Hypertension (high blood pressure) decisions — 2005

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, finding that they were not incurred or aggravated by active service and are not related to nicotine dependence acquired during service.

The veteran is seeking service connection for hypertension and heart disease, which he claims are related to scarlet fever treated during military service. The VA has requested a remand for further examination and opinion.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for gout, diabetes, hypertension, and arthritis of the arms and legs as there was no evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have hypertension, headaches, or bleeding gums as a result of service. The evidence does not support a finding of service connection for these conditions.

The Board found that the veteran's lung disorder and hypertension were not related to his military service, and thus denied both claims.

The Board found that the veteran's right leg disability, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and breast cancer were not related to VA treatment. The preponderance of evidence indicated these conditions did not result from the steroid use in 1996.

The Board has determined that the veteran's hypertension is not related to his military service and cannot be attributed to his right knee arthritis, leading to a denial of the claim.

The Board denied service connection for prostate disorder and hypertension, and did not address the left ankle disorder claim. The veteran's claims of reopening the left ankle disorder were also denied.

The appeal has been dismissed due to the character of the appellant's discharge being other than honorable, which legally bars him from receiving VA benefits.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling examinations to determine the etiology of the veteran's claimed conditions.

The veteran's claims for service connection for headaches, hypertension, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorder, stomach ulcers, and other stomach conditions were denied as there is no evidence of a chronic condition during or within one year after service. The Board found that the veteran did not have a verified in-service stressor for PTSD.

The Board has determined that the veteran's hypertension, coronary artery disease, and enlarged heart were not incurred or aggravated by service. The evidence does not support a finding of service connection for these conditions.

The Board found that the submitted evidence was not new and material, thus denying the veteran's claims for reopening his service connection for bronchitis with COPD, hypertension, and arthritis of the lumbosacral spine.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claimed conditions were not incurred or aggravated during service and denied all claims.

The Board denied all claims for increased ratings, finding that the veteran's conditions did not meet the criteria for higher evaluations under VA rating criteria.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a private hospital due to lack of prior authorization and because VA facilities were feasibly available.

The VA has denied the claim for service connection for the cause of death and DIC under 38 U.S.C. § 1318 as there is no evidence linking the veteran's death to a service-connected disability.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claim of service connection for hypertension due to a lack of recent VA treatment records and an error in the VCAA notice letter.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his claims, including obtaining missing service medical records and providing the veteran with a VA examination to determine the etiology of his claimed conditions.

The veteran's claim for service connection for chronic disability of the eyes as due to tear gas exposure was denied because there is no evidence of an in-service injury or disease related to his current vision problems. The Board found that the preponderance of the evidence did not support the claim.