and or forensic principles and methods to the facts of the case. Please send all requested information to the address below:

11B, been reading this thread, and I have used Attig's qualifications letter as well. I would strongly suggest that as others have stated, file a NOD, using the new form AND file a supplemental statement. In my claim, I filed NOD as soon as results were on Health eVet- blue button, and followed up with cut and paste where I disputed each inaccurate statement and provided documentation from medical doctors that were experts in my claim, I.e. cardiologists, urologists, allergy doctor. My documentation included doctors statements, DBQ filled out by doctor (took me 4 months to get the military doctor to complete!), and results of numerous tests. I may be unique as retired and volunteer at Navy hospital, where I get my medical care. btw: I worked at Camp Rudder ( Florida Army Ranger Camp) for 7 years. RANGERS DO LEAD THE WAY!

High blood pressure and heart disease are two separate disease and carry separate ratings, even though the heart disease may be caused by the HTN, especially if uncontrolled for long period of time.

GP is correct. The key is that vets and retirees are treated differently by Lowe's. I am retiree, and also have the VA id card. If you are vet and no id card, then get discounts same as what GP stated. I have friends that are vets, but no id card and this upsets them as well!

Berta, no I did not send all 400+ pages at one time, sent 43 separate uploads from April 2013 through 12 Sept 2013. The VA rater chose to ignore what was in my VBMS, even though I sent certified mail in July 2013 telling them of the VBMS uploads. This was well before the denial of 22 September 2013. They clearly made an error in not considering all the "material evidence". Had an email from Ms. Witty on 22 April 2015 stating that they were looking into it. Nothing since then. BTW: I have copies of my VA activity as well as what was uploaded each of the 43 separate times. I had to scan and convert to JPEG file and then save in separate folder, so I know what was uploaded on each instance. I have learned always keep meticulous records of any dealings with VA.Wish I could record phone conversations, but against the law in Florida! I have literally spent hundreds of dollars on certified mails to VA. kept all green cards and stamped receipts. Sometimes do not get green card back, but go to USPS web site and download the receipt. Noticed that Newnan, GA intake center just has someone stamp the green card, no date, no time. Going to USPS today to complain about not getting what I paid for. Still feel like on the hamster wheel.

Did you send read receipt? I send all my emails to VA read receipt, so can see that at least they read the email and what date and time.

Berta, still waiting on DRo Review since NOD of 7 October 2013 sent via certified mail as usual. Finally sent Ms.Hickey an email and there was some movement, had email from ms. Kitty (VARO St. Pete Director) telling me more C & P exams and more opinions. It has been almost 60 days since that email. I will give another 30 days and then more emails to Washington. I was patient for over 18 months, but this claim has been in process since 2003, denied 2005, then DRO Review in 2007, awarded 30% analogous rating for aggravated hypertension. Condition worsened dramatically in 2012-2013 and filed new claim in 2012, denied in 2013 and currently waiting on DRO Review. Filed a CUE in April on VA failure to consider all evidence in their possession in denying my claim in 2013. The hammer is that the VA ignored all evidence I submitted via eBenefits in 2013, in excess of 400 pages. I have tacit admission that mistakes were made as Kelvin ( senior DRO team member at St. Pete VARO) put it. I have a strong case for CUE claim. Of course as per usual VA has not responded to my CUE. Prior post from me stated that VA had acknowledged the CUE, well it was in phone conversation, nothing in writing. Wait just a little longer and will bump it up to Washington.

Thanks GP, I am 67 and she is 73, and been married 34+ years. She is great wife! We are both retired and I volunteer at NAVY HOSPITAL PENSACOLA with Red Cross (Quarterdeck).

je suis un peau francis

yes, got your PM, but many Vets may not be able to afford this expensive software. The Adobe Reader DC will allow the vet to search through the thousands of pages that were scanned into VBMS. The problem as with much of VA is critical to get proper scanned documents into the electronic file. In my case I have about 20 pages out of almost 2000+ pages that were not scanned properly. Want to bet that they are key to my claim? I have asked for response to my question as to why not re-scan or let me know what was not scanned. This is contract operations at Newnan, GA VA Intake Center in my case. I foresee the same nightmare that we now have with paper C-files, as my electronic file has another vets records scanned into it.

I forgot to mention. The Control F function is not needed if you have Adobe Reader DC (document cloud). Just click on the magnifying glass icon at top of page and type in the name that you are searching in the box that opens up will come up will many different pages. Great feature! This tool is free, suggest that you download and use it for searching the electronic CD of your claims file. Works great for me. This is same tool that the C & P personnel and VARO personnel are using. It is not foolproof, as tried a doctors name and came up blank. Not sure why. Tried Kittle, then Doctor Kittle, then Jeffrey L. Kittle, but all came up blank. He is the doctor that just did my last C & P exam. Hmm , oh crap, forgot he did exam AFTER the CD was created. Must be getting old I am 67.

