SAVE THE DATE: 2009 DoD/VA Suicide Prevention Conference
January 12-15, 2009
Grand Hyatt, San Antonio, TX
Building Community Connections: Suicide Prevention in the 21st Century
For the first time ever, the conference will be a joint effort between The Department of Defense and The Department of Veterans Affairs. The 2009 DoD/VA Suicide Prevention Conference will be held at the Grand Hyatt in San Antonio, TX on January 12-15, 2009.
In response to previous conference surveys, this year we will offer not only additional breakout sessions, but sessions relevant to four different conference tracks in an effort to accommodate many disciplines. The four conference tracks are Clinical Intervention, Multi-Disciplinary, Practical Applications/Tools, and Research and Academics. To provide greater flexibility, attendees will be able to attend sessions relevant all to one track or they may combine sessions from across conference tracks. Each speaker and presentation will be carefully selected to ensure relevancy to the conference track. Details on specific topics and speakers will be posted on the registration website, once registration becomes available, under the "Agenda" tab. Please note that these are subject to change and to check back frequently for updates.
As in previous years, the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS) provides accreditation of continuing education hours for social workers, psychologists, nurses and physicians. In addition, the Association of Professional Chaplains (APC) has also allowed CE hours earned at the conferences by APC Chaplains to be counted toward their 50 CE hour requirement. USUHS will make the final determination as to the number of credits that will be offered at next year's conference; more details will be available once registration is open.
Attendees will consist of Suicide Prevention Program Managers, Behavioral Health Professionals, Counselors, Chaplains and Chaplain Assistants, Unit Suicide Prevention Officers, Members of Installation Suicide Prevention Committees, Health Promotion Professionals, Substance Abuse Professionals, Command and unit leaders involved in suicide prevention, and Public Affairs Professionals. Members of the media are also welcome.
EXHIBITORS: A limited number of tables are available at no charge for organizations wishing to display suicide prevention-related materials. All materials made available to conference attendees must be provided free of charge.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
SAVE THE DATE: 2009 DoD/VA Suicide Prevention Conference
OUR OPINION: A Gulf between real illness and false promises
OUR OPINION: A Gulf between real illness and false promises
The Patriot Ledger
Posted Dec 03, 2008 @ 06:30 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUINCY — For some of the nearly 700,000 veterans who fought in the 100-hour Gulf War in 1991, there may finally be some vindication and, we hope, an effort by the government to address and treat the mysterious illnesses that have plagued about one-quarter of those who answered the call to serve.
When soldiers and Marines returned from the Gulf War 17 years ago with blurred vision, rashes and headaches, they were told it was all in their minds, a diagnosis inconsistent with their symptoms.
But for the better part of the last two decades, the problems for many have become exasperated – in some cases debilitating – with symptoms such as persistent memory and concentration problems, more severe and constant headaches, head-to-toes pain in joints and muscles, gastrointestinal problems, and other chronic abnormalities that did not fit in with any known diagnosis.
And many of the estimated 200,000 who exhibit the symptoms just aren’t getting better.
Last month, the Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses, a select group created by Congress to make a definitive finding on the problems, determined there are indeed physical maladies brought on by Gulf War service, perhaps even triggered by some of the vaccinations, pesticides and preventative treatments against nerve gas exposure given to the troops by military doctors, among other things such as proximity to oil field fires and sandstorms.
The committee, which was based out of Boston University’s School of Public Health, said the $350 million the federal government has spent on studying the illness has been wasted money, focused mostly on proving it doesn’t exist.
And even as the rate of affected veterans increased, funding for treatment and study by the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs, two agencies who are supposed to be veterans’ advocates not adversaries, has declined every year since 2001.
But the research committee found that not only is the multi-symptom illness real, Gulf War veterans have displayed an alarming rate of other fatal and incapacitating diseases and illnesses.
The report found, for instance, significantly higher rates of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, commonly known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease, among Gulf War veterans. There also is a heightened incidence of brain cancer among those veterans as well as an increase in birth defects to children born of Gulf War servicemen and women.
It’s clear the current administration will not tackle the issue. VA Secretary James Peake on Monday said he would ask the Institute of Medicine to review the findings, once again delaying and denying relief to those on the front line of the first Iraq invasion.
It will be up to President-elect Barack Obama and the new Congress to deal with the issue and we urge them to make it a top priority, regardless of the economy.
The panel calls for at least $60 million to be spent annually for research and money needs to be allocated to pay for disabled veterans, estimated at $30,000 a year for a 100 percent disability. We’re finding hundreds of billions to send to Wall Street, Detroit, collapsing banks and financial institutes and a myriad of other failing corporations. This one should be a no-brainer.
“This is a national obligation, made especially urgent by the many years that Gulf War veterans have waited for answers and assistance,” the committee’s report states.
The time for study is over and this report should be used as a basis to treat those afflicted and, where needed, make disability payments to veterans who served with honor and dignity without having those values returned as part of our promise to our warriors.
Pentagon Reports High Rate Of Divorce Among Military Couples
Pentagon Reports High Rate Of Divorce Among Military Couples
December 3, 2008 8:06 a.m. EST
AHN Staff
Washington, D.C (AHN) - Stress of being separated by two ongoing wars the United States is participating in has taken its toll on military marriages which hit a 16-year high divorce rate.
According to Pentagon, the divorce rate rose to 3.5 percent among the 287,000 married American soldiers, up from 3.3 percent recorded the previous fiscal year which ends Sept. 30. At that rate, it means there were 10,200 divorced couples in active Army duty and 3,077 among Marines.
Army spokesman Paul Boyce explained to the Washington Post, "With increasing demands placed on Army families and soldiers - including frequent deployments and relocations - intimate relationships are tested."
Marine spokesman Col. Dave Lapan said the military leadership is paying serious attention to the strain on marriages caused by frequent separations due to deployments to different posts.
The Pentagon data lists only couples who divorced while in active service. If those who separated after they left the military service is counted, the divorce rate may actually be higher. Veterans also pointed out it excluded strained marriages.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
This was not unexpected the military divorce rate rose during Vietnam and the early "peacetime years" in 75,76, 77, 78 and 79. I was there and watched the break ups, the combat divisions especially had problem marriages I served in the 9th ID and the 2nd ID during this period and many friends endded up divorced and it was carry over from problems that started during the Vietnam War and the PTSD that many of the soldiers were dealing with.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Highlights and recommendations of WMD Report Dec 2, 2008
Key Conclusions and Recommendations of Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism
Findings
1 - Terrorists are more likely to be able to obtain and use a biological weapon than a nuclear weapon (Executive Summary: xv)
2 - Historical cases demonstrate both the dangerous potential of bioterrorism and the technical difficulties – developing a biological weapon that can inflict mass casualties is an intricate undertaking, both technically and operationally complex. (1:11)
3 – Currently, terrorist groups have only rudimentary biological weapons capabilities and can not carry out a mass-casualty attack. But they could develop their capabilities quickly by recruiting skilled scientists. (1:11)
4 - Given the high level of know-how needed to successfully undertake a mass-casualty biological weapons attack, the US should be less concerned that terrorists will become biologists and far more concerned that biologists will become terrorists. (1:11)
5 - The world-wide diffusion of sophisticated capabilities increases the potential that terrorists will use them to develop biological weapons. (2:23)
6 - Advances in the life sciences and biotechnology facilitate the development of new and more deadly biological weapons (1:12)
7 - The United States has placed too little emphasis on prevention of bioterrorism and must move more aggressively to limit the proliferation of biological weapons and reduce the prospect of a bioterror attack. Only by elevating the priority of preventing bioterrorism will it be possible to substantially improve U.S. biosecurity. (ES: xv, xvii; 2:24)
8 - The US goal must be to prevent the potential that terrorists will develop biological weapons from becoming a reality by keeping dangerous pathogens, and the equipment, technology, and know-how needed to weaponize them, out of the hands of criminals, terrorists, and proliferant states. (2:23, 26)
9 - The Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) is the cornerstone of international efforts to prevent biological weapons proliferation and terrorism (ES: xviii)
10 - The BWC has been undercut by serious violations and by its failure to gain universal membership, and it is not supported at the international level by an overarching strategy for preventing biological weapons proliferation and terrorism (ES: xviii); several nations remain outside of the Convention, and there are concerns that some members are secretly pursuing offensive programs (1:9-10)
11 - The dual-use nature of biological activities, equipment and technology renders traditional verification measures for BWC compliance ineffective. The continuing global spread of dual-use materials, equipment, and facilities makes verifying compliance even more difficult. (ES: xviii; 2:35, 36, 41)
12 - The US decision to withdraw from the protocol negotiations was fundamentally sound, based on valid concerns, and the US should reject any efforts to restart them. The view that compliance with the BWC could be verified by an international organization is unrealistic. (2:36, 41-2)
13 - The US must lead the international community and promote a new approach for strengthening the BWC. (2:42)
14 - The annual meetings of the BWC since 2003 have proven useful for increasing international awareness of biological security issues (2:36)
15 - US biological threat reduction programs have made good progress in improving pathogen security and redirecting former bioweapons scientists in the FSU to peaceful activities (ES: xviii)
16 - The US has cut back on its Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) activities in Russia due to disinterest, suspicion, and bureaucratic and political obstacles on the Russian side, but a large cadre of former bioweapons scientists remains a global proliferation concern (ES: xviii-ix; 2:36)
17 - It remains to be seen whether globally expanding US biological CTR programs will be successful, but they should be further expanded, particularly to Africa and South America (ES: ix)
18 - Infectious disease surveillance for early detection and reporting of infectious disease outbreaks provides an “extended defense perimeter” for the United States and is crucial to mounting a defense against biological weapons development and attack, but it remains a difficult and demanding task (2:37, 40)
19 - Despite the International Health Regulations 2005, outbreak information is not always provided by WHO member states on a timely basis (2:37)
20 - International surveillance networks are not comprehensive in coverage, and surveillance systems for animal diseases are significantly less developed than, and not fully integrated with, those for human diseases. (2:38)
21 - Although dangerous pathogens can be isolated from natural sources, it would generally be easier for terrorists to steal or divert well-characterized “hot” strains from a research lab or culture collection. (2:24)
22 - There are serious shortcomings in US pathogen and laboratory security (1:4)
23 - The identification of Bruce Ivins, a US Army biodefense researcher, as the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks raises questions about the adequacy of current personnel vetting procedures. (2:25)
24 - The anthrax letter attacks revealed serious gaps in U.S. preparedness for bioterrorism that have been only partly addressed since 2001. They also demonstrated that even small-scale attacks can elicit a disproportionate amount of terror and social disruption. (1:7, 10)
25 - The rapid expansion of high containment laboratory capacity is justified given the need for research on measures to counter both bioterrorism and the global spread of EIDs of natural origin (2:25)
26 - The absence of a comprehensive regulatory framework, however, raises safety, security and terrorism concerns. The rapid growth in the number of facilities and people handling select agents has increased the risk of laboratory accidents or intentional misuse by insiders. (2:25)
27 - No single entity is responsible for overseeing and managing the risks associated with all high-containment labs operated by the USG, industry or academia. (2:25)
28 - Members of the life sciences community must foster a bottom-up effort to sensitize researchers to biosecurity issues and concerns and raise their security awareness (ES, xvii-xviii)
29 - There are even greater shortcomings globally, as most developing countries have largely ignored the problem of biosecurity because of competing demands for their limited budgets (1:4)
30 - Any biosecurity regime must ultimately be international in nature. As a first step, it is necessary for the US to put its own house in order and lead the rest of the world by providing the highest standards of biosafety and biosecurity (2:26)
Recommendations
1 – The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) should lead an interagency review of the implementation of the Select Agent Program, its effectiveness in improving biological security, and its impact on legitimate scientific research (including international collaboration and transfers of pathogens from developing countries to the U.S.). The review should explore ways of implementing the Program so that it continues to prevent the misuse of dangerous pathogens without hampering vital domestic research and international collaboration. (2:28)
2 – The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should take the lead in developing a national strategy for advancing microbial forensics capabilities that: facilitates the development and maintenance of a comprehensive library of pathogen reference strains; establishes government-wide standard procedures for collecting, processing, and analyzing samples, and identifies a lead agency to direct this effort, and the roles and responsibilities of support agencies; and funds basic research to support the further development of microbial forensic techniques. (2:28-9)
3 - DHHS in coordination with DHS should lead an interagency effort to tighten government oversight of all high-containment laboratories in the United States. This should include: determining present and future requirements for research on biodefense threats and emerging infectious diseases, and planning future expansion to minimize associated safety and security risks; requiring federal registration of all BSL-3 and BSL-4 facilities and identifying a lead federal agency to oversee and enforce the registration process and create a government-wide database of all high-containment labs in the US; implementing a common set of safety and security requirements for all high containment labs; and mandating standard biosafety and biosecurity training for all personnel in these labs, and funding the development of educational materials for that purpose. (2:29-30)
4 - The US government should consider centralizing biosafety and biosecurity regulatory functions by developing a new oversight mechanism for high containment labs that combines the Select Agent Program and NIH Guidelines for rDNA research. (2:30)
5 - DHHS should promote a culture of security awareness in the life science community, including by creating a domestic review and oversight system for dual-use research and calling on leaders in the life sciences community to speak out clearly and frequently about the professional responsibilities of scientists to prevent misuse of biology for hostile purposes. (2:30-1)
6 - Congress should hold hearings to discuss the dual-use problem and should foster practical solutions for addressing it. (2:31)
7 - The separate concepts of biosafety and biosecurity should be combined into a unified conceptual framework of laboratory risk management, which should be integrated into a program of mandatory education and training for scientists and technicians in the life sciences, beginning with advanced college and graduate students and extending to career scientists. The US government should fund the development of education materials and reference manuals on biosafety and biosecurity. (2:31)
8 - The responsibilities of biosafety officers should be expanded to include laboratory security and oversight of select agents, and all biosafety officers should be tested and certified by a competent government authority. (2:31)
9 - Whistleblower mechanisms should be established within the life sciences community so that scientists can report their concerns about safety and security without risk of retaliation. (2:31)
10 - DHHS in coordination with DHS should take steps to enhance the nation’s capacity for rapid response to prevent an anthrax attack from inflicting mass casualties, which would also improve the nation’s ability to manage other public health disasters, be they natural or man-made. To this end, the US government must develop a fully comprehensive and tested system for the rapid delivery of lifesaving medial countermeasures against anthrax and other bioterrorist threats, fully implement an effective anthrax preparedness strategy as a matter of national priority, and fund NIH and the private sector to develop new classes of antibiotics as well as anthrax anti-toxins. (2:32-4)
11 - Congress should quickly take up the additional request of $969 million to fund the development and manufacture of medical countermeasures, innovative approaches to distribution and decontamination, and upgrades to BioWatch (2:33)
12 - An innovative approach will be needed to solve the problem of how to rapidly dispense antibiotics and other medical countermeasures should a large-scale bioterrorist attack occur (2:33)
13 – The dispensing system should be exercised and reviewed regularly, including through “red-teaming” to identify areas of weakness. Exercises should also assess the emergency response and treatment capabilities of hospitals and the effectiveness of public health networks (2:33)
14 – DHHS and DHS, in cooperation with state and local health departments and emergency responders, should develop specific messages that can be disseminated after a bioterrorist attack to facilitate citizens’ self-protection and self-decontamination (2:34)
15 – The State Department and DHHS should press for an international conference that brings countries with advanced life sciences capabilities together with emerging biotechnology powers to discuss the norms and safeguards needed to keep dangerous pathogens out of the hands of terrorists and to develop a road map for ensuring that the global revolution in the life sciences unfolds safely and securely. The conference should identify key principles of biosecurity, harmonize national regulatory frameworks for dangerous pathogens and dual-use research of concern, and promote international biosecurity cooperation. It should consider bottom-up approaches for raising the awareness of life scientists about the security dimensions of their work. (2:39)
16 – The State Department should lead a global assessment of biological threats and engage in targeted biological threat prevention programs in additional countries in order to prevent the emergence of new threats and reduce existing threats. This would include conducting a global assessment of pathogen security, developing a prioritized list of countries where poorly secured collections of dangerous pathogens are at risk of theft or diversion, and devising a comprehensive strategy for assisting these countries to upgrade the security of their labs and culture collections. This approach should be integrated with efforts to improve the public health infrastructure in the affected countries, and will require increased funding. (2:39-40)
17 - DHHS should work to strengthen global disease surveillance networks. The US should help OIE improve its capabilities for monitoring outbreaks of zoonotic diseases and should facilitate the integration of data and analyses between the WHO and the OIE. The US should continue to foster the development of its own global surveillance networks, including the CDC Global Disease Surveillance System. The US should offer bilateral assistance to those developing countries at greatest risk of epidemics to help them establish surveillance networks for detecting and reporting human and animal disease outbreaks prior to a confirmed laboratory diagnosis. DHHS should strengthen the capabilties of its Office of the Secretary to better lead international engagement efforts, and should encourage NGO disease surveillance programs. (2:40-1)
18 - The US should propose a new action plan for achieving universal adherence to the BWC and promoting effective national implementation, especially with respect to the prevention of bioterrorism, to be adopted a 2011 review conference. The US should also seek broad political support for an expanded intersessional work program that focuses on 1) building the capacities of BWC members states in key areas of bioterrorism prevention (lab security, disease surveillance, oversight of research with a high potential for misuse for hostile purposes) and 2) improving the practical training of experts form BWC members states in technical aspects of biosafety, biosecurity, and disease surveillance. (2:42)
19 - The US should support an appropriate increase in the size and stature of the BWC Implementation Support Unit so that it can function as an effective facilitator and coordinator for an expanded set of BWC activities and initiatives. (2:42)
20 – The US should launch a high-level political initiative that impresses on Russian leaders the need for continued international cooperation on biological security and nonproliferation issues. The State Department should lead an interagency effort in 2009 to rethink and restructure the CTR program to align it with the circumstances and challenges in Russia today. (2:80)
21 – The intelligence community should address its weakening science and technology base in biotechnology and enhance collaboration with specialists outside the intelligence community, including nongovernmental and foreign experts. (2:100)
22 – The US intelligence community should develop an outreach strategy to the scientific community in order to tap into international networks among scientists and their reservoir of open-source information as a means of acquiring information and detecting anomalous activities that might be related to state or terrorist bioweapons efforts (2:98, 100)
Military veterans can help other veterans beat addiction
Military veterans can help other veterans beat addiction
BY JOHN LAUINGER
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Sunday, November 30th 2008, 8:37 PM
Related News
Articles
Be wise with senior cuts
Mental distress from the rigors of military service and the horrors of combat can lead veterans to abuse drugs and alcohol.
But those same experiences also make veterans ideally suited to helping other veterans beat drug and alcohol addictions, experts and local veterans say.
"There is just such a mutual understanding that develops by having been in the same shoes," said James McDonough, director of the state Division of Veterans Affairs.
With soldiers continuing to return from Iraq and Afghanistan with substance abuse problems, a nonprofit group with counseling centers in Queens and Brooklyn is aiming to help more veterans become certified counselors.
The Outreach Project is one of the first groups to apply for state funding that would provide scholarships for military veterans to train as drug and alcohol abuse counselors, said David Greenberg of the Outreach Project.
"We hope that veterans don't come home with these problems, but the reality is that they do," said Greenberg, who is leading the agency's effort to train veterans to become state-certified counselors.
Among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans who received care from the federal Veterans Affairs Department between 2001 and 2005, one in five had substance abuse problems and almost a third had mental health problems, a recent federal study found.
The Outreach Project offers training for counselors at its offices in Richmond Hill, Queens; Greenpoint, Brooklyn, and on Long Island.
It is waiting for word from the state on its application for the funding. The scholarships would pay for the $4,450 training course, which lasts 11 months and prepares individuals for state certification.
The agency also provides job placement services.
Ervin Rogers, an Army veteran from East Flatbush, Brooklyn, is among a handful of veterans already pursuing counselor certification at the Outreach Project.
He said the scholarship would be "a great opportunity for veterans" to secure employment, and said veterans would be more effective at getting through to fellow veterans.
"If there's one thing I've found, it's that veterans are very iffy on who they trust, given their experiences," said Rogers, 48, who served in the military after Vietnam.
"Those who come home from Afghanistan and Iraq are more apt to trust another veteran."
jlauinger@nydailynews.com
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Been there and have this T shirt, bottom line is the veterans are not going to listen to anyone until they are ready to admit they have a problem, and for most it is not until they have hit bottom and have lost everything they cared about, their home, their family and their jobs. Some are able to get it back together, but many don't. Then when they realize how bad they are then they might talk and listen and try to clean it up, and then move on and create a new life for themselves.....
Cognitive tests required for Europe-based troops
Cognitive tests required for Europe-based troops
Exam establishes a baseline measurement in case they suffer a brain injury
By Steve Mraz, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Monday, December 1, 2008
S&S
Capt. Christopher Siegrist takes the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics test at Wiesbaden Army Airfield last year.
This is one test you won’t have to study for.
Soldiers deploying from Europe will now be required to take a cognition test that establishes a baseline measurement in case they experience a traumatic brain injury while deployed.
The Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics is a computerized exam that takes about 20 minutes to complete and puts soldiers through some mental gymnastics that measure reaction times, short-term memory and doing math.
Traumatic brain injury is a blow or jolt to the head or a penetrating head injury that disrupts the function of the brain. Severity ranges from mild — a brief change in mental status or consciousness — to severe, including an extended period of unconsciousness or amnesia. Mild TBI is synonymous with a concussion and has been labeled the signature injury of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
"If somebody has that kind of experience, we would wait 24 to 48 hours and then administer the ANAM again just as a way of measuring any changes," said Maria Crane, Europe Regional Medical Command’s traumatic brain injury program manager. "If there are, it would trigger referral to the primary care doctors or the psychologist or neuropsychologist downrange to take a look at that."
Earlier this year, the Army made the test mandatory for all deploying soldiers. However, it is not mandatory that soldiers take the test again when they redeploy.
Upon redeployment, only soldiers who have been identified as experiencing a blast-injury downrange or given the Military Acute Concussion Evaluation downrange would have to take the ANAM when they arrive home.
Crane stressed that the ANAM is a screening tool and not a diagnostic exam.
"With the areas of cognitive performance we’re measuring, they could not do as well on it because they’re tired, because they have (post-traumatic stress disorder) or because they have other things going on," she said. "We really can’t make that jump and say that the ANAM is worse now because six months ago you had a TBI. All we could do is say, ‘They didn’t perform very well on the ANAM so that means we should do further assessment.’ "
In response to the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act requirement for pre-and post-deployment screening for TBI, the Department of Defense has added TBI screening questions to the post-deployment health assessment, and in July required screening of all servicemembers for mild TBI prior to deployment, according to a 2008 Government Accountability Office report.
The ANAM was initially selected for use as a measure of cognitive performance by the Army Medical Command based on a recommendation from the Army surgeon general’s TBI task force in May 2007, according to comments from Cynthia Vaughan, spokeswoman for the Army surgeon general.
Even before the ANAM test became mandatory, hundreds of soldiers stationed in Europe had already taken it. In August 2007, roughly 1,200 soldiers deploying with the 1st Armored Division headquarter in Wiesbaden, Germany, took the ANAM test as part of their pre-deployment process.
A six-person ANAM team from Europe Regional Medical Command will travel to communities where units are deploying and administer the ANAM to the soldiers, Crane said.
"I would just tell soldiers to take care of themselves by seeking the help that they need," she said. "Most of the time, treatment is very simple, very effective and there’s no loss of anything — no loss of home leave, no loss of career. It really is to help keep our soldiers healthy and functioning to the best of their abilities."
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
wow five years into the war and they just started this? what were they waiting for?
Monday, December 1, 2008
Some vindication for sick vets, but little relief
Some vindication for sick vets, but little relief
WASHINGTON – Ground combat in the 1991 Persian Gulf War lasted just 100 hours, but it's meant 17 years of pain and anguish for hundreds of thousands of veterans.
Those who came home and complained of symptoms such as memory loss and joint pain are even sicker. As their lives unraveled and their health further deteriorated, many were told their problems were just in their head.
But recently, many of the sufferers were given a new reason for hope. A high-profile advisory panel to Veterans Affairs Secretary James Peake earlier this month affirmed research showing that a collection of symptoms commonly known as Gulf War illnesses are real and require treatment. The country has a national obligation to help them, the panel concluded.
The report, however, also noted a sad reality: Of the $340 million in government funds spent to research the topic, little has focused on finding treatments. And, researchers said, the estimated 175,000-210,000 Gulf veterans who are sick aren't getting any better.
Many of those veterans are left wondering what's next for them. The panel, created by Congress, said at least $60 million should be spent annually for research, but some veterans question whether the money will be made available during a time when the economy is struggling.
"I just hope that our elected officials pay attention to it and they accept that it is true," said James Stutts, 60, of Berea, Ky., a retired Army lieutenant colonel and physician who struggles to walk. He gave up practicing medicine because of memory problems after serving in the war.
"It's not a stress-related, nor is it a psychosomatic, issue," Stutts said. "It is true. It is real. There is pain, not only for the veteran, but their families."
The sad irony, said John Schwertfager, a veterans advocate in Ohio, is that many of the veterans who came home physically sick and were told wrongly that they suffered from a mental condition. Now, after years of chronic pain and personal, marital or professional struggles, they're grappling with real mental health problems.
"A slow, steady deterioration is what I'm seeing," Schwertfager said.
_____
Paul Sullivan, a Gulf War veteran who helped lead the fight on Capitol Hill to get help for the veterans, said it wasn't very long after the war ended that more veterans started complaining of symptoms such as fatigue, rashes, respiratory problems, diarrhea, headaches, muscle and joint pain, and nausea. When veterans wrote members of Congress, the lawmakers typically responded by contacting Pentagon officials who in turn wrote back saying there were no reports of chemical exposure, Sullivan said.
"They didn't tell Congress that they weren't looking," Sullivan said.
Cost was a factor. A 100 percent disabled veteran today is entitled to about $30,000 annually, which could easily mean more than $1 million in payments to veterans who live decades longer.
Compounding the problem was the complexity of the symptoms and uncertainty over the causes. Were they caused by combat stress? Was it vaccinations? Was it pills given to protect soldiers from nerve agents? Was it exposure to oil well fires or chemical weapons? Or a combination of factors?
Meanwhile, veterans like Jim Bunker, 49, an Army captain in the war who is today president of the National Gulf War Veterans Research Center in Kansas City, