Jump to content

  • veteranscrisisline-badge-chat-1.gif

  • Advertisemnt

  • Trouble Remembering? This helped me.

    I have memory problems and as some of you may know I highly recommend Evernote and have for years. Though I've found that writing helps me remember more. I ran across Tom's videos on youtube, I'm a bit geeky and I also use an IPad so if you take notes on your IPad or you are thinking of going paperless check it out. I'm really happy with it, I use it with a program called Noteshelf 2.

    Click here to purchase your digital journal. HadIt.com receives a commission on each purchase.

  • 14 Questions about VA Disability Compensation Benefits Claims


    When a Veteran starts considering whether or not to file a VA Disability Claim, there are a lot of questions that he or she tends to ask. Over the last 10 years, the following are the 14 most common basic questions I am asked about ...
    Continue Reading
  • Ads

  • Most Common VA Disabilities Claimed for Compensation:   


  • Advertisemnt

  • VA Watchdog

  • Advertisemnt

  • Ads

  • Can a 100 percent Disabled Veteran Work and Earn an Income?

    employment 2.jpeg

    You’ve just been rated 100% disabled by the Veterans Affairs. After the excitement of finally having the rating you deserve wears off, you start asking questions. One of the first questions that you might ask is this: It’s a legitimate question – rare is the Veteran that finds themselves sitting on the couch eating bon-bons … Continue reading

Sign in to follow this  

Please, stop saying pot kills pain. Back it with study for it to be fact.

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, broncovet said:

Most EVERYTHING we buy comes with labels we can not trust, not "just" CBD oil.  

Example:  Corn.  Yes, the yellow kernels.  We dont know if these are GMO, loaded with pesticides or not.  The labels "dont have to tell us" if this is a genetically modified corn, because Monsanto and other huge companies have lobied FDA and has gotten the GRAS (Generally recognized as Safe) label to genetically modified corn and other stuff even when there are no studies to really show that its safe.

   Recently, the FDA has said that the ingredient in ROUNDUP is safe, while the courts have ruled quite the opposite, awarding millions to people where that stuff caused cancer.  

Agent Orange was a big scandal with VA.  The VA would not admit that AO was causing Vets problems for decades.  

And, what about JetGuns?  Those were "safe" and approved, right?  Ask Alex Graham about Jetguns and why they are not used anymore.  

Example 2:  Chickens  These are often filled with growth horemones, and often contaminated with e coli or other stuff.  

    The bottom line is the FDA is WEAK, corrupt, and  subject to influence by large chemical companies, and puts its "stamp" on just about anything, including hundreds of drugs which were approved by FDA then later banned, but only when it makes them money to do so.  


The FDA is just a smaller, weaker, and more subject to outside influence branch just like VA.  Of course, both VA and FDA are corrupt.  


Bronco is dead on.  Parts or most of the government is very corrupt.  The system you see to keep you safe is there for the money.  There are so many more treatments the US outlaws, because it is too cheap to make and would hurt one of the big guys.  Or the treatment is too effective!  

I would rather hear from people who use a product regularly to see how it affects them and the benefits it has.  We also know the FDA will downplay or just not put warnings out on products if they can get away with it.  

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a great example of a weak FDA, which caves in to the food lobby.  

Many years ago, Harvard researchers found out that hydrogenated oil, aka "trans fats" is absolutely horrible for your health and they estimated this oil kills 10,000 people per year.  So, did the FDA ban this stuf from foods?  

No.  The food companies lobbied FDA, complaining that removing trans fats "would cost the food companies too much money" even tho trans fats essentially clog up our veins and arteries leading to heart attacks and strokes.  This happens because "hydrogenating" oil makes it a solid at room temperature, while it would normally be a liquid.  

Finally, in 2018, "new" products banned hydrogenated oil, while food companies could continue poising Americans with trans fats so food companies could profit.


It worked great.  Food companies could add hydrogenated oil, and it greatly increased "shelf life".  Frankly the stuff never spoiled, in part because bacteria are smarter than we are..they would not eat hydrogenated oil because it clogged their systems, too.  

So, food companies put it in Twinkies, margarine, potatoe chips, cookies and hundreds of other foods.  

When Harvard published this study proving hydrogenated oil is a slow acting poison, the food companies rebelled against its ban because it would cost them too much money to reformulate products without trans fats.  

Finally, last year, trans fats were banned by FDA in NEW products, but old products can still have this poison.  (That is, they cant create any new products with trans fats, but can keep selling us old products).

A few responsible companies removed trans fats in spite of FDA caving to the food industry, above our safety.  

Lays removed trans fats from potatoe chips about 10 years ago, as did Vortman cookies.  

Of course, the food companies resisted labeling which showed trans fats adversely affect our health.  So consumers were left in the dark by a corrupt FDA, taking bribes from food companies to allow continued use of this slow poison in our foods.  

Worse, a label can read "0 trans fats" EVEN when it has trans fats!!!  Why?  The food companies lobied to "round off the number" PER SERVINg.  