I had some questions as to how to read and search my 1800+ pages of the CD that was mailed to me by the VARMC, St. Louis. I contacted a management analyst and she forward my question to Mr. Herbert, Director. I have copied and pasted his reply. Please do not bombard him with phone calls. His email is derek.herbert@va.gov. The questions I asked are in BOLD. On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Herbert, Derek, VBAVACO wrote: Good afternoon MrXXXX I’ve attempted to answer your questions below: 1. What does it mean for example: 16:33, CDT 04/23/2013 # 30785861 Submitted Electronically , at top of page? a. This watermark reflects the time and date that the material was received within the system and denotes an electronic submission, such as eBenefits. b. In this example the document was received at 4:33PM (CDT) on 04/23/2013 via eBenefits. 2. Notice that most of the pages have the notation " copy made by VARME St. Louis from a record in VA's possession" Does this mean copied from my old c-file ? a. Although difficult to see, the notation is, “COPY MADE BY VARMC ST LOUIS FROM A RECORD IN VA’S POSSESSION”. b. This watermark indicates that the material was copied by personnel at the VA Records Management Center in St. Louis, MO, prior to submission. Typically, material maintained at the Records Management Center consists of the claim file, the service treatment record, and/or the Official Military Personnel File. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Very respectfully, Derek L. Herbert Acting Chief, Contracted Operations Veterans Benefits Administration Office of Business Process Integration (20C) Veterans Claims Intake Program Office: 202-461-9606 Mobile: 202-329-8673 Fax: 202-461-9331 I still have questions about the electronic file, as mine has 15+ pages of unreadable data. I have asked Mr. Herbert why was this not re-scanned or attempt to contact me for better copy or let me know what was not copied. Still waiting on reply. This electronic record will be even more critical in future as I noticed in my recent C & P exam that NO C-FILE was used, just the electronic records. It appears that this is way forward for the VARO. This is noted on the exam notes as well. I am concerned as scanning what we submit and also what we submit electronically, either via fax or uploads to eBenefits is even more critical. I am trying to search and see what was not properly scanned but this may be almost impossible task (1800+ pages). I have a pending CUE in due to VARO not using what I had uploaded in 2013 via eBenefits to decide my claim. The VARO has already admitted that they made mistakes in my claim. I have used PC-FAX to send some documents to Newnan Intake Center, but at same time, send them via eBenefits. i still used certified mail for some things as well. Trying to cover all bases:)

agree, no money can make up for not being able to get an errection!

Thanks GP, I may end up with pacemaker, but trying to avoid it, as my wife has pacemaker and she is still trying to become used to it-had it implanted in Dec 2014.

Yes, I have had 2 phone calls from a Kelvin, at VARO, who stated he is part of VRO review team. The VA has acknowledged my NOD.

See my other posts, now the VA is stating that I have hypertensive heart disease, secondary to hypertension. Hell, this is what I claimed back in 2003, but denied. And then there is my CUE, where they ignored all the medical evidence that had heart disease less than 6 months after came off AD. VA has tacitly acknowledged that " MISTAKES WERE MADE " in my claim back in 2013. Oh well, back on the hamster wheel:)

Ok, I am learning more each day. Hate to have ED, wife is very unhappy to say the least.

This is extract from my recent C & P exam for ED. I filed claim in 2012 for ED as secondary to HTN. Denied in 2013 as not service connected, even though started have ED problems before i retired in 2005. 4. Erectile dysfunction ----------------------- Does the Veteran have erectile dysfunction? [X] Yes [ ] No If yes, complete the following section: a. Etiology of erectile dysfunction: htn b. If the Veteran has erectile dysfunction, is it as likely as not (at least a 50% probability) attributable to one of the diagnoses in Section 1, including residuals of treatment for this diagnosis? [X] Yes [ ] No If yes, specify the diagnosis to which the erectile dysfunction is as likely as not attributable: htn c. If the Veteran has erectile dysfunction, is he able to achieve an erection sufficient for penetration and ejaculation without medication? [ ] Yes [X] No If no, has the Veteran used medications for treatment of his erectile dysfunction? [X] Yes [ ] No If yes, is the Veteran able to achieve an erection sufficient for penetration and ejaculation with medication? [ ] Yes [X] No 5. Retrograde ejaculation ------------------------- Does the Veteran have retrograde ejaculation? [ ] Yes [X] No 6. Male reproductive organ infections ------------------------------------- Does the Veteran have a history DBQ GU Male reproductive system: MEDICAL OPINION REQUEST TYPE OF MEDICAL OPINION REQUESTED: Aggravation of a nonservice connected disability by a service connected disability. OPINION REQUESTED: Aggravation of a nonservice connected disability by A service connected disability. Was the Veteran's erectile dysfunction at least as likely as not Aggravated beyond its natural progression by his/her service connected hypertension with pulmonary hypertension? Discussion of above question: The above question requires that the erectile dysfunction exists prior to military service and be aggravated by his hypertension. His erectile dysfunction did not occur until 2005, occurring after his military service, and therefore this does not seem to be the appropriate question. If we stay with the above question the opinion is that his erectile dysfunction was not aggravated by his hypertension and pulmonary heypertension. The more appropriate question is whether the erectile dysfunction is secondary to the hypertension with pulmonary hypertension. Opinion: It is at least as likely as not that the erectile dysfunction Is secondary to his hypertension and pulmonary hypertension. Rationale: The veteran's erectile dysfunction occurred after many Years of hypertension with pulmonary hypertension. Hypertension injures the blood vessels in the penis contributing to erectile dysfunction. The veteran's testosterone was normal in 2011 ruling out hypogonadism as one major alternative cause of erectile dysfunction. Advancing age can also be a major cause but the veteran was diagnosed with erectile dysfunction or possibly 10 years ago when he was somewhat younger. Since the other causes are somewhat less likely it increases the likelihood of hypertension being the most likely cause. Supportive evidence in the veteran's case also is that the urologist's opinion is that it is secondary to his hypertension. This opinion is like several others, in that doctor goes beyond what the VARO is asking to reach a favorable opinion. I am not sure if this is good or bad. Has anyone else had similar experience?

