BVA–LSD IN WATER COOLER


Read this decision and then tell me someone isn’t half a bubble off. Here’s the punchline:

 

The specialist opined that it was likely that the Veteran’s hepatitis C was related to the drug use but opined that it was less likely than not related to service because the long-term drug use involved only 2 years of in-service drug use as opposed to 23 years of post-service drug use. Here, the Veteran’s competent statements, which the Board finds to be credible, indicate that during service and for a long time thereafter he used drugs to self-medicate for the low back pain associated with his service-connected low back disability. In light of that factual background and the VHA specialist’s opinion linking the Veteran’s 25-year use of drugs to the onset of his hepatitis C, the Board finds that the evidence supports the Veteran’s claim. As such, given the opinion offered by the VHA specialist, the Board finds that the Veteran’s hepatitis C is proximately due to his service-connected low back disability.

I wish I could do that “Awwwerrrh? Tim Allen does so well on Home Improvement. This decision certainly deserves one.

 

About asknod

VA claims blogger
This entry was posted in BvA HCV decisions and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to BVA–LSD IN WATER COOLER

  1. RobertG says:

    WTF? I like the statement “the veterans competent statements” after “23 years of doing acid man” are legit! Man I didn’t know there was any more orange sunshine or purple haze out there. Strawberry fields forever and jane fonda doing zippy the pinhead does bring back memories. Would this be “CUE” on the part of the vA after they take a normal piss? He likes it–hey mikey……

  2. KC says:

    Seems legit.

  3. randy says:

    With HCV denials flying left and right I am swirling mentally now. A history, any history, of drug use is fodder for them to deny so what am I missing here. Self medicating from my perspective would most likely involve the use of the oft noted, “left hand tobacco” which is not a transmittable route for passing along HCV. If it were a 25 year history of harder drugs taken via needles or nasal cavity then it is plausible enough for a denial. In any case this sounds as though the Vet may get a 50-50 and therefore a win.

    • asknod says:

      I suspect an incoming bait and switch. He gets SC for HCV secondary to back injury but gets no $ because it’s willful misconduct. It isn’t over until they turn the squelch up and silence the fat lady singing.

      • randy says:

        Imagine that, with the DAV representing him. They still have not changed my “representative” who the local county listed as AMVets and there is not even a branch in this state. Gotta laugh at some and mourn the rest I guess.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.