Ever wonder what happens to your claim or appeal when you arrive without a nexus from your doctor? Or you become a doctor in your own mind able to diagnose strange diseases faster than a speeding bullet? Read on, Ladies and Gentlemen.

The Board notes that this is the only medical opinion on  record that deals with the etiology of the Veteran’s  hepatitis C.  The findings of a physician are medical  conclusions that the Board cannot ignore or disregard.   Willis v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 66 (1991).  The Board finds  that the April 2006 VA examination is probative since he  reviewed the Veteran’s claims file and his opinion was  extremely through and detailed and reference available  literature.  Prejean v. West, 13 Vet. App. 444, 448-49  (2000).  In addition, the Board notes that there is no  medical opinion of record that refutes the VA examiners  opinion or the import of the available medical literature  discussed in that examination report.     The Veteran testified that the VA examiner had stated  erroneous facts, specifically, the mention of drug use and  tattoos.  He testified that he never used intravenous drugs.   The Veteran also testified that his diagnosis of hepatitis C  preceded his tattoo.  The Board notes that there is evidence  that supports the Veteran’s statement that his only tattoo  was received in 1995, subsequent to his diagnosis of  hepatitis.  Regardless of any mistakes regarding the  examiner’s mention of tattoos or drug use, the examiner’s  opinion against service connection still stands,  uncontroverted by any other medical evidence.  While the  Veteran has testified that his hepatitis C was due to the  immunization guns used in military vaccinations, the Veteran  is not competent to provide medical testimony as to etiology  of a condition.  The Board notes that a layperson such as the  Veteran is competent to testify in regard to the onset and  continuity of symptomatology.  Heuer v. Brown, 7 Vet. App.  379, 384 (1995); (Falzone v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 398, 403  (1995); Caldwell v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 466 (1991).  A  layperson, however, lacks medical training to be considered  capable of opining, however sincerely, in regard to diagnosis  and causation of a disability.

And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is what will happen to any claim that a Judge looks at when you don’t do your homework. If you don’t provide the evidence to back up your claim don’t expect you representative to do it.