Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

Ask Your VA   Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
 Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • homepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

High Tryclerides And High Chloestrol In Vnvets!

Rate this question

Guest VetWife Advocate


Guest VetWife Advocate

Kelley asked to post his reply to me regarding this topic. What say you guys!! I know Joe is being treated for it with Statins and Niacin...Am wondering what the statins are doing besides lowering the T/C? Especially with him being poisoned already with Herbecides!!

....Kelley responds....to ...Please post this wherever this comment came from.


You can always file a claim. Whether you can obtain a successful outcome or not, is another issue. Every successful claim requires a diagnosis of a disabling disease or condition. Do you have a diagnosis? High cholesterol isn't a diagnosis, it's a lab finding and isn't, in and of itself, compensable. You might say the diagnosis is hyperlipidemia but that isn't considered disabling by the VA. ...and FWIW, only means you have high cholesterol.

This topic has been discussed ad nauseam on VBN and no one has yet to produce a successful claim. Your ECG is pretty much in the same category unless you can get a doctor to provide a diagnosis. It's always possible a C&P exam could produce a one for something but if your private physician hasn't done so yet, I'd doubt a C&P examiner would.

While this discussion points out the obvious when it comes to dealing with the bastard and criminal VA it is not exactly correct.

A "successfully presented claim" and a "claim denied" by the bastard VA is not one and the same.

In a real court of law, not this trumped up bastard VA court that is unconstitutional and a government in and by itself within our own elected government, there are many claims that would have been awarded even without giving the Veteran this "congressional mythical benefit of the doubt" they mandated and have no idea where any benefit is given.

The statement that cholesterol taken out of medical context in and by itself does not mean anything is very true. However, hyperlipidemia is a medical disorder with about five different categories as well as a separate category for


"Hyperlipidemia is due to a heterogeneous group of disorders." Does not say due to a "set of test results that mean nothing" but a group of established disorders.

These disorders can be debilitating as well as an increase in mortality. From various heart and vascular conditions to pancreatic cancers.

This is most important when you consider this is also called the X factor.

Now I will not bore you with all the study findings that the VA and our government has not told you or our doctors that treat us but in using triglycerides as just one example.

The Ranch Hand transcipts, not the redacted lied about published report, shows a direct dioxin linear dose response to elevated tryglicerides.

If you consider that the Ranch Hand is the gold standard used by the lying government then clearly there is a conncetion to an increase in trycliderides in young men since this found early on.

How is an excess of triglycerides harmful?

"Excess triglyceride in plasma is called hypertriglyceridemia. It's linked to the occurrence of coronary artery disease. Elevated triglycerides may be a consequence of other disease, such as untreated diabetes mellitus.

In which they found but also even without ADA diabetes, they found an increase in severe insulin resistance. In fact, 37% of the cohort was diagnosed with diabetes yet the A1C was normal. Again, they did not tell your doctor or us.

Now lets continue with the fault tree;

In 2005, although they knew in 1991:

The 2005 Ranch Hand Published report in Military Medicine, which with its past-criticized biased political history is certainly suspect to reporting all the found issues and finding anyway it can; to dilute the findings, which I also found in the transcripts, found as follows:

Bearing in mind, these men were primarily exposed by skin contact alone. That may have been a higher level of exposure per day but certainly not the worst form of exposure/ingestions as the boots on the ground. The Ranch Hand study was "White House relegated" to study one element of one toxic chemical and that being the dioxin, TCDD. Also, bearing in mind that this study only reports mortality. Not actually, "all found associated disabling disorders."

Cited in the study is the VA's own study that found increased risk of death attributable to digestive diseases.

Also cited in the study is the Australian study that found increased risk of death attributable to digestive diseases.

Since they, neither stated "all digestive diseases" or down selecting to a particular site or area, then one would have to assume "all digestive diseases."

Yes, Vietnam Veterans have been reporting digestive system issues since at least 1968 but it fell on "deaf and dumb government ears."

Obvious to me, these scientists flunked problem solving and reporting 101.

I am just going to list the Risk Ratio as the P-value is skewed because they are only looking for a single component rather than all possibilities of contamination.


