I wont be around much here for next few days or week- too much to do regarding my AO claim-and other VAola stuff-
But in accessing some citations from the CAVC -the BVA decisions are a good place to find what you need-I just found this extraordinary BVA decision.
As I have said before many times ( yet had few actual decisions to support my statements) the VA will SC anything to AO exposure -regardless if not on the presumptive list-if the veteran or widow -as in this case- can obtain ample medical evidence of AO etiology.
"The Board finds that the preponderance of the medical
evidence indicates that the veteran's terminal pulmonary
fibrosis was at least as likely as not caused by exposure to
herbicide agents during his period of active service in
Vietnam. The opinions to this effect from Dr. White, the
veteran's treating physician, and Dr. Caralis, who conducted
a biopsy of the veteran's lungs, are the most expert and
fully reasoned specific medical opinions of record. The
articles and publications submitted by the veteran's
surviving spouse serve to demonstrate that the medical
opinions provided by Dr. White and Dr. Caralis are medically
plausible and based on a recognized theory of etiology. In
light of the foregoing, entitlement to service connection for
the cause of the veteran's death is warranted.
ORDER
Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the
veteran's death is granted."
____________________________________________
The widow in this case was also a nurse but VA gave limited weight to her opinions.
However the VA gave not only weight to her IMos but also to numerous interest abstracts she supplied as well.
I am attempting to support my claim for the remand- as the remand failed to address much of my evidence-3 IMos and many internet treatises and abstracts- associated with the clinical record, as well as many past SOCs and SSOCs on claims I have won that are prime facie evidence for my present claim.
On Internet abstracts etc.----
The Court notes that where
medical treatise evidence discusses relationships between conditions with
a "degree of certainty," a claimant may use such evidence to meet the
requirement for a medical nexus. See Wallin v. West, 11 Vet.App. 509,
514 (1998). On the other hand, if the medical treatise discusses the
relationship in more generic terms, the treatise is insufficient to meet
the requirement for a medical nexus. See Sacks v. West, 11 Vet.App. 314,
In the past the Court has recognized that sufficiently detailed
medical-treatise evidence may be competent to
establish facts in support of an appellant's claim. See Timberlake v.
Gober, 14 Vet.App. 122, 130-31 (2000)
As stated buy the US CAVC within No. 03-1815
Robert W. Brockhouse, Appellant,
v.
R. James Nicholson
A veteran or widow should Never overlook the probative value of internet abstracts and treatises as well as citations to established known standard medical knowledge.
But this internet evidence should just be used as the icing on the cake.
Bonafide competent medical evidence (which often will only come from a 'real' doctor- one who is independent of the VA and has expertise in the filed of the disability) is the main evidence that the VA will award on.
Question
Berta
I wont be around much here for next few days or week- too much to do regarding my AO claim-and other VAola stuff-
But in accessing some citations from the CAVC -the BVA decisions are a good place to find what you need-I just found this extraordinary BVA decision.
As I have said before many times ( yet had few actual decisions to support my statements) the VA will SC anything to AO exposure -regardless if not on the presumptive list-if the veteran or widow -as in this case- can obtain ample medical evidence of AO etiology.
"The Board finds that the preponderance of the medical
evidence indicates that the veteran's terminal pulmonary
fibrosis was at least as likely as not caused by exposure to
herbicide agents during his period of active service in
Vietnam. The opinions to this effect from Dr. White, the
veteran's treating physician, and Dr. Caralis, who conducted
a biopsy of the veteran's lungs, are the most expert and
fully reasoned specific medical opinions of record. The
articles and publications submitted by the veteran's
surviving spouse serve to demonstrate that the medical
opinions provided by Dr. White and Dr. Caralis are medically
plausible and based on a recognized theory of etiology. In
light of the foregoing, entitlement to service connection for
the cause of the veteran's death is warranted.
ORDER
Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the
veteran's death is granted."
____________________________________________
The widow in this case was also a nurse but VA gave limited weight to her opinions.
However the VA gave not only weight to her IMos but also to numerous interest abstracts she supplied as well.
I am attempting to support my claim for the remand- as the remand failed to address much of my evidence-3 IMos and many internet treatises and abstracts- associated with the clinical record, as well as many past SOCs and SSOCs on claims I have won that are prime facie evidence for my present claim.
On Internet abstracts etc.----
The Court notes that where
medical treatise evidence discusses relationships between conditions with
a "degree of certainty," a claimant may use such evidence to meet the
requirement for a medical nexus. See Wallin v. West, 11 Vet.App. 509,
514 (1998). On the other hand, if the medical treatise discusses the
relationship in more generic terms, the treatise is insufficient to meet
the requirement for a medical nexus. See Sacks v. West, 11 Vet.App. 314,
--------------------------------------------------------
In the past the Court has recognized that sufficiently detailed
medical-treatise evidence may be competent to
establish facts in support of an appellant's claim. See Timberlake v.
Gober, 14 Vet.App. 122, 130-31 (2000)
As stated buy the US CAVC within No. 03-1815
Robert W. Brockhouse, Appellant,
v.
R. James Nicholson
A veteran or widow should Never overlook the probative value of internet abstracts and treatises as well as citations to established known standard medical knowledge.
But this internet evidence should just be used as the icing on the cake.
Bonafide competent medical evidence (which often will only come from a 'real' doctor- one who is independent of the VA and has expertise in the filed of the disability) is the main evidence that the VA will award on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
2
1
Popular Days
Sep 26
2
May 12
1
Top Posters For This Question
Berta 2 posts
john999 1 post
Popular Days
Sep 26 2008
2 posts
May 12 2010
1 post
2 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now