Erectile dysfunction decisions — 2010

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment given his work history and educational background, with all reasonable doubt resolved in favor of the Veteran.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's coronary artery disease, erectile dysfunction, and hypertension are secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus. The Veteran is granted service connection for these conditions.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection were denied. The Board found that the Veteran has PTSD, but did not meet the criteria for higher initial or increased disability ratings.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's erectile dysfunction is proximately due to or the result of his service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II. As a result, the claim for service connection and SMC for loss of use of a creative organ is granted.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for bilateral tinnitus, hypertension, neuropathy of the lower extremities, and erectile dysfunction. The decision found no evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including diabetes mellitus, ED, right eye cataract, CAD, a busted eardrum with nerve damage, and a psychiatric disorder other than PTSD. The appeals were based on direct service connection rather than due to herbicide exposure or secondary to another condition.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus with erectile dysfunction is currently rated at 20 percent, but does not meet the criteria for a higher rating under the applicable VA rating schedule.

The Board denied all claims for effective dates prior to May 3, 2007 as the Veteran did not file a claim for these benefits before that date.

The Veteran's erectile dysfunction has not been shown to be manifested by penile deformity, and he does not use his penile implant. Therefore, an initial compensable evaluation for the disability is denied.

The Veteran's service-connected erectile dysfunction disability is not rated higher than noncompensable, and he does not meet the criteria for a TDIU based on his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, which combine to a schedular evaluation of 90 percent, likely do not allow him to secure or follow substantially gainful employment. The Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise in showing that he is unable to perform such work.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions regarding the Veteran's erectile dysfunction and its relationship to his service-connected prostate cancer associated with herbicide exposure. The Veteran needs a VA examination to determine if his ED is caused by or worsened by his prostate cancer.

The Board dismissed the Veteran's appeal as to his claim for an earlier effective date for service connection for penile deformity with erectile dysfunction due to a final rating decision, and because he did not file a timely substantive appeal.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims due to the need for additional medical examinations and development of his case. The issues include service connection for hemorrhoids, bruxism, a right testicle disorder, and erectile dysfunction.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's hypertension began during his active military service and is presumed to have been incurred therein. The other conditions are not addressed in this decision.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical evidence to determine if the Veteran's erectile dysfunction is caused by his service-connected PTSD medication.

The Board has granted service connection for erectile dysfunction as secondary to the Veteran's service-connected chronic pain syndrome with major depression.

The Board found that the Veteran's prostate cancer and erectile dysfunction did not arise in service or due to a service-connected disability. The evidence does not support a finding of exposure to herbicides during service, nor is there any credible link between his conditions and service.

The Veteran's claims for service connection were denied as there was no credible evidence to support his PTSD diagnosis and the other conditions did not appear related to his military service.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for erectile dysfunction and hypertension, both claimed as secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus type II, are being remanded for further development.