tiso787

Thank you so so much Larry, you have been most helpful. but i'm going to send the form with my daughter so the school can fill it out, as you stated concerning OTHER paperwork involved. As far as the GPA i have no worries, she was among the top 18% of applicants the college selected this year. and again thank you. :) :) :)

Thanks guys, well that could be another solution i guess. never tried that route.

It has been many years since i've been back to this board and i see many new faces and hadit had a face lift i see also, looks nice. hope i'm in the right place though, God...is berta still here? I have to re submit a form 21-674 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SCHOOL ATTENDANCE for my daughter which graduated high school in march 2009 and started college in 1 sept 2009. We all know that of course you have summer vacation between those dates. Q: do i start(line 11E)with march 2009(last day of high school) OR when she officially started college?. My daughter also has what they call "work study". Q: is work studies considered as income (line 12) How about 11F ENDING DATE OF LAST TERM, Q:would that be the same as 9C EXPECTED DATE OF GRADUATION (26may2013)?. OR is this on a yearly thing?. I have one more question, then i'll leave you guys and gals alone...My daughter lives in the dorm at the college. she has a drop box address which i consider as a TEMP address. on my last form i put my address which is permanent(at the time it was permanent). Q: do i still use the permanent address or use the temporary address at her college on line 6 ?. I could just call VA up but i received this on a weekend and holidays are approaching, who in VA actually works during holidays.

