It's A Medical Miracle..!

[jecsb4]

Boy did I get hosed by ….

I got bush whacked by QTC! I currently have 10% for bilateral hammertoes, 10% bilateral bunon surgery and 30% bilateral pes planus w/ plantar fasciitis! Well I asked for a relook based on new evidence – the evidence was pretty significant – the VA podiatrist listed all my feet issues mentioned above along with posterior tibial tendon disfunction – bilateral, and other things and wrote that no question my feet were SC.

So, I felt I should get the higher rating. SO the VARO sent me to a contracted internal med dr! Well I just got the results via FOIA. It’s a medical miracle!!!

Dr. said I had no hammer, bunions, metatarsalgia. And my flat feet went from bilateral to just one foot! My plantar fasciitis stayed the same.

Earlier this week, I gave to my VSO a IMO from a podiatrist that has done the actual surgery on me for hammer and bunions! The ones that don’t exist anymore pert the internal med dr! My doctor said my feet were in the top of the list as being severe for my numerous feet issues. The IMO is worded strongly to leave no doubt of the severity and the proper rating. Anyway I turned in the IMO with my statement. My feet are worse since their rating decision and my Dr even took pictures which I submitted along with some that I had taken.

So, will the VARO go with what my doctors (including what the VA foot doctor) says or just go by what this contract doctor said. This doctor is the only one who has denied my claims.

Will they actually try and reduce my rating? The preponderance of evidence is on my side. If they deny my recon and worse try to reduce me, I think I will try to have a local hearing.

I know for one thing, flat feet, hammertoe and bunion surgery doesn’t just go away, unless you surgery remove the limbs.

In my SOC , the VARO determined my feet increased to a 30, but now that this one doctor says otherwise, what will they do? What is my best approach to this, wait for their decision, get another opinion. See what they do with my statement and IMO, or file even more feet claims for week feet (ankles give out, and I also have a dropped foot condition.), and for Foot Injury Other (tendon tears) . I included all of that in my info and wanted them to basically count all of that as a whole to see how it effected my flat feet vs additional separate claims. Was that a good strategy? Should I change course? Ask my doctor to refute these new "findings"?

Thanks all.

[Ricky]

On the claim concerning the shrapnel wounds - an award would only be given if there was notable scarring or evidence of a current disability. The soldier in the news piece never mentioned any current disability from them. His wife's bone to pick with the VA was that the rating decision stated not due to military service - if you look at some of your previous rating decisions this is the way the VA words it if there is no disability associated with your claim. If you claim something and they or the C/P doc does not see it the at the end of the decision "xxxxxx not due to military service". This is because of the law which states a you must have a current disability inorder to be successful in your claim. Just because you were hit with shrapnel and were wounded does not mean you will be service connected for that alone - there must be a disability - he nor his wife ever mentioned a disability.

Now if he had painful scars that meet the definition of a disability then he would/should have been SC even if at a 0 percent. If he still has shranpel in his body and it is the cause of something else then the would/should be SC. Not taking up for the VA but neither of them mentioned a current disability due to the wounds. If they had read the entire last half of the rating decision on TV I betcha it would have stated words to the effect that inorder for a condition to be SC it had to occur or becaused by military service and resulted in a current disability.

As to bone spurs yes the do sometimes go away - THEY GET SO DANG BAD THEY START TO BREAK OR RUB AGAINST OTHER PARTS IN THE AREA CAUSING TERRIBLE PAIN AND WEAR THEMSELVES DOWN. That don't mean they are healed this doc was an idiot!!!!! JB is correct in that you should get the VA xrays take to your TREATING doc and have him write you and opinion using the VA's xrays - as Berta always says use their on damn evidence against them - that makes it kinda of hard for them to swallow.

This is a classic case/situation that I described in a recommendation letter that I sent the congress idiot Filner about a treating doc providing medical evidence and us still having to attend a C/P for 10 mins with an idiot who has never treated us and is usually a GP doc or internal med guy and knows nothing about muscle, bone, neuro etc.... issues. It is a waste of time and money - the VA should only require a C/P if there is evidence that we went doc shopping and paid some quack foregin doc to write a favorable report (a C/P in the reverse). I still have not heard back.....maybe one day.

