Toxic exposure, presumptive conditions, PACT ACT and false BS from "experts'

[Dustoff1970]

There is serious false and misleading information being given to vets by so called "experts" at another location.  Later I will give my disability claims/appeals success as an example against their lies.

They say in a condensed version here that exposure means nothing and even a current diagnosis means nothing without a medical nexus opinion connecting the two to active service.   They must hate the Pact ACT and the presumptive clause of that ACT.

(1)  In 2014 I was diagnosed with Ischemic Heart Disease IHD/CAD by private Heart Surgeon after extensive testing.The VARO raters automatically awarded me 30% rating for this IHD/CAD as a presumptive disability due to my "exposure" to Vietnam sprayed Agent Orange toxin under the then Agent Orange ACT as I served as combat Army medevac pilot in Nam in 1970.

Later the BVA granted my appeal and increased this to 60% effective back to 2017.

I had no and did not need a formal, official or unofficial medical nexus IMO opinion from any doctor stating that my current heart disease was connected/due to Agent Orange toxin exposure.  The VARO relied on my submitted medical evidence of IHD/CAD and my service records showing active duty status in Vietnam in 70.  That was it period.

(2) My second example is my very recent automatic award of Hypertension (HTN) service connection at 0% by VARO raters under the PACT ACT and again due to my Vietnam Agent Orange exposure and based upon long term VA medical treatment records and prescription drugs for my HTN and my service records.

As a mere formality I was required to attend C&P exams for both conditions where the examiner confirmed my identity and existing evidence records.  No private or VA doctor formal IMO medical nexus opinion was required of me period.

The way these smart ass turkeys on another forum gives short abrupt arrogant answers misleads vets to believing they must seek out a VA or private MD doctor or specialist to write up a formal nexus opinion connecting his exposure to the active service location at the proper time.

A current diagnosis of the presumptive disability and vets service records showing he was at the location of exposure in correct time period is all that is needed under the Pact ACT and Agent Orange Act.  Good grief.  I feel sorry for vets relying on those BS artist. Come to Hadit for more honest accurate information.

My comment is not legal advice as I am not a lawyer, paralegal or VSO.

 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2023 by Dustoff1970

[broncovet]

Im familiar with wrong information on other sites.  One way hadit helps prevent misinformation:

We have a check and balance system.  People who read a post, and dispute its contents may feel free to dispute it openly, but its best when links are supplied to refute bad advice.  

People are not afraid here, to post an opinion which conflicts with other opinions.  As a moderator, I welcome differing opinions.  I do not welcome personal attacks, however.  So, dispute the opinion, but dont attack the credibility of the poster.  

On other sites, the mods think they have a "God's license".  

Berta, Buck, and myself have differing opinions on some claim process and issues.  That's ok!  We would often link a site as to our reason for dissent.  

When police questioned hundreds of witnesses to the Dallas shooting of President Kennedy, they found many many different versions from some very credible witnesses.  These witness had a different perspective.  

Still, we cant be sure exactly how many shots were fired, as witnesses disagreed.  Its ok, in a healthy system there is professional disagreement on va benefits, medical issues, sports..pretty much everything.  

When every witness tells the exact same story..that is when to watch out, because that story was likely rehearsed and a lie.  

We had a poster some time ago who advocated "not attending" c and p exams.  I provided a link from Va

as to a regulation which warned against not attending c and p exams.  https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.655.   Indeed Veterans who skip a c and p exam may well have to face consequences.  The rule is clear, so I asked the poster not to suggest to Veterans they not comply with this regulation, because it could harm them, as the link shows.  

Generally, I do not advise violating VA regulations, including this one, "except in compelling or highly unusual cases".  As an example, if you can not attend a c and p exam, such as you are in the hosptial, then call va tell them you cant attend, and why.  This is explained in the regulation, at least somewhat.  

I also dont advocate lying to VA, such as exaggerating symptoms.  Its never a good idea, and there have been Veterans who got into serious trouble for the same.  Sleep better, tell the truth, but maximize your benefits by applying for and appealing benefits you think you deserve.  When other naysayers tell you not to apply, remember, they dont know your medical history like you do.  I always suggest vets file for any/all of the benefits they feel are due to them.