5/28/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly (a) There must be a history, which should be proved, or trauma at work (to the head specially) due to unusual and extraordinary physical or mental strain or event, or undue exposure to noxious gases in industry. (b) There must be a direct connection between the trauma or exertion in the course of employment and the worker’s collapse. (c) If the trauma or exertion then and there caused a brain hemorrhage, the injury may be considered as arising from work. Records do not show that these conditions were met. Also, Margarito’s CVA set in a year after he has been medically repatriated. More importantly, CVA was actually the resulting complication of his underlying illness of diabetes. Diabetes mellitus is a chronic condition that has the potential to have significant adverse effects on the quality of life of the patient as a result of its microvascular and macrovascular complications. The microvascular events include retinopathy, nephropathy and neuropathy. While these markedly increase the morbidity of persons with DM, it is the macrovascular complications (cardiovascular disease) that account for the increased mortality in this population.[50] It is recognized that people with diabetes have an increased prevalence of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes can be said to be a condition of premature cardiovascular complications in the setting of chronic hyperglycemia. Cardiovascular disease (refers to disease of the heart and circulatory system) is the leading cause of death in people with DM.[51] The same is true with respect to his chronic renal ailment. The medical findings presented by both parties uniformly show that Margarito’s renal ailment was contracted as a complication of his diabetes from which he has been suffering for 6 years prior to his employment with the petitioners. Thus, it cannot be said that his risk of contracting renal insufficiency or CVA was increased by his working conditions because irrespective thereof, his complications would have set in because of his diabetic condition. In sum, the CA erred in finding grave abuse of discretion on the part of the NLRC when the latter affirmed the LA’s dismissal of Margarito’s complaint for permanent disability benefits and sickness allowance. In as much as we commiserate with Margarito’s widow, the Court’s commitment to the cause of labor is not a lopsided undertaking. It cannot and does not prevent us from sustaining the employer when it is in the right. The constitutional policy to provide full protection to labor is not meant to be a sword to oppress employers. Justice, is, in every case for the deserving, and it must be dispensed with in the light of established elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/57272 12/16