[Ricky]

On the claim concerning the shrapnel wounds - an award would only be given if there was notable scarring or evidence of a current disability. The soldier in the news piece never mentioned any current disability from them. His wife's bone to pick with the VA was that the rating decision stated not due to military service - if you look at some of your previous rating decisions this is the way the VA words it if there is no evidence of a DISABILITY associated with your claim. It was not really saying that the shrapenl wounds were not due to military service it was indicating that there was no disability due to military service. If you claim something and they or the C/P doc does not see it the at the end of the decision "xxxxxx not due to military service". This is because of the law which states a you must have a current disability inorder to be successful in your claim. Just because you were hit with shrapnel and were wounded does not mean you will be service connected for that alone - there must be a disability - he nor his wife ever mentioned a disability.

Now if he had painful scars that meet the definition of a disability then he would/should have been SC even if at a 0 percent. If he still has shranpel in his body and it is the cause of something else then the would/should be SC. Not taking up for the VA but neither of them mentioned a current disability due to the wounds. If they had read the entire last half of the rating decision on TV I betcha it would have stated words to the effect that inorder for a condition to be SC it had to occur or becaused by military service and resulted in a current disability.

As to bone spurs yes the do sometimes go away - THEY GET SO DANG BAD THEY START TO BREAK OR RUB AGAINST OTHER PARTS IN THE AREA CAUSING TERRIBLE PAIN AND WEAR THEMSELVES DOWN. That don't mean they are healed this doc was an idiot!!!!! JB is correct in that you should get the VA xrays take to your TREATING doc and have him write you and opinion using the VA's xrays - as Berta always says use their on damn evidence against them - that makes it kinda of hard for them to swallow.

This is a classic case/situation that I described in a recommendation letter that I sent the congress idiot Filner about a treating doc providing medical evidence and us still having to attend a C/P for 10 mins with an idiot who has never treated us and is usually a GP doc or internal med guy and knows nothing about muscle, bone, neuro etc.... issues. It is a waste of time and money - the VA should only require a C/P if there is evidence that we went doc shopping and paid some quack foregin doc to write a favorable report (a C/P in the reverse). I still have not heard back.....maybe one day.

Edited December 9, 2007 by Ricky

[jecsb4]

On the claim concerning the shrapnel wounds - an award would only be given if there was notable scarring or evidence of a current disability. The soldier in the news piece never mentioned any current disability from them. His wife's bone to pick with the VA was that the rating decision stated not due to military service - if you look at some of your previous rating decisions this is the way the VA words it if there is no disability associated with your claim. If you claim something and they or the C/P doc does not see it the at the end of the decision "xxxxxx not due to military service". This is because of the law which states a you must have a current disability inorder to be successful in your claim. Just because you were hit with shrapnel and were wounded does not mean you will be service connected for that alone - there must be a disability - he nor his wife ever mentioned a disability.

Now if he had painful scars that meet the definition of a disability then he would/should have been SC even if at a 0 percent. If he still has shranpel in his body and it is the cause of something else then the would/should be SC. Not taking up for the VA but neither of them mentioned a current disability due to the wounds. If they had read the entire last half of the rating decision on TV I betcha it would have stated words to the effect that inorder for a condition to be SC it had to occur or becaused by military service and resulted in a current disability.

As to bone spurs yes the do sometimes go away - THEY GET SO DANG BAD THEY START TO BREAK OR RUB AGAINST OTHER PARTS IN THE AREA CAUSING TERRIBLE PAIN AND WEAR THEMSELVES DOWN. That don't mean they are healed this doc was an idiot!!!!! JB is correct in that you should get the VA xrays take to your TREATING doc and have him write you and opinion using the VA's xrays - as Berta always says use their on damn evidence against them - that makes it kinda of hard for them to swallow.

This is a classic case/situation that I described in a recommendation letter that I sent the congress idiot Filner about a treating doc providing medical evidence and us still having to attend a C/P for 10 mins with an idiot who has never treated us and is usually a GP doc or internal med guy and knows nothing about muscle, bone, neuro etc.... issues. It is a waste of time and money - the VA should only require a C/P if there is evidence that we went doc shopping and paid some quack foregin doc to write a favorable report (a C/P in the reverse). I still have not heard back.....maybe one day.

Ricky,

I totally agree, espically your last paragraph. In my case, even after a VA dr, and two private drs all agree on my current physical state they send me to a fairly young non specialist dr. This exam coat almost $500 and then the dr wrote that you for sending me this uunusual case!!!! If that doesn't spell inexperience - than I don't what does!!!

So in 5 minurs this dr erased over 5 years of my medical history saying I don't have any conditions!!

[Berta]

What a crock!

I get so upset when I read stuff like this-

(and have gotten plenty of VA quakola crap myself)

"So, will the VARO go with what my doctors (including what the VA foot doctor) says or just go by what this contract doctor said. This doctor is the only one who has denied my claims"

It seems to me that your evidence completely out-weighs that faulty QTC opinion.

