Ihd, Meds And Stress Test

[Mike_S]

Presumptive AO with CABG in 2006. There was no cardiac rehab available at any VA in South Florida at that time and I could not afford it on the outside.

That said, after a couple of years I had to do something and bought a gym membership. I did that to practice for the stress test. I eventually did well on the test at 10 METS and higher which reduces any compensation to 10% disability because I require meds. I am on Beta Blockers for one of my heart meds. Those meds keep the heart rate down and it takes much more effort and time to reach the target heart rate. METS = % disability.

I have brought this up each time I have a stress test and they tell me to take the meds. However this skews the results. The target heart rate should be adjusted when these meds are required before the test or let us stop using them when safe to do so for the test.

I feel screwed one more time.

[FormerMember]

I merely recite the regulation for your benefit. VA is notorious for low ball ratings. They go so far as to lead you into saying something (or nothing) and use it as either condemning evidence or lack of evidence. Damned if you do and vice versa. I always read a denial very carefully and then read the regulation and the rating code to ascertain if it's all above board. Most often it is not. I never thought for a minute you were arguing about it. You're a fellow Vietnam Vet. Why would I argue with you? I want you to be 250% in the money. If they owe you ,you take it. If they don't, then leave it. Welcome home. Glad you made it back.

[Buck52]

In response, the Secretary argues that the Court is precluded by statute from reviewing VA’s Schedule for Rating Disabilities. Secretary’s Br. at 14 (citing 38 U.S.C. § 7252(b)); Butts v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 532, 539 (1993)). He also asserts that the rating criteria for IBS contemplate “whether the frequency or severity of . . . IBS symptoms were lessened or controlled with medication,” as the criteria “do not differentiate between a claimant’s condition with or without medication.” Jones v. Shinseki (2012)

[FormerMember]

Yeppers. But always read the CAVC precedence to see the bitchslap. If the regulation is silent on the need to take the beta blocker before a C&P, then merely saying it is required is CUE. The VA is fond of saying "Well, just because it doesn't say anything about beta blockers doesn't mean we didn't contemplate it. For the record, we did." Mike_S can win this without breaking a sweat. It's precedence now and easy to repair via Jones. Never leave anything on the table with VA-ever. If you do, they'll just come back and take that away too. Somehow, my skin scarring from Porphyria Cutanea Tarda miraculously disappeared without my having to go to Spain and visit the Our Lady of Guadalupe for divine intercession. After complaining in my Writ five years later, VA suddenly gave it back. Sure, it's 10% and means nothing in the financial picture, but you cannot let them do this again and again or they think it's okay to do to other Vets.

Thus, to the extent that the Court did not explicitly hold in Otero-Castro that the Board may not deny entitlement to a higher rating on the basis of relief provided by medication when those effects are not specifically contemplated by the rating criteria, it does so today. This ensures that all similarly structured DCs are interpreted and operate in the same manner so that diagnostic criteria are applied consistently. Therefore, as DC 7319 is silent as to the effects of medication, the Board erred in denying entitlement to a higher disability rating based on the relief provided by the appellant’s anti-acid (sic) medication. Jones supra

Edited May 15, 2015 by asknod