The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including a VA examination to address the probable etiology of any hair loss disability and review of the claims file. The depression claim is inextricably intertwined with the service connection claim.
The deciding factor: The Veteran reported having hair loss in service that has continued to the present, and STRs show he was treated for sebaceous cyst of the scalp. A VA examination is needed to address whether any of the Veteran's identified hair loss conditions are at least as likely as not (i.e., to a 50-50 or greater degree of probability) causally related to active service, to chemicals used to straighten his hair therein, or to the sebaceous cyst for which he was treated in service.
- Claimed conditions
- hair loss
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- February 23, 2017
- Citation
- 1705473
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 1705473.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's hair loss and high cholesterol were denied as they are not considered disabilities for VA compensation purposes.,The Veteran's left arm condition was remanded due to inadequate examination, requiring a new evaluation.
- Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection of hair loss.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for hair loss, teeth infection/loss of teeth, and loss of fingernails as there was no evidence showing these conditions were related to the Veteran's military service.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for hypertension and hair loss (secondary to hypertension) as there is no current disability found, and the Veteran did not provide evidence showing impairment affecting earning capacity.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
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.