I thought this site could be of value since its about doctor talking to doctors or other medical professions. http://www.chiroweb.com/cgi-bin/ubb/open/f...e=30&LastLogin= Happy reading!! The Controlled Clinical Trial: An Analysis by Harris L. Coulter, Ph.D. In THE CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL: AN ANALYSIS, Harris Coulter, author of DIVIDED LEGACY: A HISTORY OF THE SCHISM IN MEDICAL THOUGHT and DPT: A SHOT IN THE DARK, critically examines the usefulness of randomised clinical trials. His thorough research, based almost exclusively on medical literature, reveals why the "controlled clinical trial" (CCT) cannot guarantee drug safety and efficacy. Coulter argues that while allopaths talk pompously about this so-called "gold standard" of medicine, no controlled clinical trial matching the textbook definition has ever been performed. "Because the theoretical requirements are unrealistic and unscientific. How can you test a drug on 12 or 100 or 1,000 identical or 'homogenous' people all with the same thing wrong with them? Allopaths can't even find five homogenous patients. You'll always find things that are different between people, because we are all chemically, physically, structurally, and emotionally unique. The CCT can never tell a doctor how a given patient will react to a given drug at any given time. The findings from the so-called controlled clinical trial are useless in one-on-one doctor patient interactions." THE CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL not only investigates the science behind the CCT, but also delves into its history and politics. According to Coulter, the CCT has become popular primarily for political reasons. "It's used as a stick to beat alternative medicine with for failing to perform these trials. Since these trials are very expensive it costs about $200 million today to get a new drug on the market the controlled clinical trial is really an instrument for limiting competition in medicine, and for raising the costs of medicines to the public." He asserts that monopolistic objectives are not the only built-in fraud feature of the CCT. Fraud in safety testing of drugs is a strong likelihood. The clinical investigator is paid enormous sums of money by the very manufacturer of the drug, and financial temptation to perform dishonest trials is strong. It's a very lucrative business - many of them receive more than $1 million annually from their testing programs. Coulter dedicates a chapter of the book to demonstrate the extent of fraudulent drug testing. "Frightful examples of dishonesty, fraud, negligence, and other kinds of wrongdoing in clinical trials have been staple fare for readers of the [uS] daily press since the 1970s, when Congressional committees and subcommittees renewed their interest in the topic." One typical example cited is that in the United States in 1976 the General Accounting Office found that trials of a drug designed to prevent rejection of kidney transplants had led to 85 deaths in the 650 patients participating, and not one of these deaths was reported to the Food and Drug Administration. Senator Edward Kennedy, conducting a Hearing of the Senate Health Subcommittee, noted that if only 10% of the data from ongoing clinical trials is defective, the problem is enormous. "When you consider the potential cumulative effect of faulty animal data coupled with faulty human data, you have the elements of a regulatory nightmare." While Coulter doesn't dismiss the CCT outright - saying that if it's properly conducted it may have some role - he offers an alternative that helps overcome the problem of biological and physiological differences among patients. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Corporate Crime in the Pharmaceutical Industry by Dr John Braithwaite The sordid behaviour of today's pharmaceutical corporations has been further demonstrated by Dr John Braithwaite, now a Trade Practices Commissioner, in his devastating exposé, CORPORATE CRIME IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY (1984). International bribery and corruption, fraud in the testing of drugs, criminal negligence in the unsafe manufacture of drugs - the pharmaceutical industry has a worse record of law-breaking than any other industry. Describing many examples of corporate crime, which shows the depth and seriousness of the crime problem in the pharmaceutical industry, Dr Braithwaite's revealing study is based on extensive international research, including interviews of 131 senior executives of pharmaceutical companies in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico and Guatemala. The book shows how pharmaceutical multinationals defy the intent of laws regulating safety of drugs by bribery, false advertising, fraud in the safety testing of drugs, unsafe manufacturing processes, smuggling and international law evasion strategies. At the time of researching the subject, Braithwaite was a Research Criminologist at the Australian Institute of Criminology and a Fulbright Fellow affiliated to the University of California, Irvine and the United Nations Center on Transnational Corporations. "Data fabrication is so widespread", says Dr Braithwaite, "that it is called 'making' in the Japanese pharmaceutical industry, 'graphiting' or 'dry labelling' in the United States." He further states: "Pharmaceutical companies face great temptations to mislead health authorities about the safety of their products. It is a make or break industry - many companies get virtually all their profits from just two or three therapeutic winners. Most of the data that the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee relies upon in deciding questions of safety and efficacy is data from other countries, particularly the US. Inquiries into scientific fraud in the US have shown there is a substantial problem of fraud in safety testing of drugs in the US, just as has been documented in Japan." The book reports that between 1977 and 1980 the United States Food and Drug Administration have discovered 62 doctors who had submitted manipulated or downright falsified clinical data. A study conducted by the FDA has revealed that one in five doctors investigated, who carry out field research of new drugs, had invented the data they sent to the drug companies, and pocketed the fees. Citing case examples, Dr Braithwaite states: "The problem is that most fraud in clinical trials is unlikely to even be detected. Most cases which do come to public attention only do so because of extraordinary carelessness by the criminal physician..." According to Dr Judith Jones, Director of the Division of Drug Experience at the FDA, if the data obtained by a clinician proves unsatisfactory towards the drug being investigated, it is quite in order for the company to continue trials elsewhere until satisfactory results and testimonials are achieved. Unfavourable results are very rarely published and clinicians are pressured into keeping quiet about such data. It is very easy for the drug company to arrange appropriate clinical trials by approaching a sympathetic clinician to produce the desired results that would assist the intended application of the drug. The incentive for clinical investigators to fabricate data is enormous. As much as $1000 per subject is paid by American companies, which enables some doctors to earn up to $1 million a year from drug research, and investigating clinicians know all too well that if they don't produce the desired data, the loss of future work is inevitable. