JRW

>>>Private hospital records from 2002 show a diagnosis of 440.0 Aortic Atherosclerosis and 440.21 Ath Ext NTV AT w Claudct on my Diagnosis Summary<<< Char49, I don't think there should be any confusion here on your diagnosis for IHD. Since your above private records show atherosclerosis, proving a IHD diagnosis to the VA is a moot point. It should not matter whether you can locate your previous VA medical files that may have more information on this or not. Your private records will speak volumes to the VA. Once the VA sets you up for IHD C&P exam, they may perform some further tests on you to determine the progression of your IHD to establish a rating. But, as stated earlier, your diagnois has already been shown on your private medical records. IHD does not go away. It stays with you forever. If you have access to those private medical files (I'm assuming you do), you can submit those with your claim. From the description of your private medical records, I still say your case for IHD compensaion to the VA, will be handled in a routine manner. You've already proven the two most important requirements for this additional compensation. They are: 1. Boots on the ground in Vietnam 2. A diagnosis of IHD (atherosclerosis) in 2002 You've cleared the most important hurdles already. Let nature (the VA) take its course, my friend.

Chr49, Notice below an excerpt from the proposed IHD regulations dated 3-25-10 concerning the VA definition of Ischemic Heart Disease (IHD) to be added to the Agent Orange list. "Therefore, for purposes of this regulation, the term ''IHD'' includes, but is not limited to, acute, subacute, and old myocardial infarction; atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease including coronary artery disease (including coronary spasm) and coronary bypass surgery; and stable, unstable and Prinzmetal's angina. Since the term refers only to heart disease, it does not include hypertension or peripheral manifestations of arteriosclerosis such as peripheral vascular disease or stroke." I would venture to say that you are in line to file a separate claim for IHD, as your private medical records clearly show atherosclerosis. Yours looks to me like a "cut-and-dry" case.

" The DoD may want to make an example of him, to stem future AWOLs......." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I fail to see how effective this type of example would be, especially, in an all volunteer Army. True, he was AWOL and, yes, you might can argue this was during a time of war (although not an officially declared one), but................................. my gut feeling is that the powers to be know that this kid would be entitled to significant veteran benefits if he were acknowledged as service injured. Knowing this and the fact that the kid made a very dumb mistake by going AWOL, what better opportunity for the powers to be, than to deny him of such future benefits by branding him as AWOL in time of military action, and boot his butt out of the military in a most undignified manner. The Army gets rid of an undesirable and the government avoids having to pay future VA benefits to this young man because he has a BCD. This is a win-win situation for the powers to be. Like I stated earlier, I have been very hardnosed about following rules all my life, but this situation smells and it smells bad for this young man. I do think it's wrong. IMHO

For the record, I am a strong believer in following the stated rules. It has been my nature all my life. The kid went AWOL. He broke the rules. However, even a person with my strong beliefs in following rules would say that, in this situation and barring anything else more incriminating, and assuming his record up to the point of AWOL has been satisfactory, then even I would have to say............................cut the soldier some slack! Yea, slap his hand hard for being AWOL, but a BCD is way overboard. You need to fit the punishment to the crime. A BCD is overkill, plus you have possibly marked this kid for life. I would have to wonder the kid's frame of mind 30-40 years from now with this kind of baggage on his back. This.....is...... wrong! My 2 cents worth.

This is great news. I had my C &P last week for IHD. I have three of the items within the IHD proposed regulations, fully documented. Assuming the proposed regs. go through, I will be pleased with whatever the rating turns out to be (hopefully).

Rotorhead, Do not give up. Hang in there. We Vietnam vets must never give up. We're all in this together. Trust me, we will persevere. Never, never, give up!

I can't say much about the limbs going to sleep at night but............ the fast beating heart at times. That could be signs of atrial fibrillation. Atrial fibrillation can be linked to various illnesses, among those being heart disease (IHD). Atrial Fibrillation left untended can, in some cases lead to ischemic stroke. I suggest you get hooked up with a cardiologist.

I agree with you on the lifestyle part. I really don't expect the VA to attach lifestyle restrictions to the new presumtions being added to the Agent-Orange list. There is already enough precedent on prior Agent Orange claims from veterans where life style, or even family history for that matter, does not play a part in the awarding and or determination of the percentage of disability. I do wonder, however, if they (VA) are taking a closer look at the many various secondary conditions that may be resulting from the new presumptions, especially IHD, and determining what the legal response will be, and or the granting of additional disability from such. If you think about it, announcing that IHD is presumtive for Vietnam veterans is a major inclusion to the Agent-Orange list. Of all the previous illnesses that have been added to this list, this one is, in my opinion, the "the grandaddy of them all." This could be a reason for the time it is taking to post the comments for review and ultimate insertion into the Federal Register. I do think that if you have clear-cut and unequivocal evidence of IHD, your case will be a matter of determining the rating percentage. Now, on the other hand, if you are trying to prove that you have IHD as a Vietnam veteran, and are relying strictly upon the VA health system to validate such claim, there is where the "rubber hits the mat." Now, I am not saying that the VA health system would intentionally lowball the severity or deny an illness. But, as I stated in a previous post, if you can afford the services of a private heart PCP, who can run the necessary tests and conclude one way or the other, you will be ahead of the game. Having private medical records to validate this illness to me, kind of levels the playing field. This is just my two cents worth. I'm not an expert, but I do a lot of reading and digesting of what I read up on.

