tinnitus Hearing Loss Soc Denial

[stillhere]

In my last denial for my hearing loss this is what it says:

A March 2008 record from audiologist XXXX show you were seen for a complete evaluation. You reported difficulty hearing in all listening situations and intermittent tinnitus had been occurring for several years. The record notes excessive exposure to noise while serving in the military. Severe to profound asymmetrical sensorineural hearing loss was noted bilaterally.

The record does not provide and opinion that your current hearing loss was incurred or caused by your military service. Current medical evidence shows hearing loss.however the evidence received in connection with this claim does not constitute new and material evidence because it does not relate to an established fact necessary to substantiate the claim and does not raise reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. Service connection denied as this was not incurred in or caused by your military service.

QUESTION: Does this say they just want an opinion to grant this claim??

Are they saying that they understand I have a hearing loss and the rcords shows loud noise exposure in the record???

[carlie]

In my last denial for my hearing loss this is what it says:

A March 2008 record from audiologist XXXX show you were seen for a complete evaluation. You reported difficulty hearing in all listening situations and intermittent tinnitus had been occurring for several years. The record notes excessive exposure to noise while serving in the military. Severe to profound asymmetrical sensorineural hearing loss was noted bilaterally.

The record does not provide and opinion that your current hearing loss was incurred or caused by your military service. Current medical evidence shows hearing loss.however the evidence received in connection with this claim does not constitute new and material evidence because it does not relate to an established fact necessary to substantiate the claim and does not raise reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. Service connection denied as this was not incurred in or caused by your military service.

QUESTION: Does this say they just want an opinion to grant this claim??

Are they saying that they understand I have a hearing loss and the rcords shows loud noise exposure in the record???

It's saying the March 2008 record from audiology is not new and material evidence and it appears that this is not an adequate report in the respect of

a nexus from audiology, of your current hearing loss to active duty, therefor the claim is denied.

jmho,

carlie

[JamesBreckenridge]

I don't like that rating decision. What state are you in?

In a perfect world, they would say what your audiogram said on your enlistment exam, and what it said on your exit exam. Did you meet the "hearing loss for VA purposes" on your exit exam? I'm guessing not, or it would have been granted on a direct basis. What were your puretone hearing thresholds on your enlistment and exit exams? (If you weren't a 20-year active duty retiree it complicates matters A LOT so I'm sticking with the simple case). Even if you didn't have three 26s or a single 40, there may still have been a shift in your puretone hearing thresholds.

If hearing loss was noted on your exit physical (even if not severe enough for VA purposes) it's STILL enough to send to the VA hospital for a C&P Audio exam with a request for a medial opinion asking whether the current hearing loss is a continuation of the hearing loss in service.

[broncovet]

Knowing nothing else but what you posted, this decision will be overturned on appeal, IMHO. The decision itself even admits Service connection when it says:

"The record notes excessive exposure to noise while serving in the military."

This decision is in conflict with itself! In other words the decision admits to excessive noise exposure during the military, but denies the claim anyway. That is like saying,

"We think your claim is service connected, but we are denying it anyway just to see if you will appeal. If you dont appeal, it will become final in one year."

I recommend you carefully read what the audiologist opined about your nexus to military service. My hearing loss claim was similar, and denied even the the audiologist opined, "Veterans hearing loss is most likely due to military service".

Bottom LIne: You nedd to file a NOD. Unless your audiologist offered a contrary opinion, the BVA and Courts MUST use the audioligist opinion. That is, a rating specialist, or even a judge is unqualified to say that the military did not cause your hearing loss over an audioligist, who is qualified to make a professional opinion. The law says it this way: A qualified medical opinion can not be over ruled by a layperson.

This is what is wrong with the VA. These people should know this and they either dont know this, or they know it and use it to their advantage to burn the Veteran.

[stillhere]

Knowing nothing else but what you posted, this decision will be overturned on appeal, IMHO. The decision itself even admits Service connection when it says:

"The record notes excessive exposure to noise while serving in the military."

