HadIt.com Elder Josephine Posted February 28, 2010 HadIt.com Elder Share Posted February 28, 2010 Am I reading this correctly? Service Connection for Nicotine Dependence http://www4.va.gov/vetapp09/files4/0930736.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HadIt.com Elder Testvet Posted February 28, 2010 HadIt.com Elder Share Posted February 28, 2010 Am I reading this correctly? Service Connection for Nicotine Dependence http://www4.va.gov/vetapp09/files4/0930736.txt ''in legal language the veteran "threaded a very narrow needle" he used the language needed to use nicotine as a cause to his CAD based on the fact it aggravated his SC COPD since it aggravated an already SC issue the Judge sided with the veteran that the RO should have granted SC as secondary now remember any other Judge at BVA would probably deny the same claim presented like this win some lose some this vet won a big one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HadIt.com Elder Josephine Posted February 28, 2010 Author HadIt.com Elder Share Posted February 28, 2010 That is what I thought also, but a very interesting award. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bufloguy Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 Here is a similar case. . . http://www4.va.gov/vetapp07/files1/0700083.txt The veteran's service-connected PTSD contributed to his fatal lung cancer in that it played a material causal role in his use of tobacco products after service. The veteran's use of tobacco products caused the disease that is directly linked to the veteran's demise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berta Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 Josephine-that case is quite a Find !!!! This could possibly help any AO vet -if denied -who has IHD that VA says is due to smoking-to hopefully prevail on the IHD claim. Smokes were gov issues in rations up to some point in the Mil- I wonder what evidence the vet used to prove his nicotine dependence started in the Mil- not all servicemen/women smoked the cigs that came with the C rats. As noted, one of the exceptions to the bar against nicotine- dependent claims filed after June 9, 1998 is that if the evidence shows that an ischemic heart disease or other cardiovascular disease is aggravated by the Veteran's use of tobacco-related products during service, then service connection can be warranted. The Board did not consider this exception in the September 2008 decision but rather continued to deny the claim based on the June 9, 1998 prohibition against tobacco-related claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berta Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 Bufloguy-that is a great case too: this part is unusual: "The veteran died in May 2002. In the original death certificate, the immediate cause of the veteran's death was listed as lung cancer with other significant conditions contributing to death noted as coronary artery disease and stroke. An amended certificate of death added PTSD as an additional significant condition contributing to the veteran's death." Here in NY the Coroner asked me all of my husband's disabilities and then said they never put PTSD on a death certificate although he considered it to be a very disabling condition. My husband was only rated at 30% for PTSD at death but this was changed to 100% 3 years later. I considered trying to have the Death Certificate changed to reflect the PTSD but never did- I found some BVA cases where the BVA had taken a very unfavorable view when some death certificates had been amended. In one case the BVA had even stated that the death certificate was changed due to pressure from a widow put onto the ME and/or Coroner. Yet I suggested this to a widow in another state and she had her husband's death certificate amended with no problem and this led to a DIC award. In the long run whether a condition is listed as contributing to death or not on a death certificate,the death can sometimes still be directly service connected. My recent award of direct SC death of my husband was based on an AO condition that was not listed on the death certificate at all and not diagnosed in his lifetime. Obviously there was more evidence in this widow's case that supported the award. While BVA cases dont stand up as evidence to support a separate claim from someone else-they contain a wealth of info as to the thinking pattern of the BVA as they consider all applicable law and regs along with all of the evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
Josephine
Am I reading this correctly?
Service Connection for Nicotine Dependence
http://www4.va.gov/vetapp09/files4/0930736.txt
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
2
2
1
1
Popular Days
Feb 28
3
Mar 1
3
Top Posters For This Question
Berta 2 posts
Josephine 2 posts
Testvet 1 post
bufloguy 1 post
Popular Days
Feb 28 2010
3 posts
Mar 1 2010
3 posts
5 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