PJS Posted 28 October , 2018 Share Posted 28 October , 2018 Can anyone explain what the phrases "prevents 1/2 for 6 months" and "prevents 1/4 for 3 months" actually mean? Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 28 October , 2018 Share Posted 28 October , 2018 Is it not presents rather than prevents ? I wonder if they're saying it causes him problems for 6 months of the year with colder weather ? Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seaJane Posted 28 October , 2018 Share Posted 28 October , 2018 Could "presents 1/2" mean "presents one day in two"? But don't quote me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 28 October , 2018 Share Posted 28 October , 2018 6 minutes ago, seaJane said: Could "presents 1/2" mean "presents one day in two"? But don't quote me. I wondered that but the 1/2 for 6 months and then the 1/4 for 3 months made me think it was out of a year. Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Brannen Posted 28 October , 2018 Share Posted 28 October , 2018 (edited) It is "prevents", as you can see how the writer writes "present" at the end of the first paragraph. Definitely is a "v" not an "s". As well, in the paragraph are various examples of both letters with "e" as a following letter. However, have no clue what it means! EDIT: Believe it is the amount it prevents the soldier from being 100% physically efficient. From:http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwi/VolXIII/SectionIVrev.htm "Soldiers in Class C have more serious disabilities and must be considered individually. When it is clear that the physical disability is not of too great severity to exclude him from Class A or B, yet the surgeon believes that this disability is not of too great severity to prevent his retention in the service for duty in a special capacity, he will consult the soldier's " qualification card," note the occupations in which qualified, and direct the personnel officer, as custodian of all personnel records, to indorse on the card in the case of each named occupation the medical officer's opinion as to whether or not the soldier can safely be employed in the named occupations, and whether the disability prevents the soldier being 100 per cent physically efficient in the occupations named on the card. If not 100 per cent physically efficient the percentage of efficiency will be noted. Unless a soldier is 80 per cent or more efficient in at least one trade, he should not be retained in the service." Edited 28 October , 2018 by Keith Brannen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJS Posted 28 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 28 October , 2018 2 hours ago, Keith Brannen said: It is "prevents", as you can see how the writer writes "present" at the end of the first paragraph. Definitely is a "v" not an "s". As well, in the paragraph are various examples of both letters with "e" as a following letter. However, have no clue what it means! EDIT: Believe it is the amount it prevents the soldier from being 100% physically efficient. From:http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwi/VolXIII/SectionIVrev.htm "Soldiers in Class C have more serious disabilities and must be considered individually. When it is clear that the physical disability is not of too great severity to exclude him from Class A or B, yet the surgeon believes that this disability is not of too great severity to prevent his retention in the service for duty in a special capacity, he will consult the soldier's " qualification card," note the occupations in which qualified, and direct the personnel officer, as custodian of all personnel records, to indorse on the card in the case of each named occupation the medical officer's opinion as to whether or not the soldier can safely be employed in the named occupations, and whether the disability prevents the soldier being 100 per cent physically efficient in the occupations named on the card. If not 100 per cent physically efficient the percentage of efficiency will be noted. Unless a soldier is 80 per cent or more efficient in at least one trade, he should not be retained in the service." Thank you all. I think this makes the most sense. The amount it prevents the man from being fully fit and for how long. So, the first report was 50% disability for a duration of six months and then after six months he was re-assessed to be 25% impaired for a further 3 months. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 28 October , 2018 Share Posted 28 October , 2018 (edited) 2 minutes ago, PJS said: Thank you all. I think this makes the most sense. The amount it prevents the man from being fully fit and for how long. So, the first report was 50% disability for a duration of six months and then after six months he was re-assessed to be 25% impaired for a further 3 months. Peter Keep in mind that the link and information provided is from the medical treatment of US soldiers rather than the UK. Craig Edited 28 October , 2018 by ss002d6252 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Brannen Posted 28 October , 2018 Share Posted 28 October , 2018 3 hours ago, ss002d6252 said: Keep in mind that the link and information provided is from the medical treatment of US soldiers rather than the UK. Craig Correct, but it was the only detailed explanation I could find, and yet all examples of "Prevents... ...months" on the internet were from British medical boards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJS Posted 28 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 28 October , 2018 I believe this is the definitive answer ... Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now