Diabetes decisions — 2007

The veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and the claims for service connection for left ear hearing loss, PTSD, and diabetic neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities have been dismissed.

The Board has determined that the veteran's death was not caused by a service-connected disability, and thus denied the claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus, narcolepsy, hypertension, ocular hypertension (claimed as glaucoma), a left below-the-knee amputation, and peripheral neuropathy. The veteran's leg ulcers secondary to diabetes mellitus claim was withdrawn.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims of service connection for type II diabetes mellitus, chloracne, and colon cancer are denied as there is no competent medical evidence to support these conditions.

The veteran's appeal regarding an initial evaluation in excess of 20 percent for diabetes mellitus has been withdrawn.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus, finding no medical evidence supporting a relationship between his military service and the onset of the condition.

The veteran's service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II is currently rated at 20 percent and the appeal pertains to whether a higher evaluation is warranted.

The VA has determined that the veteran's service-connected diabetes mellitus alone does not render him unable to obtain or maintain substantially gainful employment, and thus denied his claim for a TDIU.

The Board found no evidence of service connection for diabetes mellitus or prostate cancer, and denied the claims based on a lack of competent medical evidence linking these conditions to service.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the veteran's exposure to Agent Orange and his service in Vietnam. The VA is instructed to investigate these matters further.

The Board has granted service connection for PTSD, diabetes mellitus (based on presumed exposure to Agent Orange), and hypertension. Service connection for coronary artery disease is denied.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claims for service connection and increased ratings due to new evidence and allegations of worsening disability.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II; a sleep disorder (claimed as narcolepsy and/or sleep apnea); and sinusitis. The evidence did not support a finding of in-service incurrence or continuity of symptomatology.

The Board finds that the veteran's service connection claims for coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, and a lung disability are granted. The claim for peripheral neuropathy of the lower and upper extremities is being REMANDED to the RO.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and scheduling examinations to address the issues of service connection for PTSD, hypertension secondary to diabetes mellitus type II, and a compensable evaluation for visual impairment.

The Board has granted the appellant's request to reopen his claims of service connection for back disability and diabetes mellitus, finding new and material evidence that suggests a continuity of symptomatology since service. The appellant maintains that his current conditions are related to exposure to Agent Orange during military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's coronary artery disease is not caused or aggravated by his service-connected diabetes mellitus, and therefore denied the claim for service connection.

The Board denied service connection for Type 2 diabetes mellitus, but granted service connection for Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD).

The Board denied a higher initial evaluation for Type II diabetes mellitus, finding that the veteran's condition did not meet the criteria for a rating greater than 20 percent.

The veteran's diabetes mellitus and diabetic retinopathy have been evaluated at a 20 percent rating, but the current medical evidence shows that his diabetic retinopathy has worsened to affect both eyes. The case is remanded for further evaluation of the diabetic retinopathy.