This decision is in conflict with itself! In other words the decision admits to excessive noise exposure during the military, but denies the claim anyway. That is like saying,

"We think your claim is service connected, but we are denying it anyway just to see if you will appeal. If you dont appeal, it will become final in one year."

I recommend you carefully read what the audiologist opined about your nexus to military service. My hearing loss claim was similar, and denied even the the audiologist opined, "Veterans hearing loss is most likely due to military service".

Bottom LIne: You nedd to file a NOD. Unless your audiologist offered a contrary opinion, the BVA and Courts MUST use the audioligist opinion. That is, a rating specialist, or even a judge is unqualified to say that the military did not cause your hearing loss over an audioligist, who is qualified to make a professional opinion. The law says it this way: A qualified medical opinion can not be over ruled by a layperson.

This is what is wrong with the VA. These people should know this and they either dont know this, or they know it and use it to their advantage to burn the Veteran.

Thanks for all the replies and opinions. Below is the nexus letter from my audiologist for my BVA appeal:

Ok new evaluations from audiologist in support of my claim for hearing loss: CHIEF COMPLAINT: The Veteran, a 60year old male, was seen in my office on XXXX for pure tone and speech recognition evaluations. The veteran reports a significant history of noise exposure during his military career. He has a long history of hearing loss and tinnitus in both ears. The veteran currently wears a hearing aid in the left ear only.

AUDIO TEST PERFORMED: Audio tests were performed including audiogram with tympanograms.

AUDIO RESULTS: Otoscopic examination revealed both ear canals free of cerumen. Standard Puretone Audiometric procedures revealed a moderate to severe hearing loss in the left ear and a moderate to profound sensorineural hearing loss in the right ear. Significant asymmetries were noted from 750 through 8000Hz. NU 6 word list was utilist to obtain speech discriminations via live voice with a score of 76% at 90dB HL in the left ear. Speech discriminations could not be evaluated in the right ear, although a speech reception threshold of 95%dB HL was obtained in ear.

PLAN OF CARE: Mr. XXXX, has a moderate to severe sensorial hearing loss in the left ear and a moderate to profound sensorial hearing loss in the right ear accompanied by constant tinnitus. It is more than likely than not that the tinnitus and hearing loss was caused by noise exposure while in the military. Continued hearing aid use is recommended for the left ear and should be considered for the right, ear along with cochlear implant candidacy. Annual audiometric evaluations are recommended for continued status assessment of the auditory mechanism and hearing conservation is recommended(hearing protection) whenever the veteran is exposed to excessive noise levels.

Signed , Au D CCC-A

[stillhere]

I don't like that rating decision. What state are you in?

In a perfect world, they would say what your audiogram said on your enlistment exam, and what it said on your exit exam. Did you meet the "hearing loss for VA purposes" on your exit exam? I'm guessing not, or it would have been granted on a direct basis. What were your puretone hearing thresholds on your enlistment and exit exams? (If you weren't a 20-year active duty retiree it complicates matters A LOT so I'm sticking with the simple case). Even if you didn't have three 26s or a single 40, there may still have been a shift in your puretone hearing thresholds.

If hearing loss was noted on your exit physical (even if not severe enough for VA purposes) it's STILL enough to send to the VA hospital for a C&P Audio exam with a request for a medial opinion asking whether the current hearing loss is a continuation of the hearing loss in service.

On the separation exam a Dr. clearly wrote in the box where comments go "high frequency hearing loss.

And yet the audio exam they were supposed to have given shows perfect hearing. That is the contradictory info on the exam. They had this in 84 and still did not question it?? By the way I have had an aide since 83 that I have paid for since then till 2005.

I have yet not had anyone give an answer to that other than to shrug their shoulders? It just doesn't add up to me.

State Virginia

[JamesBreckenridge]

Sounds like you are supposed to have a C&P Audio exam with a medical opinion. Your exit exam shows high frequency hearing loss.

You have hearing loss in service, you have continuity of the condition since you got out of service.... this boggles my mind, based on the limited information I'm going on.

Ask for a DRO to do a de novo review, and ask for a medical opinion.