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Poisonous Prescriptions by Dr Lisa Landymore-Lim "Given that a poison is ANY substance that when introduced into or absorbed by the body injures health or destroys life, most of today's pharmaceutical preparations, because of their harmful effects, may be labelled poisonous." The above opening to POISONOUS PRESCRIPTIONS (1994) gives the gist of the author's view on allopathic drugs. A view that could not be easily dismissed by health authorities, as Dr Landymore-Lim, a British scientist, is well qualified by their own standards. She graduated in 1983 from the School of Chemistry and Molecular Sciences, University of Sussex, England, with a First Class Honours degree in Chemistry by Thesis. In 1984 she was awarded a study scholarship by the Swedish Institute, and has worked briefly for the Medical Research Council at the National Institute for Medical Research, London, and at the Dunn Nutrition Unit, Cambridge. Concerned about preventing disease, Landymore-Lim is now an independent consultant and investigator, focusing on the harmful effects of pharmaceutical drugs and other chemicals. POISONOUS PRESCRIPTIONS, which evolved from the author's clinical research conducted in the UK, provides readers with an insight into the poisonous nature of pharmaceutical drugs. The book includes information on a number of commonly used drugs in the United Kingdom and other industrialised countries, paying particular attention to those that are routinely pushed onto babies and young children. Among the numerous other adverse reactions that are inherently linked to all drugs, Landymore-Lim's investigations have found that diabetes and asthma can result from exposure to antibiotics and other commonly used pharmaceutical drugs. To support her assertions she provides ample evidence from hospital records and her own studies and she explains clearly and simply the complex mechanisms behind the diabetes and asthma-causing properties of chemicals. In dispelling the authorities' widely held misconception that diabetes is largely a genetic disorder Landymore-Lim provides statistics and graphs showing how the incidence of diabetes in industrialised countries has dramatically increased in the last 40 years, coinciding with the rapid rise in the use of drugs during that time period. No doubt that if Dr Landymore-Lim's information breaks through the Media censorship it will send shock waves through the medical profession. We support her efforts and urge you to assist her group's on-going research. The Prevention of Diseases & Disability (PODD) would like to hear from anyone in Australia who has suffered from any serious drug-related condition to be included on a register. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox Research Shows that Vaccines Represent a Medical Assault on the Immune System by Viera Scheibner Ph.D. This book (published 1993) is a concise summary of the results of orthodox medical research into vaccines and their effects. It aims to inform medical professionals, parents and the general public about short and long-term dangerous side-effects, including brain damage and death, of vaccines; of the ineffectiveness of vaccines in preventing infectious diseases, as shown by epidemics in fully vaccinated populations; and the causal link between DPT and polio vaccines and cot death. Dr Viera Scheibner, retired Principal Research Scientist for the NSW Government with a doctorate in Natural Sciences, has published 3 books and some 90 scientific papers in refereed scientific journals in Australia and overseas during her distinguished career. She and her husband, Leif Karlsson, an electronic engineer specialising in patient monitoring systems, developed Cotwatch, a true breathing monitor for babies. Vaccination proved to be the most prominent stressful event to sound the alarm. A microprocessor version of Cotwatch recording babies' breathing patterns presented the effect of vaccination clearly on the computer print-outs and the link between vaccine injections and cot death became painfully obvious. Following this finding, Dr Scheibner studied some 30,000 pages of medical papers dealing with vaccination. She found no evidence that vaccines are safe or effective. Vaccines are highly noxious. They contain formaldehyde, aluminium phosphate, thiomersal (mercury compound), foreign proteins (antigens) and contaminating animal proteins and viruses from the tissues used as growth medium to culture the viral and bacterial components of vaccines. None of these substances should ever be injected into human beings. They erode the immune system and alter the immunological response to diseases. The appearance of many new, autoimmune diseases like asthma, affecting alarming numbers of children, childhood leukaemia, and cancer, the enormous upsurge in the incidence of cerebral palsy and infantile convulsions seen in children of vaccination age and not before, should all be taken as serious warnings. Infectious diseases contracted at the appropriate age and allowed to run their course are beneficial because they serve to prime and mature the child's immune system. The overwhelming evidence from the numerous human clinical and epidemiological studies cited by Dr Scheibner demonstrates beyond any doubt the dangers and ineffectiveness of vaccinations and her book is a most valuable contribution towards exposing the myth of vaccinations. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cot Death Cover-Up? by Dr Jim Sprott THE COT DEATH COVER-UP? is the culmination of over fifteen years of cot death research by the author, a highly respected consulting chemist and forensic scientist from New Zealand. In 1986 Sprott arrived at the conclusion that babies were succumbing to cot death because of inadvertent gaseous poisoning by an extremely toxic nerve gas generated by microbiological action on something within the baby's cot, but he wasn't able to identify the gas. Then in 1989 consulting scientist Barry Richardson, working independently in Britain came to the same conclusion and in addition identified the offending gases. It was not long before the two teamed-up to work on what they describe as the "Richardson Hypothesis". According to Sprott the three identified gases that were generated from mattresses on which babies died of SIDS are "phosphine, arsine and stibine, all extremely toxic 'nerve gases'. They are produced by the action of the otherwise harmless fungus Scopulariopsis brevicaulis on substances containing phosphorus, arsenic and antimony. These elements are often present in cot and other mattresses." These odourless but intensely poisonous gases, with toxicities about 100 times as great as hydrogen cyanide (prussic acid), act upon the baby's nervous system to inhibit breathing and heart function. The problem, in fact, has been first identified as far back as the 1880's when the mystery of thousands of unexpected child deaths throughout Western Europe and the UK was solved by Italian chemist Gosio. He had discovered that deaths were due to a toxic gas, arsine and/or alkyl homologues generated by the micro-organism Scopulariopsis brevicaulis (then known as Penicillium brevicaules). It acted upon copper arsenate, used in green pigments in wallpaper, and arsenious oxide, used as a preservative in wallpaper glue. THE COT DEATH COVER-UP? contains ample evidence supporting Sprott and Richardson's findings. Among the many graphs it contains one that demonstrates the rapid drop in cot deaths in Britain in 1986-1994. The graph, based on official statistics, shows that when the findings were first made public in mid-1989 the SIDS rate started to fall immediately, dropping 35 per cent by the time the official "Back to Sleep" campaign was launched in December 1991. In the period 1989-1994, Britain saw a staggering 70 per cent reduction in the SIDS rate. Despite these remarkable results, Sprott and Richardson were fiercely opposed by their respective country's health authorities and official SIDS groups. Their struggle for official recognition of their findings is reminiscent to that of other independent SIDS researchers such as Dr Archie Kalokerinos and Dr Glen Dettman, who had proved that severe depletion of a child's vitamin C level, precipitated by various insults including childhood vaccinations, could predispose it to SIDS. The author says that the book is not aimed at academics (although its first-class material should suffice their snobbery), but is aimed at parents - parents who have to suffer the consequences of a system that puts them and their babies last in the "war" against this human tragedy known as SIDS.

