Funnily enough after my serious car crash I had to undergo PULHEEMS to be written off reserve. My local GP was tasked and he was lucky that his new practice partner was an ex Navy quack.
His answer was "does it still hurt?"
Mine was "hell yes!"
Fine says he write him down as unfit to carry even a firearm in self defence. Discharge completed I took up Deer Stalking!
PULHEEMS is almost necessarily subjectively interpreted. There are MOs who 'do it by the book' and those who bring their wider experience of the Army to bear in determining fitness for X. I'm inclined to favour the latter as it tends to make for a more humane and sensible application of the rules. A good example is asthma: strictly speaking, asthmatics (anyone who's used an inhaler within the previous four years) are ineligibe for service and are frequently denied entry. But a high percentage of the general population are asthmatics (disproportionately high amongst the young we recruit) and there are many inhaler-users in the Army. It'd have to get rid of quite a few soldiers if it adopted the formal line - but double standards are, in fact, applied and it need sto be more realistic about asthma and the degrees of seriousness thereof.