Fw: Va Links Brain Cancer To Agent Orange Exposure In Recent Court Decision

[allan]

To: Veteran Issues by Colonel Dan <VeteranIssues@yahoogroups.com> Subject: [VeteranIssues] FW: VA Links Brain Cancer to Agent Orange Exposure in Recent Court DecisionDate: Feb 17, 2011 7:43 AM

From: Robert White

Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 8:33 AM

To: Robert White

Subject: VA Links Brain Cancer to Agent Orange Exposure in Recent Court Decision

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/02/prweb5080394.htm

VA Links Brain Cancer to Agent Orange Exposure in Recent Court Decision

It is notoriously difficult for veterans to get their disabilities connected to their military service - even when the connection is apparent. In this unique case, the Department of Veterans Affairs was made to concede a very important connection and gave justice to a struggling widow.

Ozark, MO (PRWEB) February 17, 2011

Mrs. Sheree Evans is the surviving spouse of Vietnam Veteran, Edward T. Evans, who passed away from Glioblastoma Multiforme (GM), or more commonly known as brain cancer, in March of 2003. Since this time, Sheree has fought for widow’s benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for her husband’s cause of death as a result of Agent Orange exposure (Board of Veterans' Appeals, Docket No. 05-00 201 / U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, Vet. App. No. 06-2190). While Mr. Evans was presumed to have been exposed to Agent Orange during his service in the Vietnam War, one of the most challenging obstacles for Sheree was showing that his exposure to Agent Orange caused the development of brain cancer. VA had consistently maintained that brain cancer is not on their list of Agent Orange-related disabilities, and, as a result, that there is no medical link for the development of this specific cancer to Agent Orange Exposure.

Sheree’s long struggle against VA took her to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, the highest level of the Veterans Administration’s appeals process. Once she had been denied there, Sheree appealed her case to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. There she was successful in getting the final decision by VA vacated because VA had used an independent medical opinion as evidence, which was merely grounded in the lack of GM being on the Agent Orange Presumptive list as the basis for denying a relationship. VA then ordered another medical opinion which determined that there was no research into the relationship between GM and Agent Orange. Sheree countered with a medical assessment which argued that there was an abundance of research into the relationship between GM and Agent Orange. In a recent decision, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided that the evidence in favor and against were in equal weight and applied the benefit of the doubt rule and on January 26th, 2011 granted Sheree’s claim. While this is not a precedential decision, VA did admit a link between the two. Time will tell what the outcome of this will amount to, but GM may very well come to be added to the Agent Orange presumptive list.

According to Court documents, Sheree had fought for service connection for the cause of her husband’s death for almost eight years, based on a promise that she had made to him before his death. Sheree plans to write a book in honor of Edward that commemorates his life, his struggle with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of his combat experience in Vietnam that left him physically scarred from a shell fragment, and her fight to give him the recognition that he deserves. She is very active with the Order of the Silver Rose, an advocacy group for Veterans and families who have been affected by Agent Orange.

GM is a highly aggressive form of brain cancer which, when left untreated, usually results in death in less than three months. GM has been widely researched and recent studies indicate that there is an increasing prevalence of brain cancers as a result of exposure to toxins (IOM, 2008). Though not specifically studied in Veterans of the Vietnam War, current research shows a causal relationship between herbicide exposure and GM.

The fact is that there is an unusually high number of Vietnam Veterans who suffer from GM and, due to GM’s aggressive nature, a sizable percentage of them have passed on. Studies of the dioxin TCDD, the main dioxin in Agent Orange, in laboratory animals have shown to cause cancers at a variety of sites, including GM (IOM, 2008). These studies have concluded that it is plausible that human exposure to TCDD would cause the same variety of cancers as in laboratory animals. However, there has been a lack of studies on the relationship between Vietnam Veterans and exposure to TCDD. Therefore, the Institute of Medicine, which VA recognizes as the authority of recognizing a relationship between disabilities and Agent Orange, has not issued any reports linking Agent Orange and GM.

*Institute of Medicine. (2008) Veterans and Agent Orange: health effects of herbicides used in Vietnam. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Reference: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

"Keep on, Keepin' on"

Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan"

See my web site at:

http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/

[dizzyliz]

I have read the Nehmer training manual. See page 12- As I understand it, a Nehmer claim means that the first claim of service connection for the condition at issue was received BEFORE the condition was added to the list of AO related disabilities AND the effective date for the grant of service will also be BEFORE the condition was added. The VA assigned the effective date of 7/31/10 which is for the IHD which is prior to the date it was added to the list on 8/31/10.

My mom is no longer with us, so I don't know for sure if she filed a claim for DIC, but to the best of my knowledge she did not.

So, my dad filed a claim for lung cancer and IHD in 77. This is prior to either of these diseases being added to the AO list. According to page 12 of the Nehmer because his claims in 77 were both made before they we added to the list (lung cancer-1994 and IHD 8/31/10) his claim is a Nehmer claim.

My concern is, that he died as the result of his brain tumor. This is not on the AO list. If this was primary cause of death, then will they deny claim of IHD?