________________________________________________________________________________ _____________ You bring up an interesting point. However, I think if you are able to see a private heart cardiologist and have all the pertinent tests and opinion from your private heart primary care provider submitted, I would think this would tend to carry as much weight, if not more with the VA. This is going to be my plan of action. I don't think the VA would refute or downplay the results from your private primary heart doctor. IMHO.

I began using it late last year. I kind of like it. You can track and order your meds online through this website. I do wish it would give you access to your lab tests and other results from your doctor appointments. Maybe in time, it will. All in all, I like it.

The last 9 illnesses added to the Agent-Orange list, have averaged 6 to 9 months from the VA announcement date to the Federal Register implemenation date. This is irregardless of any mandatory time frame that they may be required to go by. I don't think the threat of a lawsuit is going to light a fire under the VA to speed things up. A federal department that is this large, is not going to be intiminated by a lawsuit over their not following certain rules of procedure. That's just not going to happen. Now we may very well not like that (and that includes myself), but it is what it is. So, I would have to say this: patience is a viture.

DIC is not taxable. Below is a source stating this as such. Hope this helps you. http://militarypay.defense.gov/survivor/sbp/11_va_benefits.html

You deserve everything you can get. God bless!

I totally agree. If this story is true, it is a stain among all disabled veterans who rightfully deserve compensation. It makes it that much harder for those vets needing their compensation, to have stories like this one thrown back into their faces. I have no use for a thief, even if he is a veteran. I have always believed that there is something to be said about "honor and integrity." Call me old-fashioned, but that's how I feel and I'm not about to change.

Thanks Berta.

Berta, In reviewing over my medical records, I found that my Echocardiogram Reports, although diagnosed CAD and listed such words on the test report, did not list verbatim the word, "Ischemic, Ischemia," etc. However, I also had a " Stress Mycoardial Perfusion Imaging Report" also called a Nuclear Stress test performed, and it listed among the results, "Stress EKG: abnormal consistent with Ischemia." I also had a coronary by-pass to correct a blockage. All of this information has been submitted with my Agent-Orange claim, plus a letter from my cardiologist, specifically stating that he is treating me for Ischemic Heart Disease. I would appreciate your thoughts on this, especially since you bring up an interesting point on the possible wording of the pending regulation.

If that be the case, all I can say is: "Heaven Help Us All!!!!!"

<<<if I read the report on MSNBC.COM correctly, the 125 billion the White house is seeking is actually 2.6% less than the VA budget this year. Go figure>>> ________________________________________________________________________________ _____________ I don't think so. According to the Stars And Stripes, " Overall, the VA's budget will jump nearly 8 percent from 2010, and up more than 27 percent from fiscal 2009." See below link. I think the 2.6% reduction you may be referring to, is coming from the proposal to cut from other parts of the of the budget. Let's keep our fingers crossed. http://blogs.stripes.com/blogs/stripes-central/breaking-down-fy-2011-veterand-affairs-budget

The comment, listed below, was taken from this website. http://www.thedisabilitydigest.com/blog/227/disabled-and-need-a-cost-of-living-raise/ "Douglas W. Elmendorf, director of the Congressional Budget Office, predicted that inflation would remain low for several years, so Social Security might not pay a cost-of-living increase until January 2013. President Obama's budget assumes no increase in 2010 or 2011, then a 1.4 percent COLA in 2012." If the above holds true, 2012 looks to be a very small increase.

