Diabetes decisions — 2017
2,291 indexed Board decisions in 2017.
Badges describe the whole decision, not the outcome for every condition listed. An appeal can grant one issue and deny or remand another. Check the original decision for each issue; these outcomes do not predict your claim.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)January 2017
The Veteran seeks service connection for a bilateral eye disorder, including diabetic retinopathy. The case is being remanded to obtain additional treatment records and to provide an updated VA opinion regarding the nature and etiology of any diagnosed eye disorders.
- Whole decision: DismissedJanuary 2017
The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and the Board is dismissing the case.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)PACT Act · January 2017
The Board has determined that the Veteran was exposed to herbicides during service in Thailand, and therefore, diabetes mellitus and peripheral neuropathy are presumed to have been incurred due to such exposure. The claims for prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, and an increased rating for a left ankle disability are being remanded.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus, finding that there was no evidence of herbicide exposure during service and that the condition did not manifest within one year after discharge. The Board also found that the Veteran's current diagnosis is unrelated to his service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)January 2017
The Board has remanded the case due to a request for a videoconference hearing, and the appeal is not ready for appellate review.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)January 2017
The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining unit records and deck logs from the USS Tripoli to verify the Veteran's service in Vietnam. The appellant is seeking service connection for her husband's death due to colon cancer, diabetes mellitus, type II, and ischemic heart disease.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Veteran's daughter, the Appellant, was denied accrued benefits as she did not qualify as a child and her claim for service connection was also denied.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Board has determined that the Veteran did not have service in Vietnam and was not exposed to herbicide agents. The claims for heart disease, diabetes mellitus type II, nephropathy associated with diabetes mellitus type II, hypertension, peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities, and bilateral upper extremities were denied as they are not related to service.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Board denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and eczema and dermatitis due to a lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service. The Board found no credible evidence of herbicide exposure in Vietnam or any other area where Agent Orange was used.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus and myocardial infarction due to herbicide exposure as there was no evidence of herbicide exposure during service, and the conditions were not shown during or within one year after service.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Veteran's diabetes mellitus type II is currently rated at 20 percent, which does not meet the criteria for a higher rating. The Board finds that the current rating adequately reflects his disability level and symptomatology.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Veteran's diabetes mellitus is currently rated at 60 percent disabling, and the Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted. The Veteran also meets criteria for TDIU based on his service-connected disabilities.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)January 2017
The Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation rating in excess of 20 percent for service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination as the last one was conducted over six years ago and the Veteran has asserted that his condition has worsened.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Board found that the severance of service connection for various peripheral neuropathies associated with type II diabetes mellitus was not proper, as there is no clear and unmistakable error in the original determinations.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)January 2017
The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to his failure to appear at a scheduled Board hearing. The issues of service connection for diabetes mellitus, acquired psychiatric disorder (including PTSD and depressive disorder), bladder cancer, and initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss disability are still pending.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Board found that the Veteran's current diabetes mellitus type II did not manifest during service or within one year after discharge, and thus denied her claim for service connection.
- Whole decision: DeniedJanuary 2017
The Veteran's claims for service connection were denied as the conditions did not have onset in active service or are otherwise unrelated to service.
- Whole decision: GrantedJanuary 2017
The Veteran's erectile dysfunction is related to his service-connected type II diabetes mellitus, and the Board grants service connection for this condition.
- Whole decision: GrantedJanuary 2017
The Veteran's claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus type II was reopened and granted, with the presumption of herbicide exposure in Thailand.,Service connection is also granted for kidney disease and congestive heart failure as secondary to diabetes mellitus type II.
- Whole decision: GrantedPACT Act · January 2017
The Veteran's diabetes mellitus type II is presumed due to Agent Orange exposure and he has a current diagnosis. Service connection for diabetes mellitus type II is granted.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.