Big Pharma stiffs Vets, VA.

[broncovet]

The company that makes Hep C drugs sells it to VA and Veterans for big bucks.  

Then they give it away to foreign nations.  Its disgusting. 

http://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma-asia/pharma-backed-initiative-delivers-low-cost-hep-c-drugs

It was invented by a VA doc who sold it to Gilead.  

http://www.disabledveterans.org/2015/12/03/va-doctor-invented-hepatitis-c-cure-sold-it-for-400-million-profit/

[stinger]

Such is the world of economics.

[Meddac]

And this article from March 11, 2016, states differently. 

http://m.military.com/daily-news/2016/03/11/va-concedes-it-had-no-role-in-developing-hepatitis-miracle-drug.html

It's misleading to only post up part of a story.

Edited April 18, 2016 by Meddac

[broncovet]

Meddac...

   Thank you for posting another opinion on this.  I had not seen the March 11 article, and I promise you I had no intention of deceiving Vets.   As far as the article from Ben Kraus, I have followd him for some time, and his articles seem to have been spot on.  He is a well known Vet advocate.  

    Remember this:  Va has taken much heat on this, partially from the article by Ben Kraus and others.  The VA has a dog in this fight and its not unusual for VA to publish some sort of "spin" response in an attempt to refute allegations against it.   At other times, the VA media people are silent.    Time after time, I have found VA to not be telling us the truth, and I am "not alone" in being skeptical of anything the VA says.  

    We dont know the truth here, but I trust Ben Kraus infinately more than VA.  This said, I am pleased you reported another opinion that I was previously un aware of.  

[Meddac]

Even as a retired employee of VA I agree with your views of deceptive practices. I also agree that this appears to be an unfinished story.

The stories I could tell about the RO where I was would makes  some heads spin. Some parts of the VA work do hard for Veterans, but many others do not have better interests in mind.

I go into some of it at times on my podcast, but I try to be reasonably fair to all sides. My overall opinions of VA aren't the greatest, but they are only my opinion.

No intent to start trouble with your post, Bronco.

[broncovet]

Meddac

    Thank you for your "insider" views and I appreciate your posts and views, as will other Vets.  I will admit that I still have some hostility toward VA.  I applied for benefits in 2002, after struggling with issues from 1998.  A VA employee shredded 2/3 of my issues to make it look like a single issue claim.  The net result was that I finally got rated at 0 percent, upon appeal, and did not get "any" benefits until over 3 years later.  It was too little too late, and I lost my home to foreclosure.  

    Im still trying to get benefits from those early years, 2002-2005.  My home was very modest, and, if I do get my benefits back to 2002, I would be able to buy my home back, probably, with the retro, if its for sale.  The VA has spent the last 14 years trying to cover it up.  

    The suprising part for me is that the Va is still hostile towards me.  Several VARO directors have came and gone in the past 14 years, but each new one seems to take over the hostilitiy where the last director left off.  

    Just last year, I had been in communication with the "new" VARO director, after having contacting Allison Hickey about the 1.4 decade long problems yet unresolved.  He was equally hostile, but finally turned my claim over to the board (again..this was my third BVA decision).  For example, my 2012 BVA decision was a remand for TDIU, which the RO never processed for more than 3 years, until 2015.  I had to fight with them to even comply with the Board decision.  

    At first they denied.  "We implemented your board decision."   I explained they did not, that TDIU was not readjuticated as specified by the Board.  

"What are you complaining about..you are at 100%?"  They responded.  I explained the Board specifically stated that TDIU was "not Moot" and had ordered a remand.  They were fighting me, obviously not agreeing with the Board decision.   The board had already agreed with me that TDIU was "not moot" because it could mean an EED, and, because Bradley vs Peake would mean SMC S, if awarded IU.  

The Ro director was so hostile toward me, that they did not want to implement the board decision.  

[Meddac]

I can't speak of the Director at the RO that you deal with (Cleveland?), but I do know that the Director at the RO here is a bit of a "hot-head". Good with political type rhetoric, but horrible at following anything up with action...except the occasional cases that will reflect in a good light for publicity sake.

There is a lot of politics that drives the Regional Office direction from the upper management levels.