Recent had C & P exam and noted several disabilities that VARO added to my claim. This is what doctor opined on spirolactone, which VA started me on in 2007 for hypertension. I am not sure if have claim or not, unless it is 1151 claim. OPINION REQUESTED: Aggravation of a nonservice connected disability by A service connected disability. Was the Veteran's diverticulitis with constipation at least as likely as not aggravated beyond its natural progression by his/her service connected hypertension with pulmonary hypertension? Medical opinion: It is at least as likely is not at the veteran's constipation and diverticulitis were aggravated beyond its natural progression by the medical treatment of his hypertension with pulmonary hypertension. Rationale: Diverticulosis which leads to diverticulitis has a strong genetic component, but the veteran had no significant history of diverticulitis prior to his antihypertensive treatment with spironolactone. The veteran developed severe constipation and was treated for diverticulitis with antibiotics. His CT scan confirmed the presence of diverticuli. Although he reports that he now has no symptoms, it did briefly aggravate the diverticulitis beyond its natural, gradual progression. **************************************************************************** My medical records show that Pensacola JACC started me on Spironolactone in 2007 to help control hypertension and pedal edema. It caused severe constipation and diverticulitius. Still not sure if I have claim or not, as I did not file for this disability.

Well, I have 2 separate cardiologists dbq's that support this opinion. Agree that VARO is trying to screw me, nothing new there. BTW, this is second heart exam, as 1st one was flawed, done by different c& p doc., had to do over. Claim is on DRO review, since Oct 2013.

This is 28 April 2015 results of my C & P exam for heart disease. I have been trying since 2003 to get SC for heart disease. I had 6 tests less than 6 months after came off AD DBQ CARDIO Heart: MEDICAL OPINION REQUEST TYPE OF MEDICAL OPINION REQUESTED: Aggravation of a nonservice Connected disability by a service connected disability. OPINION REQUESTED: Aggravation of a nonservice connected disability by a service connected disability. Was the Veteran's atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease At least as likely as not aggravated beyond its natural progression by his/her Service connected hypertension with pulmonary hypertension? Discussion of above question: The above question requires that the Atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease exist prior to military service and be aggravated by his hypertension. His atrial fibrillation did not occur until 2013 and proof of ischemic heart disease until 2015, occurring long after his military service, and therefore this does not seem to be the appropriate question. If we stay with the above question the opinion is that his atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease were not aggravated by his hypertension and pulmonary hypertension. The more appropriate question is whether the atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter are secondary to the hypertension with pulmonary hypertension. Opinion: It is at least as likely as not that the atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter/ischemic heart disease are secondary to his hypertension and pulmonary hypertension. Rationale: The veteran had long-standing hypertension that began During his military service. He is service connected for hypertensive heart disease. Hypertensive heart disease damages the muscle and electrical system of the heart which can lead to atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. Hypertension also damages the arteries which causes the cholesterol to adhere and cause ischemic heart disease. It is therefore logical and in agreement with his cardiologist's opinion that the hypertensive heart disease caused his atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter and also his ischemic heart disease. **************************************************************************** in 2003, and results showed had hypertensive heart disease, yet rater only rated me for aggravated hypertension. Been on various appeals since 2007. This exam seems more favorable than prior exams. Any thoughts? I am currently rated 30% for hypertension. I am trying to get 60% at least for the hypertensive heart disease.

Recently got my c-file on cd, so my record has been digitized. Still do not trust the VA, as noticed that my cd is a redacted copy. Not everything in my paper c-file is on the cd. It is searchable, by key word, etc. Bad news is have about 15+pages that were scanned that are not readable. This is unacceptable, as not sure what is unreadable, but I would be willing to bet that it is something key to my claim. Why did the scanning process, not catch the un readable scans? More opportunity for the VA to screw the vets, IMHO.

Had another Echo at Baptist Hospital Pensacola and results were dramatically different than the Echo done by the VA. Hmm! In my talk with Kelvin at VARO today, they acknowledged that had my new echo. I told Kelvin that I would challenge any use of the VA conducted Echo as not meeting the standards. I am not a cardiologist, so having my NHP cardiologist compare the last three Echos, especially the one conducted by the Pensacola JACC cardiologist, Dr. Schang.