Originally Posted by Halo
I ordered my transcript from my hearing & I see the Dr. who testified for me said the medication he prescribed for me helped me. Wouldn't this be a reason someone would be denied as I was? I would personally think so. There's other things I also see, but I'm too depressed after reading it to mention them now. No wonder I was denied!
I agree with LL and Janke. You can't jump to the conclusion that issue was the clincher or if it had any impact.
Trying to demonstrate the point that having "a prescribed medication help you" doesn't mean that you are or are not disabled, I'll use the example of "me."
I have TOS and RSD, complicated by fibro,occipital neuralgia, djd, depression, bursitis, and tendonitis. Severe pain is my biggest complaint. Cymbalta and Neurontin take the edge off my pain slightly. Narcotics help considerably. My doctor should be documenting whether these medications help me or not. If they aren't helping, I shouldn't still be on them. If they are helping, that is a necessary part of my medical record. The fact that these meds help me doesn't mean that I'm cured. The pills make it so that I don't have to spend 16 hours a day with an icepack. The pills make it so that I can stand or walk around a bit and not have to be laying down or sitting in a specific chair 24/7. The pills don't make me so functional that I can do household chores daily, or even bathe and dress everyday. I still have limits with my activity tolerance. My meds make me feel even more dizzy/lightheaded/difficulty concentrating than I do without meds. That beats severe pain, but it doesn't make me able to do SGA. My medications help me; they do not make me un-disabled.
Does that make sense ?