I dont understand this:

"In my SOC , the VARO determined my feet increased to a 30, but now that this one doctor says otherwise, what will they do? What is my best approach to this, wait for their decision, get another opinion"

You mean they got this additional opinion that was not mentioned in the SOC?

SOCs- I believe every single statement they said against the claim has to be rebutted-

but I dont understand why they gave you another exam?

Sounds like your IMO will fully knock their negative one down.

[jecsb4]

What a crock!

I get so upset when I read stuff like this-

(and have gotten plenty of VA quakola crap myself)

"So, will the VARO go with what my doctors (including what the VA foot doctor) says or just go by what this contract doctor said. This doctor is the only one who has denied my claims"

It seems to me that your evidence completely out-weighs that faulty QTC opinion.

I dont understand this:

"In my SOC , the VARO determined my feet increased to a 30, but now that this one doctor says otherwise, what will they do? What is my best approach to this, wait for their decision, get another opinion"

You mean they got this additional opinion that was not mentioned in the SOC?

SOCs- I believe every single statement they said against the claim has to be rebutted-

but I dont understand why they gave you another exam?

Sounds like your IMO will fully knock their negative one down.

Berta,

What I meant to say was that when I got my SOC – I got a partial grant of 30%. After that decision, I had been to the VA podiatrist. It was then that he detailed all of my additional problems. I then requested reconsideration, since this new evidence was not part of their rating decision in the SOC and still was within the timeframe (60 days) since I received the SOC.

I then went to 2 private Drs and they concurred. Well all of that data was not good enough for them, and they sent me to this contracted quack that in only an 8 minute exam erased 5 years of my feet conditions! Who felt that "my case was interesting"!!

I requested the C&P via FOIA and that is when I realized this. I actually submitted the IMO prior to my knowing the outcome of the quack C&P exam.

I definitely do have a preponderance of evidence on my side, heck even the VARO said I had these conditions – just not in their opinion at 50%.

So I need to decide what to do:

1. Nothing – wait for the approval or the SSCO, or maybe the leave it unchanged

2. See the VA dr again

3. Write a statement and submit it refuting the quacks summary with the evidence

I am inclined to do the 3. Berta what would you do? Anyone else, opinions.

Thanks.

[Berta]

I would make sure- by letter-that they are reconsidering the decision -based on the IMO.

I only hope they dont pull on you what they pulled on me-in 2006-

in spite of receipt of my 2004 IMO in response to a SOC,(and my POA said it was also discussed at a conference with the DRO- but it wasnt)

the RO obtained a quack opinion, and then they sent my claim to the BVA-I got it back though-and got an additional IMO too-

My position with the VA is - send them ANYTHING you can at any time- to combat any negative medical stuff.

Although we are not doctors, some medical rebuttals by lay people as claimants can be made due to plain old common sense -something that seems to defy the VA's logic.

Maybe best to see what the IMO response is from them-you might not need another IMO to refute them.

In my case I feel the VA had no right to even get a VA opinion-as they had said that I had sent them no evidence (not true)so why did they even bother- but then again- I am glad they did get this VA opinion because it allowed Dr. Bash to refute it and expand on his original opinion.

Also I rebutted it too-it was based on only 3 or 4 medical records faxed to her and she was in Buffalo while my husband's entire stack of records had been sent here to the Bath VARO and remained here during this socalled VA medical review.I guess at least 100 miles away from where the VA doctor did the opinion.

The VA doc did not even know that I had proven wrongful death and numerous other misdiagnosis.And couldnt tell military time (from the records)

and didnt even have a clue on Rod's conditions and the cause of his death.

The VA Iris system actually confirmed for me (and I was thrilled)that Rod's records had been sent to the local VA and remained there for many weeks -as this 'review' of his records took place in Buffalo.

I still laugh at another Iris email I got when I double checked in case I needed to use this against them-

"MRS SIMMONS I TOLD YOU ALREADY THE VETERANS ENTIRE 3 VOLUMES OF MEDICAL RECORDS HAVE BEEN AT THE BATH VAMC FOR WEEKS!"

I loved that.Proof that the examiner did not have what she should have had to support her medical"rationale" which Dr. Bash said was "medically inaccurate"-and rebutted it all in his 2nd IMO.

I am sending VA letter for telephonic conference but have not told them of the additional IMO I expect any day now-since they have not yet addressed, acknowledged, or rebutted at all any of my IMOs maybe I could hire an Elvis impersonator in Buffalo to present this one to them-

anything to get it acknowledged and considered properly-