ptsd Question About Date Of Diagnosis And Secondary Conditons

[chr49]

Amended post - Hope this is easier to understand

I lived with PTSD for over 30 yrs before I was diagnosed in 2007. There was no such thing as PTSD in 1971, but I wouldn't have gone for help for several years anyway due to my state of mind. I didn't bother to see any doctors between 1971 and 1998 and when I went I did not talk about my Vietnam experience (I doubt I mentioned being a veteran)so my records don't say a thing, other than the fact that I was warned to stop smoking and have used multiple cessation programs since 1999 in an effort to quit.

I was recently denied a secondary claim for vascular disease. The denial states I have had an unhealthy lifstyle before and after "PTSD diagnosis in 2007." Smoking is 'the after diagnosis' unhealthy lifestyle and my addictions (in long term remission)are indicated as 'before diagnosis'.

When I initially filed for PTSD, it went thru easily. My 2008 PTSD C&P exam documents 'chronic PTSD'with classic symptoms since returning from combat(1971). The exam is standard form stuff but I'm thinking the statement "The veteran’s PTSD is the cause of the aforementioned changes in functional state and quality of life" may be of value, but I truly don't know.

My wife has found a couple cases and most important; a General Counsel’s Published Opinion (VAOPGCPRED 6-2003) which addresses whether a veteran’s tobacco-related disability or death may be service connected secondary to a service-connected mental disability, which caused the veteran to use tobacco. 38 U.S.C. §1103(a) prohibits a finding of service connection of a disability or death resulting from the veteran’s use of tobacco during the service. The General Counsel opinion, however, clarifies that service connection is permissible if the veteran’s disability or death is the result of his post-service use of tobacco, which is caused by a service-connected psychological disability.

I am considering using the materials we've found so far and getting another IMO that will support having PTSD prior to diagnosis, as well as the tobacco usage connection but we can't find any regulations specifically related to the "date of diagnosis" in regard to secondary conditions.

I'm concerned about fighting something that can't be won if there is a regulation that won't allow secondary based on the date of diagnosis.

Any help out there?? I really appreciate it. My wife does my research and paperwork (I'd most likely give up if she didn't) but I can't see stressing her over all of this if it's an impossible mission.

Thanks ahead to anybody that has advice to offer.

Edited August 6, 2010 by chr49

[SLEDGE]

Eat a candy bar 5 or 10 minutes before the blood test.

sledge

[chr49]

Eat a candy bar 5 or 10 minutes before the blood test.

sledge

Gotta laugh because I know a Pepsi or Coke will do the trick too. My wife had a soda prior to an appointment years ago. Obviously, she wasn't expecting any lab work. Set off bells and whistles when they saw her blood sugar level!

I really don't want to be diagnosed for something I don't have...not smart me thinks!!!!

Edited August 10, 2010 by chr49

[retiredat44]

my levels varied between around 140 and 152 when I was an in patient..

they only gave me insulin when it went above 150.

Edited August 10, 2010 by retiredat44

[chr49]

my levels varied between around 140 and 152 when I was in in patient..

they only gave me insulin when it went above 150.

retiredat44

This is my understanding: Blood sugar levels above normal but below 125 are considered 'pre-diabetic'. The DMII diagnosis comes into effect when your blood sugar rises above 125. Most often lower blood sugar levels are treated with diet &/or oral medication. Once your levels get consistently higher, insulin is brought into the picture.

The VA also ran A1C levels on me annually until this year. I've been told that the A1C shows an average of your blood sugar over the past 3 months. My lab results say that 6.5 is considered diagnostic for diabetes. Mine was 6.2

Edited August 10, 2010 by chr49

[john999]

What you AIC is saying with a score of 6.2 is that you are at very high risk of DMII. If you have PN don't mention it to the VA until you have official DX of DMII. If you think there is a lot of difference between an AIC of 6.4 and 6.5 your body does not know the difference. Your heart and arteries don't know the difference. Most doctors outside the VA would probably say you have DMII. Because the VA is focused on compensation they have an arbitrary cut off for compensating DMII.Doctors ourside the VA might even put you on meds to reduce your blood sugar. You are probably going to develope DMII to the level of what the VA compensates. I would go to a doctor outside the VA and see what he/she says about your health. Forget a claim for compensation. Your health is what is at stake. I am just a little more diabetic than you and I get 10%. I also get 10% for the PN as secondary.

[chr49]

What you AIC is saying with a score of 6.2 is that you are at very high risk of DMII. If you have PN don't mention it to the VA until you have official DX of DMII. If you think there is a lot of difference between an AIC of 6.4 and 6.5 your body does not know the difference. Your heart and arteries don't know the difference. Most doctors outside the VA would probably say you have DMII. Because the VA is focused on compensation they have an arbitrary cut off for compensating DMII.Doctors ourside the VA might even put you on meds to reduce your blood sugar. You are probably going to develope DMII to the level of what the VA compensates. I would go to a doctor outside the VA and see what he/she says about your health. Forget a claim for compensation. Your health is what is at stake. I am just a little more diabetic than you and I get 10%. I also get 10% for the PN as secondary.

John,

Well, my wife is in agreement with you. She said there is just too much evidence out there saying an A1C of 6 is too high. She has kept us both on diabetic, low fat/sodium diets since 2005. In honesty, I don't always understand where she's coming from but I know she's a smart gal. She tends to get a bit nutty about such things at times, but it's nice that she cares.

BTW, Compensation isn't the reason I use the VA medical system.