6/5/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly permanently or partially disabled, but he must also prove that there is a causal relation between his illness or injury and the work for which he had been engaged.[39] This Court has held that a person who claims entitlement to the benefits provided by law must establish his right thereto by substantial evidence or "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion."[40] This Court cannot grant a claim for disability benefits without such substantial evidence because to do so would be offensive to due process. Hence, the burden is on the seafarer to prove that he suffered from a work-related injury or illness during the term of his contract. [41] In this case, Demetrio failed to discharge this burden. He failed to prove the required causal connection between his stomach cancer and his work as chief cook aboard the vessel. In his Position Paper,[42] Demetrio admitted that the cause of stomach cancer was unknown, but stressed that there is speculation that smoked food may be promoting its development; that his illness is presumed to be work-related; and that since he had passed the PEME, this estopped the PTC and the NCM from claiming that he was unfit to work prior to his deployment or that he did not contract his illness on board the vessel. Additionally, in the Comment[43] to the Petition filed before this Court, Demetrio's widow, Julia, averred that the company-designated doctor, Dr. Salvador, failed to explain how or why Demetrio's illness was not work-related; and that the latter's work as chief cook was all about food intake and that this contributed to his becoming afflicted with stomach cancer. Against this backdrop, the basic issue that clamors for resolution is how Demetrio's work, as chief cook, contributed to or aggravated his illness; and definitely this was an issue that was not addressed or explained by both Demetrio and Julia. All we have on record is the fact that Demetrio died of stomach cancer plus the claim that his work involved food intake which according to him caused or aggravated his stomach cancer. Demetrio and later, Julia, issued general statements that we deem self-serving because they are unproved or uncorroborated allegations that simply raised the possibility that Demetrio's stomach cancer could have been or might have been work-related. At any rate, even if the seafarer erects his claim on the probability of work-connectedness, such claim would still fail. "Probability of work-connection must at least be anchored on credible information and not on self-serving allegations."[44] Thus, this Court agrees with the finding of the NLRC that there is no substantial evidence to support the allegation that Demetrio's stomach cancer was caused by work-connected factors. In addition, Julia cannot point to Demetrio's having successfully passed the PEME as basis for the conclusion that he acquired his illness on board the vessel. This is a nonsequitur. The PEME conducted upon a seafarer would not or could not necessarily reveal elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/61244 6/10