Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

VA Disability Claims Articles

Ask Your VA Claims Question | Current Forum Posts Search | Rules | View All Forums
VA Disability Articles | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users

  • hohomepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • 27-year-anniversary-leaderboard.png

    advice-disclaimer.jpg

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Gulf War Illness and CLL

Rate this question


dwbell98

Question

6 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
  • Moderator
52 minutes ago, dwbell98 said:

I served in Desert Storm and now have CLL. How do I get this checked out?

File a claim for it. Being diagnosed is one thing, you are still going to have to let the VARO know that you have been diagnosed and you request compensation for it.

Unfortunately, the VARO and the VAMC are two different animals and they do not always get along and play/talk to one another. 

Edited by pacmanx1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

By 'checked out', I think you mean if you should file a claim- I might have to re write this post-I am in a cloud and it affects my PC modem.

 

This GW veteran is on BVA  remand for CLL:
 

In Part:
"With respect to CLL, the examiner opined that “there is no evidence” that elevated lymphocyte and Lymph% counts in June 2000 and June 2003, elevated Lymph% count in October 2002, and enlarged lymph nodes in March 1989 were causally related to the CLL he developed in 2007. It is unclear what type of evidence would be needed to establish this link. If elevated lymphocyte and Lymph% counts are potentially indicative of CLL, then an opinion is needed to address whether a diagnosis of CLL could be precipitated by elevated lymphocytes and Lymph% counts, even slight elevations. It is not necessary that evidence affirmatively establish a causal relationship between early elevations and later diagnosis; rather, the standard is whether it is as likely as not.  Furthermore, the examiner did not discuss the possibility that the Veteran’s diagnosis of CLL could have been caused by hazardous environmental exposures while serving in the Southwest Asia theater of operations (Saudi Arabia and Kuwait) during the Persian Gulf War, to include possible exposure to depleted uranium. Rather, the examiner merely stated, without supporting rationale, that “[t]here is no evidence suggesting the leukemia diagnosis in 2007 was caused by an in-service injury.”

https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/Files2/21010845.txt
In my opinion, if he was exposed to depleted uranium or any other chemical  or environrnental hazard hazard , in service, that might have caused the CLL, he will need a strong IMO/IME from a specialist to prove service connection.
The Presumptives for the Gulf war have changed-recently and they are all her under the Burn Pit forum.
CLL is presumptive for Agent Orange, as this article from the Mayo clinic states and we have had CLL AO vets here:
The link has other causes for CLL as well.
BUT:
This vet proved his CLL was due to environmental exposures during the Gulf War:
In part:
"The Veteran also submitted an August 2018 letter from Col. G.F., the Battalion Commander of the 2nd Battalion, 34th Armor (2-34 Armor) (assigned to the 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized) which was deployed to Saudi Arabia arriving on New Year's Eve 1990. Col. F. noted that the Veteran was his 4.2" Heavy Mortar Platoon Leader. He described the movement of the unit in January and February 1991 noting that the unit attacked as part of the 1st Infantry Division and drove north through Iraq and then east across the northern edge of Kuwait.  Col. F. reported further that the unit entered dense oil smoke on the 27th of February and remained in thick black smoke from the oil fires until March 8th when the unit returned to Iraq where they remained on the edge of the oil fires until mid-April.  The 2-34 Armor was one of the units identified in the downwind hazard of the chemical munitions explosion in an Iraqi ammunition depot as well. (see also December 2000 and September 2005 letters from the Department of Defense regarding the proximity of the Veteran's unit in March 1991 to a low level of chemical agents resulting from the demolition of munitions at Khamisiyah, Iraq with no reported indication of any long-term health affects but continued monitoring). "
SANd:
"3. Service connection for CLL

"The Veteran maintains that his current CLL is related to his active service. Specifically, the Veteran provides that his CLL is linked to in-service exposure to hazardous chemicals, including smoke from oil field fires in Kuwait. See May 2020 statement, May 2021 Board hearing testimony. For the following reasons, the Board finds that service connection is warranted."
"Accordingly, the Veteran has a current diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia, which has been linked by medical evidence to his active service by the May 2021 medical opinion completed by his treating physician. Moreover, the Veteran's claims folder does not contain an adequate medical opinion to the contrary. Thus, the Board finds that the Veteran's CLL is at least as likely as not attributable to his active service. And, under VA law, in such a circumstance, the claimant must prevail. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 55 (1990). Therefore, service connection is warranted for chronic lymphocytic leukemia."
This entire decision is here:
https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/Files7/21045508.txt
The new presumptives have caused the VA to look at many recent claims differently regarding Gulf War Veterans.
If you were not exposured to burn pits or hazardous explosions or chemicals in the Gulf War-
DID your MOS expose you to chemicals or even herbicides at a different duty station? 
Our member James Cripps proved he was exposed to AO at Fort Gordon- the first CONUS AO Veteran.