Endocrine = RR = 1.4

Circulatory = RR = 1.3 - although on this one the p-value was 0.07

Respiratory = RR = 1.2

Digestive Diseases = RR = 1.6

This next one is just hilarious in the way it was reported - not funny in actuality.

Ill defined or unknown = RR - 1.5 - So if you served in Vietnam you have a RR of 1.5 over someone who did not serve in Nam or was not exposed. We just do not know what that something is and have no idea of the symptoms or systems affected. In a pigs eye!

Under circulatory issues:

Atherosclerotic heart disease = RR = 1.7- although on this one the p-value was 0.009

Acute Myocardial Infarction = RR = 1.3

Coronary Arteriosclerosis = RR = 2.2

Cerebrovascular disease = RR = 2.3 -although on this one the p-value was 0.08

Hypertensive disease = RR = 2.5

Other Circulatory disease = 2.4

A cumulative total of RR = 1.7 with I might add a p-value of 0.001 which conclusively points to a connection to TCDD and a significant increase in mortality.

Yet, still the VA will not associate these disorders to the toxic chemicals but only to a diabetes condition.

Amazing isn't it, just how medically astute the White House appointed head bastard is that they can look at all the above found data, statistics, found responses and say, yep only diabetes caused all of it. Just simply amazing the scientific power or reasoning of the VA.

Once again, what was conveniently left out in the references was any reference to the last four dioxin EPA reassessments or to any of the actually honest Korean studies that also showed a definite connection to not only heart issues but related brain atrophy and infarction issues; also finding many peripheral vascular autoimmune disorders.

Instead, the references seemed to be cherry picked and more references to their own biased work than anyone else's work.

How do our elected officials that are supposed to protect their constituents from this form of White House mockery and injustice let this go on?

Unless, they are an integral part of the mockery and injustice!

Now it might be that the linear dose response to triglycerides could have been a precursor to this found mortality increase as well as disabling conditions of many varieties and severity.

Therefore, the statements made are true to a point but if you connect the dots, there is a fault tree that point to dioxin and these mortality cardiovascular disorders including the perhaps precursor of dioxin caused hyperlipidemia to all this death. They just never bothered to tell us.

Now going to the VA and having your VA doctor in general fight for you is not going to happen. They work for the enemy.

The civilian doctors have learned if they support the Veteran, the VA clerks will use up all their time and resources answering more and more dumb questions that do not mean anything. One Baylor University doctor concluded the VA needs to tell the doctors how many studies does it take to override their political bias. 10:1, 20:1, or 100:1.

If all Veterans had the knowledge of what the government has actually found and demanded the VA doctors answer the question, "is it just as likely associated and if not why not" in writing based on facts not opinions then we are just subject to the VA lottery system based on White House budget not scientific facts.

However, even if the VA doctors started standing up for the Veterans and not their employer the VA would use their power just to say USC 38 Para 511 allows us to deny your claim so we are doing just that. Why? Because we can!

Next lottery case!


DMZ 67-68


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 1
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Popular Days

1 answer to this question

Recommended Posts

Hyperlipedemia is part of the lipid hypothesis of high Tryglyceride and low cholestrol that can be very significant in a diabetic's overall disabling medical profile.

Also I have found a successful claim at the BVA service connecting the veteran's hyperlipedemia with his DMII from AO.

This post is correct in that the hyperlipid involvement can cause the type of coronary damage and heart disease found in veterans with DMII.

As the post states - undiagnosed diabetes mellitus (what my claim is about) can be a sugnificant factor in continuous elevation of tryglycerides to the extent of causing undetected atherosclerosis- and the veteran might not be diagnosed with CAD and DMII until they have a heart attack or stroke from it.

Even though a periodic annual check up might not reveal any high glucose value- the chem reports of VA blood work reveal whether this lipid hypothesis should require further lipid studies.

Other chem recs for Creatine and BUN- Blood Urea Nitrogen and other values on a blood chem report

-unless an HB1AC test was done to rule out diabetes-can be red flags for VA doctors to pay attention to-

diabetes doesn't kill anyone- it's complications do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use