stillhere Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 I would appreciate someone with the ability to explain the results of my hearing test going into the service and coming out. Pre induction test R 250 - 500=15, 1,000=15, 2,000=10, 3,000 -,4000=30 L 250- 500=10, 1,000=15, 2,000=15, 3,000- 4,000=10 separation test R 250- 500=15, 1,000=15,2,000=15, 3,000-, 4,000=15 L 250- 500=15, 1,000=15,2,000=15, 3,000-, 4,000=15 Do you see what I see? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlie Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 still, "However, upon leaving the military, a repeat audiogram was conducted dated Oct.14,1971 indicating normal thresholds. I question the validity of that exam due to the fact that typically a hearing loss of this nature does not improve. (This audiogram showed an improvement of 40dB at 4,000 Hz.)" You posted, ""The paragragh above clearly states the improvement is in no way possible. So the exit eam is fraud. No, the paragraph does not clearly state the improvement is in no way possible. Typically -- in no way means impossible and the opinion states no Medical Rationale to support this. Example, I am SC'd for chronic suppurative otitis media - which in layman's terms is an ear infection with drainage. If I have drainage during the time I have an Audiology test, the results on the side with the infection can easily be off 40db or much more. Heck the machine may not have even been calibrated properly. There can be several more reasons for hearing results to differ. I am not myself questioning what you say -- I am stating how I feel VA will respond to the information. jmho, carlie Carlie passed away in November 2015 she is missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlie Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 § 3.156 New and material evidence. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2008/julqtr/pdf/38cfr3.156.pdf Hope this helps. carlie Carlie passed away in November 2015 she is missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillhere Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 still, "However, upon leaving the military, a repeat audiogram was conducted dated Oct.14,1971 indicating normal thresholds. I question the validity of that exam due to the fact that typically a hearing loss of this nature does not improve. (This audiogram showed an improvement of 40dB at 4,000 Hz.)" You posted, ""The paragragh above clearly states the improvement is in no way possible. So the exit eam is fraud. No, the paragraph does not clearly state the improvement is in no way possible. Typically -- in no way means impossible and the opinion states no Medical Rationale to support this. Example, I am SC'd for chronic suppurative otitis media - which in layman's terms is an ear infection with drainage. If I have drainage during the time I have an Audiology test, the results on the side with the infection can easily be off 40db or much more. Heck the machine may not have even been calibrated properly. There can be several more reasons for hearing results to differ. I am not myself questioning what you say -- I am stating how I feel VA will respond to the information. jmho, carlie I understand where you are coming from and do not need hugh type(my eyes are fine) to get a point across. But if you have a hearing loss next time you go to your audiologist just ask if you could improve your hearing by 40dB what would it take. I am sure they will tell you it is almost impossible. While I do agree with you the letter/statment is not the best. I am taking yours and anyone else's comments and going back to see if I can get her to expand on it and clarify it better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillhere Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 § 3.156 New and material evidence. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2008/julqtr/pdf/38cfr3.156.pdf Hope this helps. carlie General. A claimant may reopen a finally adjudicated claim by submitting new and material evidence. New evidence means existing evidence not previously submitted to agency decisionmakers. OK the new and I consider material evidence the fact in the letter statment questioning the validity of the exit test on record. That has never before been questioned and is now by the letter not only questioned but being told there is no way this is a actual test of said individual's exit exam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillhere Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 Thanks Purple, I think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
stillhere
I would appreciate someone with the ability to explain the results of my hearing test going into the service and coming out.
Pre induction test R 250 - 500=15, 1,000=15, 2,000=10, 3,000 -,4000=30
L 250- 500=10, 1,000=15, 2,000=15, 3,000- 4,000=10
separation test R 250- 500=15, 1,000=15,2,000=15, 3,000-, 4,000=15
L 250- 500=15, 1,000=15,2,000=15, 3,000-, 4,000=15
Do you see what I see?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
16
10
4
3
Popular Days
Jan 13
9
Jan 7
7
Jan 12
7
Jan 9
5
Top Posters For This Question
stillhere 16 posts
carlie 10 posts
broncovet 4 posts
Teac 3 posts
Popular Days
Jan 13 2009
9 posts
Jan 7 2009
7 posts
Jan 12 2009
7 posts
Jan 9 2009
5 posts
46 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now