This the article from the Mayo Clinic

"Exposure to chemicals. Certain herbicides and insecticides, including Agent Orange used during the Vietnam War, have been linked to an increased risk of chronic lymphocytic leukemia."
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/chronic-lymphocytic-leukemia/symptoms-causes/syc-20352428

"With respect to CLL, the examiner opined that “there is no evidence” that elevated lymphocyte and Lymph% counts in June 2000 and June 2003, elevated Lymph% count in October 2002, and enlarged lymph nodes in March 1989 were causally related to the CLL he developed in 2007. It is unclear what type of evidence would be needed to establish this link. If elevated lymphocyte and Lymph% counts are potentially indicative of CLL, then an opinion is needed to address whether a diagnosis of CLL could be precipitated by elevated lymphocytes and Lymph% counts, even slight elevations. It is not necessary that evidence affirmatively establish a causal relationship between early elevations and later diagnosis; rather, the standard is whether it is as likely as not.  Furthermore, the examiner did not discuss the possibility that the Veteran’s diagnosis of CLL could have been caused by hazardous environmental exposures while serving in the Southwest Asia theater of operations (Saudi Arabia and Kuwait) during the Persian Gulf War, to include possible exposure to depleted uranium. Rather, the examiner merely stated, without supporting rationale, that “[t]here is no evidence suggesting the leukemia diagnosis in 2007 was caused by an in-service injury.”
 
https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/Files2/21010845.txt
In my opinion, if he was exposed to depleted uranium or any other chemical  or environrnental hazard hazard , in service, that might have caused the CLL, he will need a strong IMO/IME from a specialist to prove service connection.
The Presumptives for the Gulf war have changed-recently and they are all her under the Burn Pit forum.
CLL is presumptive for Agent Orange, as this article from the Mayo clinic states and we have had CLL AO vets here:
The link has other causes for CLL as well.
BUT:
This vet proved his CLL was due to environmental exposures during the Gulf War:
In part:
"The Veteran also submitted an August 2018 letter from Col. G.F., the Battalion Commander of the 2nd Battalion, 34th Armor (2-34 Armor) (assigned to the 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized) which was deployed to Saudi Arabia arriving on New Year's Eve 1990. Col. F. noted that the Veteran was his 4.2" Heavy Mortar Platoon Leader. He described the movement of the unit in January and February 1991 noting that the unit attacked as part of the 1st Infantry Division and drove north through Iraq and then east across the northern edge of Kuwait.  Col. F. reported further that the unit entered dense oil smoke on the 27th of February and remained in thick black smoke from the oil fires until March 8th when the unit returned to Iraq where they remained on the edge of the oil fires until mid-April.  The 2-34 Armor was one of the units identified in the downwind hazard of the chemical munitions explosion in an Iraqi ammunition depot as well. (see also December 2000 and September 2005 letters from the Department of Defense regarding the proximity of the Veteran's unit in March 1991 to a low level of chemical agents resulting from the demolition of munitions at Khamisiyah, Iraq with no reported indication of any long-term health affects but continued monitoring). "
SANd:
 
"3. Service connection for CLL "The Veteran maintains that his current CLL is related to his active service. Specifically, the Veteran provides that his CLL is linked to in-service exposure to hazardous chemicals, including smoke from oil field fires in Kuwait. See May 2020 statement, May 2021 Board hearing testimony. For the following reasons, the Board finds that service connection is warranted."
"Accordingly, the Veteran has a current diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia, which has been linked by medical evidence to his active service by the May 2021 medical opinion completed by his treating physician. Moreover, the Veteran's claims folder does not contain an adequate medical opinion to the contrary. Thus, the Board finds that the Veteran's CLL is at least as likely as not attributable to his active service. And, under VA law, in such a circumstance, the claimant must prevail. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 55 (1990). Therefore, service connection is warranted for chronic lymphocytic leukemia."
This entire decision is here:
https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/Files7/21045508.txt
The new presumptives have caused the VA to look at many recent claims differently regarding Gulf War Veterans.
If you were not exposured to burn pits or hazardous explosions or chemicals in the Gulf War-
DID your MOS expose you to chemicals or even herbicides at a different duty station? 
Our member James Cripps proved he was exposed to AO at Fort Gordon- the first CONUS AO Veteran.
 
