Melanom As Chronic Condition

[john999]

Would melanoma be considered a chronic disease for SC if vet got it within 2 years of discharge?

[Berta]

Does he have his complete SMRs? There could be something in them to put him into the one year presumptive period for chronic presumptives.

Melanoma is not an AO presumptive but I
strongly suggest that the veteran carefully read this BVA decision if
he/she served incountry Vietnam

:

http://www.index.va.gov/search/va/view.jsp?FV=http://www.va.gov/vetapp12/Files5/1232640.txt

In part:

“The Veteran served on active duty in
the United States Army from April 1968 to November 1969. The record
shows the Veteran served in the Republic of Vietnam during the
Vietnam Era.”

The claim is on remand. The veteran
raised the issue of sun exposure in Vietnam as an additional cause
for his melanoma.

There is some very interesting argument
contained within the remand on the veteran's part for SC of the
melanoma.

We had the daughter of a Blue Water
veteran here who succeeded in helping her dad years ago prove his
malignant melanoma was caused by the intense sun on the ships decks.I remember it wasnt easy for her to do that but she DID it!

Of course Vietnam was just as hot as ships decs in the Pacific and
most incountrys were exposed to intense sunlight for long periods of
time.

If the above vet in the BVA decision link
succeeds on remand, I hope he knows he also has a basis for a CUE claim on that last unappealed denial in 2005 he got.
too.

However, we widows are quite tenacious.
This is a melonoma death award:

http://www.index.va.gov/search/va/view.jsp?FV=http://www.va.gov/vetapp12/Files5/1231723.txt

In part:

“Upon further review of the evidence
of record in this case and after consideration of the guidance
furnished by the Court in the February 2011 decision, the Board is
unable to conclude that the preponderance of the evidence is against
the claim. There is competent medical evidence that support a finding
that it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran had malignant
melanoma due to herbicide and/or sun exposure in service. The
evidence is at least in a state of equipoise. Therefore, resolving
the benefit of the doubt in favor of the appellant, service
connection for the Veteran's cause of death is therefore warranted.
38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b). “

This case is Golden! It shows Nothing
is impossible.

In part:

“The Board notes that post service treatment records concerning
malignant melanoma and ascites appear to be from approximately August
1994, which is 17 years after service. This lengthy period without
treatment after service suggests that there has not been a continuity
of symptomatology. See Maxson v. Gober, 230 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir.
2000). The Board concludes that none of the disorders which caused
the Veteran's death were manifested during service or for many years
after service. Thus, the one year presumption is not for application.

Nevertheless, the appellant maintains that the Veteran's malignant
melanoma was due to exposure to Agent Orange and the sun while the
Veteran was stationed in Vietnam. In support of her claim, she has
submitted a January 2004 internet article entitled "Military
concedes toxic chemical increases risk of illness." Highlighted
was that an "ongoing study of 2,000 Vietnam Veterans shows for
the first time an elevated risk of melanoma, the deadliest form of
skin cancer."

There is more to this case than the
internet print out and the BVA does state the melonoma cannot be
considered a chronic presumptive because of lack of diagnosis within
one year after service.

This widow's case is GOLDEN!!!!!

It shows Nothing is impossible with
the VA.

[john999]

The vet in question is someone I worked with in Vietnam in 1970. He got melanoma within two years of ETS. He is trying to get his melanoma SC'ed and secondary conditions. He was from up north and we both worked long hours building a large bunker with shirts off. My arms are covered with pre-cancerous sores in response to a treatment cream given by skin doctor. I had a melanoma scare myself.

John

[Berta]

Wow John, I bet more vets then we know have had melanoma due to sunlight exposures in service.

I fear many OEF vets might contract melanoma too. Friend of mine told me of the constant heat and sunlight where he was stationed in Iraq a few years ago....I am surprtised more OEFs didnt get heat stroke. Maybe they did and their SMRs called it something else.

That might be the best way to approach this claim , as due to sunlight. You could give him an excellent eye witness buddy statement.

In part:

In sum, the Board finds that the evidence of record is in
equipoise as to substantiating the appellant's claim. With resolution
of doubt in the appellant's favor, the Board finds that the competent
medical evidence of record demonstrates that the Veteran's fatal
melanoma may not be clinically dissociated from his exposure to
ultraviolet light from the sun in service, to include a second degree
sunburn in June 1970. See generally Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App.
49 (1990); Ortiz v. Principi, 274 F. 3d 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

The examiner specifically noted the Veteran's history of treatment
for a second degree sunburn in service, that sunburns in adulthood
are a risk factor for melanoma, and that the Veteran's documented sun
exposure coincided with the disease process of melanoma as described
by the Center for Disease Control and National Cancer Institute.
Although the VA clinician also opined in May 2010 that the Veteran's
metastatic desmoplastic melanoma was less likely as not related to,
or caused by, military service, such opinion is not consistent with
the cited supporting rationale. In this regard, the Board notes that
the Veteran's post service sun exposure has not been shown to negate
the contributory factor of his sun exposure in service. As such, with
resolution of doubt in the appellant's favor, the Board finds that
the evidence of record supports a finding that the Veteran's exposure
to ultraviolet light in service from the sun, to include a documented
second degree sunburn in June 1970, may not be dissociated from his
fatal melanoma.

ORDER

Service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is
granted.

http://www.index.va.gov/search/va/view.jsp?FV=http://www.va.gov/vetapp11/Files3/1125168.txt

In the next case, This vet left the Mil
in 1966 and was diagnosed with melanoma in 1968.

(Outside of the one year chronic
presumptive regs)

In part:

“At the time of the prior decision,
the claims file also included several affidavits, including from two
fellow servicemembers who served with him in Vietnam and noted his
large dark mole in service, from his wife who noted a significant
change in his left hip mole immediately after his separation from
service, and from his mother-in-law, a friend, and his brother
regarding the appearance of the mole shortly after service. The
claims file also included medical opinions from several private
physicians collectively to the effect that it was possible that the
malignant changes of the hip lesion had begun more than a year prior
to the diagnosis of malignant melanoma in July 1968. The claims file
also included an October 1973 medical opinion from the Armed Forces
Institute of Pathology (AFIP) to the effect that the probable date of
onset of the malignant melanoma was not known. “

ORDER

New and material evidence has been received to reopen a claim of
entitlement to service connection for malignant melanoma of the left
hip, and the claim is reopened.

Service connection for malignant melanoma of the left hip is
granted.

http://www.index.va.gov/search/va/view.jsp?FV=http://www.va.gov/vetapp12/Files4/1223243.txt

These tyupes of claims can succeed with
a strong IMO and no other possible etiologyfor the melanoma but for
sunlight exposure.

[john999]

Berta

I sent my buddy a copy of the BVA case you cited. I know he is having a hard time with the VA. I am trying to get him to file a PTSD claim, but he is reluctant.

John

[Berta]

That is a shame John. I helped a dear friend get 100% under 1151 but he still didn't want to file for PTSD. Finally someone convinced him to.

I still think his award is wrong. 100% AO cancer,under 1151 , SMC for residuals of colon removal, GSW, 40% ,PTSD 50%, dont think he ever claimed the scar for the gun sot wound and it is a big one,

and he doesnt understand that any 1151 award is paid separately from his actual SC. He does not have SC as direct for AO NHL and the residuals,just the 1151 award for it. The VA almost killed him.

Oh well...I love this vet, first Vietnam vet I met at the VA in 1988. But hard to get through to him......