Has anyone given it a thought that the va employee is the one behind this. Stop and think, we all know that the numbers range about 26.5 million, I heard on CNN that certain people would give 15 dollars a pop, add that up and it comes to 397.5 million, NICE little nestegg. It would also explain why no names have surfaced ie;indentity theft, credit card fraud. the feds are watching. as soon as he gets his punishment (which is probably a 5 year probation), he's scott clean. sure beats a VA paycheck every month. Hoppy, GREAT security.......but tell me...do you still have to register your boat. I've got my WIFE as my security. Peter

Now its down to 19.3 million (according to local news), before that, 24.? million, and before that, 26.? million. does anyone know. I think its the smoke and mirrors again, trying to divert our eye from another issue at hand. I have not heard any vets complaining of bank accounts being broke into also. this is my opinion. Peter

Hi everyone, I thought i'd do some research on osteoarthritis, came across this........ Of course i can't suscribe to these people to get the full story. http://ard.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/65/5/623 The relation between progressive osteoarthritis of the knee and long term progression of osteoarthritis of the hand, hip, and lumbar spine G Hassett1, D J Hart1, D V Doyle2, L March3 and T D Spector1 1 Twin Research and Genetic Epidemiology Unit, St Thomas’ Hospital, London SE1, UK 2 Whipps Cross Hospital, Department of Rheumatology, London E11, UK 3 University of Sydney, Professorial Department of Rheumatology, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia Correspondence to: Dr Geraldine Hassett Professorial Department of Rheumatology, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW 2065, Australia; geraldinehassett@bigpond.com Background: The association between progression of knee osteoarthritis and progression of osteoarthritis at sites distant from the knee is unclear because of a lack of multisite longitudinal progression data. Objective: To examine the association between radiological progression of knee osteoarthritis and osteoarthritis of the hands, hips, and lumbar spine in a population based cohort. Methods: 914 women had knee x rays taken 10 years apart, which were read for the presence of osteophytes and joint space narrowing (JSN). Progression status was available for hand, hip, and lumbar spine x rays over the same 8 to 10 year period. The association between progression of knee osteoarthritis and osteoarthritis at other sites was analysed using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) in logistic regression models. Results: 89 of 133 women had progression of knee osteoarthritis based on osteophytes, and 51 of 148 based on JSN definition. Progression of JSN in the knee was predicted by progression in lumbar spine disc space narrowing (OR = 2.9 (95% CI 1.2 to 7.5)) and hip JSN (OR = 2.0 (1.0 to 4.2)). No consistent effects were seen for hand osteoarthritis. The associations remained after adjustment for age and body mass index. Conclusions: Progression of knee osteoarthritis is associated with progression of lumbar spine and hip osteoarthritis. This may have implications for trial methodology, the selection of patients for osteoarthritis research, and advice for patients on prognosis of osteoarthritis. Peter