Also since lung cancer was added in 1994, and claim for lung cancer is prior to the date it was added, do I have to file a separate claim? I have contacted NVLSP, and they say my claim is complicated and that I need to wait until VA makes a decision and they will review from there.

I stand corrected. Since my dad's claim in 1977 was not denied or pending on or after Sept 25 1985 they would not be considered Nehmer claims. Thanks Berta.

[Berta]

I found this 2010 BVA award today for brain cancer due to herbicides.

“The Board acknowledges that the Veteran died of brain cancer.

However, to warrant service connection on a presumptive basis

due to exposure to herbicides, the cancer must have

originated in one of the areas listed in 38 C.F.R. §

3.309(e), for example, the prostate, lung, bronchus, larynx,

or trachea. That is not the case here. Similarly, the

Veteran's cancer was not diagnosed until August 2001, more

than 30 years after his discharge from service; therefore,

presumptive service connection based on a chronic disease

listed in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) also is not warranted.”

There was an IMO from the widow and a VA opinion in conflict as evidence.

“In an effort to resolve the question, in October 2009, the

Board sought an opinion from an independent medical examiner

(IME). In a November 2009 response, the IME, a Professor of

Medicine in the Hematology and Oncology Division of the

Medical University of South Carolina, indicated that he had

reviewed the various letters and opinions. It was his

opinion that it is as likely as not that the Veteran's

exposure to Agent Orange was related to his eventual

development of GBM and his death. This conclusion was based

on his experience as a neurooncologist and a thorough review

of the limited literature on this subject. The IME

acknowledged that it is true that no scientific body has

found a direct correlation between dioxins and GBMs; however,

there are numerous publications that reveal an increased

incidence of brain cancer in individuals exposed to

herbicides. For example, in the American Journal of

Industrial Medicine (AJIM), 1990; (18): 6, 665-73, a study o etc.”

ORDER

Service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, to

include as a result of exposure to herbicides, is granted.

DIC under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318 is denied.

Basic eligibility for DEA under Chapter 35, Title 38, United

States Code, is granted.

http://www4.va.gov/vetapp10/files1/1009459.txt

This shows that although in my opinion (which means nothing to the VA) this claim should have risen to level of Benefit of Doubt with the two conflicting opinions for and against the claim---

the BVA chose to obtain the additional IMO and that awarded the claim.

Some DIC claims need considerable independent medical evidence. I had 3 IM0s, and was about to order 4th when the VA finally read what they already had. They had one VA opinion against the claim and another one that was speculative and they threw it out. This is only the second brain cancer award for AO I have seen in addition to the CAVC case posted here.

[NamTanker]

I'm writing this for my husband. He has GBM-4 and doesn't use the computer any longer. He was in Nam from July 70 to July 71, VA will not listen to us that AO caused his GBM-4.

He's already going on 15 months, doctors in beginning told him 12 - 15 months.

[NamTanker]

How can other wives work on getting documentation of AO being the cause of their husband's GBM-4?

I found this 2010 BVA award today for brain cancer due to herbicides.

"The Board acknowledges that the Veteran died of brain cancer.

However, to warrant service connection on a presumptive basis

due to exposure to herbicides, the cancer must have

originated in one of the areas listed in 38 C.F.R. §

3.309(e), for example, the prostate, lung, bronchus, larynx,

or trachea. That is not the case here. Similarly, the

Veteran's cancer was not diagnosed until August 2001, more

than 30 years after his discharge from service; therefore,

presumptive service connection based on a chronic disease

listed in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) also is not warranted."

There was an IMO from the widow and a VA opinion in conflict as evidence.

"In an effort to resolve the question, in October 2009, the

Board sought an opinion from an independent medical examiner

(IME). In a November 2009 response, the IME, a Professor of

Medicine in the Hematology and Oncology Division of the

Medical University of South Carolina, indicated that he had

reviewed the various letters and opinions. It was his

opinion that it is as likely as not that the Veteran's

exposure to Agent Orange was related to his eventual

development of GBM and his death. This conclusion was based

on his experience as a neurooncologist and a thorough review

of the limited literature on this subject. The IME

acknowledged that it is true that no scientific body has

found a direct correlation between dioxins and GBMs; however,

there are numerous publications that reveal an increased

incidence of brain cancer in individuals exposed to

herbicides. For example, in the American Journal of

Industrial Medicine (AJIM), 1990; (18): 6, 665-73, a study o etc."

ORDER

Service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, to

include as a result of exposure to herbicides, is granted.

DIC under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318 is denied.

Basic eligibility for DEA under Chapter 35, Title 38, United

States Code, is granted.

http://www4.va.gov/v...es1/1009459.txt

This shows that although in my opinion (which means nothing to the VA) this claim should have risen to level of Benefit of Doubt with the two conflicting opinions for and against the claim---

the BVA chose to obtain the additional IMO and that awarded the claim.

Some DIC claims need considerable independent medical evidence. I had 3 IM0s, and was about to order 4th when the VA finally read what they already had. They had one VA opinion against the claim and another one that was speculative and they threw it out. This is only the second brain cancer award for AO I have seen in addition to the CAVC case posted here.