 
 

This GW veteran is on BVA  remand for CLL:

In Part:
"With respect to CLL, the examiner opined that “there is no evidence” that elevated lymphocyte and Lymph% counts in June 2000 and June 2003, elevated Lymph% count in October 2002, and enlarged lymph nodes in March 1989 were causally related to the CLL he developed in 2007. It is unclear what type of evidence would be needed to establish this link. If elevated lymphocyte and Lymph% counts are potentially indicative of CLL, then an opinion is needed to address whether a diagnosis of CLL could be precipitated by elevated lymphocytes and Lymph% counts, even slight elevations. It is not necessary that evidence affirmatively establish a causal relationship between early elevations and later diagnosis; rather, the standard is whether it is as likely as not.  Furthermore, the examiner did not discuss the possibility that the Veteran’s diagnosis of CLL could have been caused by hazardous environmental exposures while serving in the Southwest Asia theater of operations (Saudi Arabia and Kuwait) during the Persian Gulf War, to include possible exposure to depleted uranium. Rather, the examiner merely stated, without supporting rationale, that “[t]here is no evidence suggesting the leukemia diagnosis in 2007 was caused by an in-service injury.”

https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/Files2/21010845.txt
In my opinion, if he was exposed to depleted uranium or any other chemical  or environrnental hazard hazard , in service, that might have caused the CLL, he will need a strong IMO/IME from a specialist to prove service connection.
The Presumptives for the Gulf war have changed-recently and they are all her under the Burn Pit forum.
CLL is presumptive for Agent Orange, as this article from the Mayo clinic states and we have had CLL AO vets here:
The link has other causes for CLL as well.
BUT:
This vet proved his CLL was due to environmental exposures during the Gulf War:
In part:
"The Veteran also submitted an August 2018 letter from Col. G.F., the Battalion Commander of the 2nd Battalion, 34th Armor (2-34 Armor) (assigned to the 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized) which was deployed to Saudi Arabia arriving on New Year's Eve 1990. Col. F. noted that the Veteran was his 4.2" Heavy Mortar Platoon Leader. He described the movement of the unit in January and February 1991 noting that the unit attacked as part of the 1st Infantry Division and drove north through Iraq and then east across the northern edge of Kuwait.  Col. F. reported further that the unit entered dense oil smoke on the 27th of February and remained in thick black smoke from the oil fires until March 8th when the unit returned to Iraq where they remained on the edge of the oil fires until mid-April.  The 2-34 Armor was one of the units identified in the downwind hazard of the chemical munitions explosion in an Iraqi ammunition depot as well. (see also December 2000 and September 2005 letters from the Department of Defense regarding the proximity of the Veteran's unit in March 1991 to a low level of chemical agents resulting from the demolition of munitions at Khamisiyah, Iraq with no reported indication of any long-term health affects but continued monitoring). "
SANd:
"3. Service connection for CLL

"The Veteran maintains that his current CLL is related to his active service. Specifically, the Veteran provides that his CLL is linked to in-service exposure to hazardous chemicals, including smoke from oil field fires in Kuwait. See May 2020 statement, May 2021 Board hearing testimony. For the following reasons, the Board finds that service connection is warranted."
"Accordingly, the Veteran has a current diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia, which has been linked by medical evidence to his active service by the May 2021 medical opinion completed by his treating physician. Moreover, the Veteran's claims folder does not contain an adequate medical opinion to the contrary. Thus, the Board finds that the Veteran's CLL is at least as likely as not attributable to his active service. And, under VA law, in such a circumstance, the claimant must prevail. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 55 (1990). Therefore, service connection is warranted for chronic lymphocytic leukemia."
This entire decision is here:
https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/Files7/21045508.txt
The new presumptives have caused the VA to look at many recent claims differently regarding Gulf War Veterans.
If you were not exposured to burn pits or hazardous explosions or chemicals in the Gulf War-
DID your MOS expose you to chemicals or even herbicides at a different duty station? 
Our member James Cripps proved he was exposed to AO at Fort Gordon- the first CONUS AO Veteran.

"Exposure to chemicals. Certain herbicides and insecticides, including Agent Orange used during the Vietnam War, have been linked to an increased risk of chronic lymphocytic leukemia."


https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/chronic-lymphocytic-leukemia/symptoms-causes/syc-20352428

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Welcome to Hadit….Need some additional information to help you…

Have you filed previously? do you currently have a rating of any kind?  Do you have your c file? As stated above CLL is presumptive for AO exposure.  But given the case presented by the very talented and knowledgeable Ms Berta , you could certainly construct a claim for this for GW.  

You will need to do some homework first.   Look through the GW presumptive list and qualifiers for areas, years, etc…make notes applicable to your deployment(s).  In general, you need to prove you were in theater during the time window.  Use the approach that the VA knows nothing …Seems silly, but it is what it is…just because DOD knows it doesn’t mean VA has a clue.


Also, get together any med records you have, test results, Dr notes, etc…. Annotate signs and symptoms before and after the dx, when started, any meds prescribed, who and when DX the condition…ie was it the VA or private Dr?  Statements from friends or family members, plus your own accounting of the effects on personal, social and work life.  You can file yourself or pay an attorney to do it for you, regardless of the choice, you will need the same information. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Please check out these replys I made this AM

https://community.hadit.com/topic/86621-burn-pits/page/11

 

 

and the map

https://community.hadit.com/topic/87011-map-where-gwvs-served-re-environmental-hazards/

 

Your Unit web site  might have info you need ,to determine exactly where you served in the GW and where you were "in close proximity" to the environmental hazards- I dont think close proximity is in the regulations, but it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use