Thanks Berta for the reply, I had a hunch i did this wrong, some of us had no idea of how VA procedures worked. we have to be careful when it comes to conditions also. I was diagnosed in the Army as PFPS both knees, I was not aware that the ortho doctor had put down "Chronic PFPS both knees", one doctor also put down on a consult sheet " In reference to secondary DJD", Army X-ray doctor also stated "narrow space sugest degenrative disc disease of the medial minicus", 2 VA doctors said it was osteoarthritis(DJD), 4 Civ. doctors said it was osteoarthritis. So VA RO said I had Tendonitis and it was suspose to get better(this was what the last Army ortho doctor said it was, if they would have thumb a little deeper, they would have found chronic PFPS). Bingo!!!....After a year of busting my buns of trying to get evidence and being denied, the RO found my chronic PFPS diagnoses. No osteoarthritis was diagnosed in service. As far as i know it could be PFPS and osteoarthritis sat in "vary" soon after service. Again, Thank you for your time Berta Peter

Hi Everyone, When I filled out my first "statement of claim", I wrote down that I was having problems with my knees, I did not give any diagnoses from other doctors. Is it true that if one does not put down on the "statement of claim" any medical conditions that VA or a Civ. doctor just happen to find, VA does not have to award you that condition?. In other words "you did not file it, we do not award it" (even when VA found it). I also noticed that while going thru my c-file, the only "RO rating notes" was on my knees. No other conditions had a "RO rating notes" (i.e. Arthritis, multiple joint DJD, Hips, kneck, hands, depression/stress). Does the RO have to fill these out?. Thank you Peter

Why was I not surprized to see Steve Buyers name. this guy wanted to re-define of what a "disabled veteran" was. Peter

Hi everyone, Doing research and came across this site that might be useful, its from louisville, ky but has many other links also. Hope this helps. http://www.louisvillelaw.com/federal/veterans.htm Peter

I would do the same, only just send the paperwork to the other vet and explain to them what happened, that way if the RO was trying to "hide" info from the other vet he/she would be righted. Man that would make a RO's day. It also sounds like VA had an inspection in that department and they had to get rid of the clutter on the desk. I would make copies for future references just in case. Peter

Thank for the reply hoppy, I really do wander why my brother said that, this doctor was a referral from my family doctor. as far as the nexis is concerned, I recieved a letter from my family doctor stating "in my opinion it is more then likely that the osteoarthritis is secondary to the bilateral knee condition when first seen 12/21/89". I got out of the service 07/24/89, so I covered my tracks on that one, even though VA refuse to look at what the family doctor found (limitation of motion). I think that i should just go and get an exam for my first visit with the ortho doctor and on my second visit, take my paperwork. Thanks again, if anyone else like to say something and you don't want to post.....email me. Tiso_us@yahoo.com Peter

Hi everyone, I'm scheduled to go and see an Ortho doctor in two weeks, The doctor is a retired army Ortho surgeon. He was the Doctor that helped my brother get his TDIU and did the surgery on him. VA respects his decision when it comes to disability. to give everyone a run down on my condition, I'm getting 30% for PFPS for my left and right knees, I was graded as 5257, and this was many years back. Now, my right knee has osteoarthritis, I have GERD, and I've got (according to the civ Doctor report) Cronic degenerative Disc disease in my lower back with osteopenia above that soon to be osteoporosis if i don't get my calcium under control, I've been taking fosamax but it has not done me any good so i had it changed to beniva. I also use a cane. Question: is there a link between osteoarthritis of the knee and lower back osteoarthitis?. (one case was at Doctor Bash's website no. 24) http://www.veteransmedadvisor.com/list2.html Question: what if any, documentation should i take to the Civilian Ortho doctor?, I don't want to screw this one up like i did in the past. I do have recent X-Rays here with me. my brother said not to take anything and not to mention VA. Thank you, Peter

Hi everyone, I have a Vet that let his case become final. this has been many years ago. I was going thru his medical records and found out that he was diagnosed with depression due to stress, I found out that after talking to him that one of the main reason he did not appeal his last VA physical exam was he could not stand the stress any more after 5 years of battling the VA. His last exam had all kinds of issues that the VARO failed to mentioned in the SOC. Question: Should the VA allow stress related depression grounds to reopen a claim.? Thank you Peter