What Does "may Be Caused By" Mean Va Wise

[OnRiver]

I posted to long of a message before. Basically does anyone know what "Maybe caused by" really means in VA jargon?

Thanks

[vaf]

Are you sure the person who administered the C & P was a real doctor, not a P.A. or a Nurse Practioner? If he was a bona fide physician, was he a specialist in the area being examined?

John999 has an excellent point. You need to be examined by a neurologist, and the phrasing of the opinion needs to following the structure of what has already been discussed here.

[Guest terrysturgis]

ONRIVER, after reading this post I have a couple queations. Is your DMII awarded because you are an in country Viet Nam vet? What percentage of compensation is the DMII at? If you have DMII you will get PN. When I had my C&P the PN testing consisted of a lot of range of motion testing. MY compensation is as follows:DMII 40%, PN right lower 40%, PN left lower 40%, PN right upper 30%, PN left upper 20%, add 10% for tinnitus equals 94.6% schedular paid TDIU 100%.

My private doctor wrote a letter and said my PN was caused by DMII. As you have probably read on this board, an IMO really helps the VA examiner get it right. Also, compare the C&P you had to the DMII exam posted by jstacy. A lot of good info there. Take care. Terry Sturgis

[Berta]

" As you have probably read on this board, an IMO really helps the VA examiner get it right"

Terry- glad you said that- even the VBM says that it is often difficult for one doctor to go against another doctor's opinion if the IMO opinion is strong and well supported.

An IMO doctor can often provide so much more medical support for the claim (because they actually read all of the records) that I agree that it can make the VA examiner's job easier.

The VA doc will have to not only conform to the VA criteria for an opinion but will have to attempt to break down an IMO and they usually can't do that successfully if the IMO opinion has full medical rationale and also some known medical references to support the opinion.

My second IMO broke down the VA opinion extremely well- the VA doc gave no rationale, nor any supporting medical references,or treatises , nor any rendition of their background as to be able to opine on my husband's conditions at death.

The records remained here 20 miles away at a local VAMC in Bath NY as this opinion was rendered over probably at least 100 miles away in Buffalo, whereas Dr. Bash had everything.

The opining VA doc did not have the autopsy , MRIs and ECHO results,FTCA medical findings and any other documentation that showed the VA could not diagnose multiple other conditions Rod had.She had 3-4 med recs faxed to her from Bath.

The VA doc , as my IMO said , relied on an "outdated" medical criteria for the medical assessment.

The VA opinion however did offer support for the claim.

I used a professional dictionary to define for VA clearly what the VA doctor stated that certainly was supportive.And it also did support the nexus as the VA doctor did state that Rod's confirmed exposure to AO in Nam was a risk factor for diabetes.

I focused on the support it offered in a response to the SSOC ,expanded on the autopy findings and Sec 1151 findings of 1998 that were not considered and the second IMO again supported direct SC death based on the med recs and other legal documents in the c file yet the fact that,this time, the VA opinion was knocked down -made the second IMO opinion neither redundant nor cummulative.

The expense of good IMos should be viewed as an investment because often without them, a claim will just continue to fail.

Edited December 6, 2006 by Berta

[OnRiver]

Thanks for all the comments.....they help.... I am a vietnam vetran with 30% rating...20% diabetes and 10% facial neuropathies bells palsy on one side....I can get 10% more for the left ...they just gave me the focal without asking but denied the perephial even though I have all kinds of backup stating I have neurologicl damage.......

I have sensory loss all over my records from neurology, pedotry and primary, even eye Doctors state so......The actually reading is "may be a secondary condition of long standing diabetes or small etc"....they all agree I have neurological damage but have like he stated "maybe secondary to diabetes or...." Which to me means its either diabetes or this other thing....he does state long standing diabetes which according to Diabetes Association most all develpe neuropathis over time...

...one service rep. says it will fly with the added extras as the CP examiner (a cardiologist) thought wrongly that a emg ruled out diabetic neuropathy....he even states " Certainly, all examinations shows perepherial neuropathies but the emg by Dr. ..... shows otherwise." Certainly means certain as far as examinations are concerned. So if you take away the emg he would be certain....We now have written into the record that EMG miss allot of neuopathies...

What exactly is a nexus statement....ALSO I am going to borrow some money to see a neurologist to review my records etc.

sorry about the writing but I can't see to well today...

[john999]

Nexus is the medical evidence that connects your injuries to your military service. In your case the nexus would be the evidence that connects the PN to your service connected DMII. What that means is a neurologist would state that your PN is a secondary condition to the DMII.

[LarryJ]

OnRiver,

Just thought I'd chime in here. Getting an "Independent Medical Opinion" an "IMO" will not help if the doctor that you choose does not know how to speak "VA".

In his opinion, he must state that your condition was "At Least As Likely As Not" ( in other words a 50% - 50% chance ) of having been caused by your military service, or having been caused by another condition that was caused by your military service.

Of course, it would be great if, instead of "at least as likely as not", that he could state difinitely that the military service caused, etc., etc.

I'll take my seat and keep quite now.