Josephine,
For the BVA, be sure to list EVERY item of evidence you want the BVA judge to look at, and state the VARO apparently has ignored some or all of it.
Also you should clarify/simplify your argument to state briefly exactly WHAT you are trying to accomplish and WHY the BVA should grant your claim (list reasons). Keep this statement VERY SIMPLE, clearly/logically stated and confine it to ONE PAGE if at all possibe...sort of a "cover-letter" if you will, your claim in a nutshell...something the BVA judge can read quickly and get a grasp of your claim and see the items of evidence listed without any confusion, complicated details, etc.. Save those details for later.
Send this in ASAP and ask that it be put "on top of your claims folder" so it's right there for the judge to read first.
As I said, save the details for another statement (and/or argue them in-person if you do a BVA video hearing), but for NOW just write up something simple for the BVA to see, where you are going with this and what evidence supports you and that said evidence should result in grant of your claim by a preponderance of the evidence (especially since the VARO seems to have no concrete evidence on its side, just "appears to be" and such...as was discussed in your other thread re: Presumption of Soundness).
But you should add in your statement that even if the VARO's "appears to be" evidence is accepted by the BVA, YOUR evidence is still more concrete than the VARO'S and STILL should tip the claim in your favor...but if it does not, it surely SHOULD put the evidence in a state of equipoise and you ask that Reasonable Doubt/Benefit of Doubt be applied.
Either of these -- preponderance or equipoise -- would get you a win. As I tell people, vets have a 66% chance of winning their claim. Those are good odds. But even BVA Remands back to VARO often turn into a win.
I am optimistic that the BVA -- and a very fresh set of eyes and mind -- will look at ALL your evidence (doctors' letters especially) and grant your claim, either seeing a preponderance of the eidence on your side or, the evidence being in a state of equipoise.
I say this in part because it took the BVA to grant my claim when the VARO would not and denied me for most of 4 years. As it turned out at the BVA, the VARO COULD have ruled the very same way 3 years earlier but it didn't, so it took the BVA to order the VARO to do what it should have done.
I am thinking the BVA will do the same for you.
Good luck,
-- John D.