Court Definition Of Possibly

[Ricky]

I posted this on another site but would also like to see if any of my Hadit family has the answer.

As I understand it the VA does not provide any weight to a medical opinion from a doctor unless it states at least as likely.

A recent C/P mental health examiner provided in a recent C/P exam " anxiety possibly contributes to vet's IBS symptoms. Based upon this the VA denied service connection of the IBS (presumptive)due to service in GW1.

The IBS symptoms appeared in 2003 and the anxiety was caused by a heart attack which happened in 2005.

Based upon the start date of the IBS symptoms is seems that it would be impossible for the anxiety to be the CAUSE OF the IBS therefore, the vet deserves a Presumptive service connection under 3:117. To me "possibly contributes" means could make worse.... the symptoms but it definetly does not mean "is caused by.

Any opinions would be appreciated

Edited August 9, 2007 by Ricky

[Berta]

I dont get the "presumptive " part at all-

'possibly' could mean "at least as likely as not"-50-50

but it would have been better than the way the doctor stated it here.

If the doc said this:

"The IBS symptoms appeared in 2003 and the anxiety was caused by a heart attack which happened in 2005" they would have good rationale to deny the IBS claim.

But if there is no medical rationale for that- (say the veteran had been treated for anxiety prior to onset of IBS)

the denial can be challenged.

Could the IBS possibly (at least as likely as not) be due to side affects from any SC meds taken prior to 2003?

[Ricky]

Berta the vet filed a claim for presumptive service connection of IBS due to his service in Desert Storm.

His doctor could find no other cause for the IBS in 2003.

Now under the presumptive rule for Gulf War Vets if a doctor finds a cause for the issue then it will not be allowed for a presumptive connection for the doctor has now identified a cause. All Gulf War presumptive claims are due to undiagnosed Illness so if a doctor states that x is at least as likely as connected to x then presumptive service connection due to an undiagnosed illness is no longer authorized. Sorry I was not clear with that.

The problem now is that this casues a loss of two years of compensation.

Although his heart attack is service connected they did not even consider service connection on a direct basis. I think they should have since this was a C/P and they used the doc's statement to deny a claim for presumptive connection.

We will fight this rating. My point of the post was that I assure you that if you get an IMO from a doc to support your claim and he says "Possibly contributes to" the VA will totally ignore it. Therefore, my assumption is that the word possibly does not equal at least as likely than not in the VA thought process. After all the old saying is that anything is possible, but not likely.

Hope this clears up my previous post.

Edited August 9, 2007 by Ricky

[Berta]

Thanks- now I get it-

Presumptive as "qualifying chronic disability" 38 USC 1117.

This is a good example of arbitrary and capricious statements by the VA-

No known etiology in 2003 and then they come up with heart as etiology in 2005- VA BS at its finest-

The presumption period, BTW, for all Persian Gulf veterans with a chronic disabilioty manifested to at least 10% or more during the presumptive period- has been extended to Dec 31. 2006.

I am glad you are challenging this and helping this vet.

The VA medical rationale is ridiculous.

I feel the word 'possibly' should fit into the scenario to award under Benefit of doubt but as you said-

VA might not view it that way at all.

Is there any way this vet can get the IMO changed as to it's wording?

It sort of ticks me off that the VA does have a criteria for IMOs but I had to make up a template for that here for private IMOs because I found no info at all anywhere that really shows an IMO doctor what the VA needs to see in an IMO.

It pays to give this type of template or even the one I posted here to any private doc who is willing to write an IMO but never did one for a VA claim before.

The IMO doctors who have little blips at the top of hadit from time to time all know exactly how to prepare these IMOs.

[free_spirit_etc]

To me Possibly means - "there is a possibilty." But it does not neccessarily rise to the level of "at least as likely as not."

It could be a 10% chance or 30% chance. At least as likely as not would indicate that the possibility was such that there was at least a 50-50 chance - that it would be AS likely that it contributed than that it did not.

So possible just means it COULD happen - but doesn't really indicate that it is LIKELY to.

Free

Berta the vet filed a claim for presumptive service connection of IBS due to his service in Desert Storm.

His doctor could find no other cause for the IBS in 2003.

Now under the presumptive rule for Gulf War Vets if a doctor finds a cause for the issue then it will not be allowed for a presumptive connection for the doctor has now identified a cause. All Gulf War presumptive claims are due to undiagnosed Illness so if a doctor states that x is at least as likely as connected to x then presumptive service connection due to an undiagnosed illness is no longer authorized. Sorry I was not clear with that.

The problem now is that this casues a loss of two years of compensation.

Although his heart attack is service connected they did not even consider service connection on a direct basis. I think they should have since this was a C/P and they used the doc's statement to deny a claim for presumptive connection.

We will fight this rating. My point of the post was that I assure you that if you get an IMO from a doc to support your claim and he says "Possibly contributes to" the VA will totally ignore it. Therefore, my assumption is that the word possibly does not equal at least as likely than not in the VA thought process. After all the old saying is that anything is possible, but not likely.

Hope this clears up my previous post.

[LarryJ]

"A recent C/P mental health examiner provided in a recent C/P exam " anxiety possibly contributes to vet's IBS symptoms. Based upon this the VA denied service connection of the IBS (presumptive)due to service in GW1.

The IBS symptoms appeared in 2003 and the anxiety was caused by a heart attack which happened in 2005."

What I read as the VA examiner's statement is simply that the anxiety could, possibly but not positively, "contribute" to the vet's IBS. Yes, the vet's IBS was diagnosed in 2003 with no definitive cause, but, under the GW1 "presumptive causes", there is no requirement to make a diagnosis as to cause or affect. Hence, the examiner is simply stating that:

"The anxiety that the vet is now suffering from, could, possibly, be a contributing factor to the vet's "ongoing" IBS. But, NOT, the causitive factor.......for the causitive factor has already been "presumed" to have been his being in GW1."

If the VA is using their own medic's opinion in this way, it would be my idea that "consulting" again with this doc and giving him an opportunity to help straighten out some office twit's accidental or deliberate mis-reading of his examination, would probably be the quickest way around this crap.

Worked for me.

[LarryJ]

AND, you definitely do NOT want a "at least as likely" statement any where.

"could possibly" is, really, in this case, an absolutely wonderful statement.

Why? Because "possibly" means, or should mean, that there is NO concrete diagnosis as to causative factor(s). The examiner, by saying "possibly", simply means HE DOESN'T KNOW.

Kinda like me saying that I am, possibly, GOD. We DON't KNOW whether ol LarryJ is God or not, but, seeing as how we really DON'T KNOW who or what God IS, or what He is capable of, then, yeah, it's a possibility that LarryJ is, in fact, GOD......................????