BVA Case 12-1361: Ptsd

He opined that the appellant's IBS was at least as likely as not related to his gastrointestinal condition in service,but that since his GERD symptoms began well after service,it was less likely than not related.

In his supporting rationale,he explained there was no documentation in the literature to support a nexus and that he was unable to determine any aggravation issues either.

In April 2009,the Board denied the appellant's claims for ED,hypertension,diverticulosis, diverticulitis,IBS,GERD,and a hiatal hernia.

The Board found no evidence of record that showed that the appellant's claimed conditions were related to active service or to a service-connected disability.

Additionally, the Board found the appellant not competent to comment on the etiology of his ED,hypertension, gastrointestinal problems,GERD,or hiatal hernia.

The Board found the appellant's statement that he developed hypertension in the 1960s not credible because it was inconsistent with his other statements.

With respect to the appellant's body aches and bilateral arm pain claims, the Board found that the appellant was not entitled to disability compensation because there is simply no medical evidence of record indicating that a specific disorder manifested by aches and pain in the entire body or bilateral arm pain has been diagnosed, and [p]ain alone,without a diagnosed or identifiable 5 underlying malady or condition,does not in and of itself constitute a disability for which service connection may be granted.

GERD and Hiatal Hernia The Secretary concedes that remand of the appellant's GERD and hiatal hernia claims is necessary because the Board failed to discuss the appellant's testimony concerning the frequency and duration of the appellant's symptoms.