So, companies can continue to put trans fats in food, make a smaller "serving size on the label" and "round down" anything less than .5 gram per serving to 0.  By doing this, they can decieve consumers into thinking there is no trans fat in the product, while, in fact, its loaded with it.  You see, the company sets the "serving size".  So a "serving size" of a piece of pie can be a teaspoon full, which would contain a half gram of trans fats, which would round down to 0 grams, and the food company could label it "No trans fats", decieving the customer, but getting millions in kickbacks from food companies who could lie to us about trans fats by allowing this manipulation of the numbers.  This is all with FDA's blessings, and their pockets loaded with money.  

Edited by broncovet

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Ads

  • Our picks

    • Peggy toll free 1000 last week, told me that, my claim or case BVA Granted is at the RO waiting on someone to sign off ,She said your in step 5 going into step 6 . That's good, right.?
        • Thanks
      • 6 replies
    • I took a look at your documents and am trying to interpret what happened. A summary of what happened would have helped, but I hope I am interpreting your intentions correctly:

      2003 asthma denied because they said you didn't have 'chronic' asthma diagnosis

      2018 Asthma/COPD granted 30% effective Feb 2015 based on FEV-1 of 60% and inhalational anti-inflamatory medication.

      "...granted SC for your asthma with COPD w/dypsnea because your STRs show you were diagnosed with asthma during your military service in 1995.

      First, check the date of your 2018 award letter. If it is WITHIN one year, file a notice of disagreement about the effective date. 

      If it is AFTER one year, that means your claim has became final. If you would like to try to get an earlier effective date, then CUE or new and material evidence are possible avenues. 


      I assume your 2003 denial was due to not finding "chronic" or continued symptoms noted per 38 CFR 3.303(b). In 2013, the Federal Circuit court (Walker v. Shinseki) changed they way they use the term "chronic" and requires the VA to use 3.303(a) for anything not listed under 3.307 and 3.309. You probably had a nexus and benefit of the doubt on your side when you won SC.

      It might be possible for you to CUE the effective date back to 2003 or earlier. You'll need to familiarize yourself with the restrictions of CUE. It has to be based on the evidence in the record and laws in effect at the time the decision was made. Avoid trying to argue on how they weighed a decision, but instead focus on the evidence/laws to prove they were not followed or the evidence was never considered. It's an uphill fight. I would start by recommending you look carefully at your service treatment records and locate every instance where you reported breathing issues, asthma diagnosis, or respiratory treatment (albuterol, steroids, etc...). CUE is not easy and it helps to do your homework before you file.

      Another option would be to file for an increased rating, but to do that you would need to meet the criteria for 60%. If you don't meet criteria for a 60% rating, just ensure you still meet the criteria for 30% (using daily inhaled steroid inhalers is adequate) because they are likely to deny your request for increase. You could attempt to request an earlier effective date that way.


      Does this help?
    • Thanks for that. So do you have a specific answer or experience with it bouncing between the two?
    • Tinnitus comes in two forms: subjective and objective. In subjective tinnitus, only the sufferer will hear the ringing in their own ears. In objective tinnitus, the sound can be heard by a doctor who is examining the ear canals. Objective tinnitus is extremely rare, while subjective tinnitus is by far the most common form of the disorder.

      The sounds of tinnitus may vary with the person experiencing it. Some will hear a ringing, while others will hear a buzzing. At times people may hear a chirping or whistling sound. These sounds may be constant or intermittent. They may also vary in volume and are generally more obtrusive when the sufferer is in a quiet environment. Many tinnitus sufferers find their symptoms are at their worst when they’re trying to fall asleep.

        • Like
    • Precedent Setting CAVC cases cited in the M21-1
      A couple months back before I received my decision I started preparing for the appeal I knew I would be filing.  That is how little faith I had in the VA caring about we the veteran. 

      One of the things I did is I went through the entire M21-1 and documented every CAVC precedent case that the VA cited. I did this because I wanted to see what the rater was seeing.  I could not understand for the life of me why so many obviously bad decisions were being handed down.  I think the bottom line is that the wrong type of people are hired as raters.  I think raters should have some kind of legal background.  They do not need to be lawyers but I think paralegals would be a good idea.

      There have been more than 3500 precedent setting decisions from the CAVC since 1989.  Now we need to concede that all of them are not favorable to the veteran but I have learned that in a lot of cases even though the veteran lost a case it some rules were established that assisted other veterans.

      The document I created has about 200 or so decisions cited in the M21-1.   Considering the fact that there are more than 3500 precedent cases out there I think it is safe to assume the VA purposely left out decisions that would make it almost impossible to deny veteran claims.  Case in point. I know of 14 precedent setting decisions that state the VA cannot ignore or give no weight to outside doctors without providing valid medical reasons as to why.  Most of these decision are not cited by the M21.

      It is important that we do our due diligence to make sure we do not get screwed.  I think the M21-1 is incomplete because there is too much information we veterans are finding on our own to get the benefits we deserve

      M21-1 Precedent setting decisions .docx
      • 5 replies
  • Ads

  • Popular Contributors

  • Ad

  • Latest News
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines