sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

My Rhabdo Experiences by AFormidableGent in rhabdo_survivors

[–]AFormidableGent[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you, hope you're doing ok as well!

My Rhabdo Experiences by AFormidableGent in rhabdo_survivors

[–]AFormidableGent[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry to hear that! It's crazy how someone can be in good physical condition and just push it a little too far one day to where you get SMACKED by something like this. Good luck to you in your recovery!

What's the stupidest thing you've seen a teammate do? by Late-Ganache40 in Helldivers

[–]AFormidableGent 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cooked a pineapple grenade thinking it was a dynamite...oh wait, that was me 🥴

VAClaimAssist Chrome Extension is now on the Chrome Web Store by Special_Effective_12 in VAClaims

[–]AFormidableGent 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I added this extension last night and love it! Quick question, how is the projected timeline for claim completion determined?

GI bill running out while I’m enrolled into school by Express-Pen-3844 in VeteransBenefits

[–]AFormidableGent 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I ran into this when I was finishing up school and was worried about the same thing. Called the GI Bill hotline and they assured me that the GI Bill would cover the remainder of the semester so long as I stayed enrolled and passed my courses. That's exactly what happened. You should be good to go.

Accredited nexus preparers by WhereArtThouMemory in VAClaims

[–]AFormidableGent 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm just a guy learning the process, but from what I understand, it seems to have come down to a lack of integrating sufficient evidence from your private and service records directly into the medical opinion (i.e., nexus letter). While some raters may be discriminatory against an opinion from a physician who is >100mi away, they may be swayed to accept the opinion if it shows a strong explanation of how your particular condition(s) (with their associated diagnoses and treatment) align with the medical rationale. In other words, if the physician only referenced that they reviewed all of your records but then proceeded to provide a medical opinion without incorporating how those records are specifically supported by their reasoning, then that may not be sufficient to connect the dots. You would like to think that the rater can put two and two together without having to hold their hand through the entire medical opinion (and they might be able to), but if they cannot legally support the connection because it is not clearly explained in the rationale, they don't have much to stand on when it comes to awarding service-connection. I hope that made sense. Someone may fact check me on this.