Since there have been a lot of questions concerning when the three new Agent-Orange illnesses might be added to the Federal Register so that the VA may commence with the rating of disabilities, I decided to research out what the time period was for all of the previous ones from the VA date of annoucement to the actual Federal Register date. It took me some time, but below is what I found. This might give us an idea of when the three new ones might go into effect. Please note that the first one (Choracne took 21 months. It looks like the reason for this unusual time period was that it was passed by Act of Congress rather than by the VA. I think it was incorporated in the original Agent-Orange Act of 1991 - Public Law 102-4). The following is for your information. Chloracne - Announce Date = Feb 91 -- Fed Register Date = May 93 = 21 mths. Soft-Tissue sarcoma Announce Date = May 90 -- Fed Register Date = Oct 91 = 17 mths. Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Announce Date = Jan 03 -- Fed Register Date = Oct 93 = 9 mths. Multiple Myeloma Announce Date = Sept 93 -- Fed Register Date = Jun 94 = 9 mths. Respiratory cancers Announce Date = Sept 93 -- Fed Register Date = Jun 94 = 9 mths. Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma Announce Date = Mar 90 -- Fed Register Date = Oct 90 = 7 mths. Porphyria Cutanea Tarda Announce Date = Jul 93 -- Fed Register Date = Feb 94 = 7 mths. Acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy Announce Date = May 96 -- Fed Register Date = Nov 96 = 6 mths. Diabetes Mellitus Type II Announce Date = Nov 90 -- Fed Regsiter Date = May 01 = 6 mths. Hodgkins Disease Announce Date = Aug 93 -- Fed Register Date = Feb 94 = 6 mths. Prostrate Cancer Announce Date = May 96 -- Fed Register Date = Nov 96 = 6 mths. B cell leukemia (hairy cell leukemia) Announce Date = Oct 09 Ishcemic Heart Disease Announce Date = Oct 09 Parkinson's Disease Announce Date = Oct 09 Some of the above illnesses had further Fed. Register modifications to them, but I used the first VA announcement dates and federal register dates for the initial entries. Those that were modified only appeared to enhance the original regulations. Looking at the above data and discounting the first two datum points, it looks like the range of effective Federal Register date is from 6 to 9 months from the time of the initial VA announcement date. I could be wrong, but I'm thinking the three new ones may very well fall within that time frame. Your thoughts??????

<<<< Don't know if I should tell the VA guy to file it as AO or just to leave it alone, already been 7 months and haven't heard a thing.>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Just to be on the safe side, I would discuss it with the VA rep. to help clarify that part of the question. It wouldn't hurt.

Below is an excerpt taken from the Department Service Office Newsletter of an American Legion post. The link is also provided. This may (or may not) give us a better idea of when the new regulations for the three new agent orange illnesses may go into effect. This may have been published on this forum sometime in the past, I do not know. I think the key statement in the overall context of this issue is when did the VA actually receive the National Academies Institute of Medical Report? Once that is established, then the law will apply, as to the final publication of the new regulations. http://www.post3legion.com/DSO%20Newsletter/DSO%20Newsletter%20110109.htm 38 U.S.C. § 1116© (1) states that the VA should adhere to the following timeline when promulgating regulations to implement presumptive service connection for agent orange-related diseases: Not later than 60 days after the date on which the Secretary receives a report from the National Academy of Sciences, the Secretary shall determine whether a presumption of service connection is warranted for each disease covered by the report. In this case, the Secretary determined that presumptive service connection was warranted for Parkinson's disease, ischemic heart disease and B cell leukemia on October 13, 2009. If the Secretary determines that a presumption is warranted, the Secretary, not later than 60 days after making the determination, shall issue proposed regulations setting forth the Secretary's determination. If VA adheres to this requirement, they must issue proposed regulations by Saturday, December 12, 2009. [*]Not later than 90 days after the date on which the Secretary issues any proposed regulations, the Secretary shall issue final regulations. Such regulations shall be effective on the date of issuance. However, in Liesegang v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 312 F.3d 1368, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2002), the Court indicated that there is no harmful error if the VA misses the specific deadlines under § 1116©(1), as long as final regulations are issued within 210 days of the date the VA receives a report from the National Academy of Sciences. The most recent National Academies, Institute of Medicine Report, Veterans and Agent Orange: Update 2008 was released on July 24, 2009. Presuming that this is the date the VA "received" the report, the final regulations are required to be published no later than February 19, 2010, pursuant to Liesegang.

Julie2, For what its worth, it appears to me that Vietnam veterans with an Agent Orange claim go through much faster, if their illness has already been medically diagnosed by outside doctors, prior to submitting the claim. In your case, it is clearly noted on the death certificate. If the regulations for the three new illnesses continue to follow in the path of the previous 12 illnesses on the list, I would think that you all you will need to do is just set back and let your claim speak for itself. Your claim, to me, looks "cut and dried."

I am not aware of lifestyle or family history having an effect on illnesses that are on the Agent Orange list. Smoking is a lifestyle. If that continues to be the case (and I think it will), I would believe that smoking would not figure in to the diagnosis especially, with him being a Vietnam veteran. If you think about it, Type II diabetes (also on the Agent Orange list) can be a result of lifestyle and or family history illness. But, if you are a Vietnam veteran, and you are diagnosed with this illness, your lifestyle and or family history is not taken into account.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<did your Cardiologist get a MUGA test ddone on you to establish a EF score ? Ask your Primary care to schedule you a MUGA exam, mine did as soon as I told her I wasw filing a AO Presumptive for IHD. took one hour, no pain, some gain. The EF score is a tool they use to grant the different Percentages for compensation>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Another heart test is the Stress Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Report. I'm using it as part of my submission of medical documents for IHD claim. It shows the EF% and lists, to me, the most important diagnosis phrase in the report: "abnormal consistent with ischemia." One more tool to have with you on this mission.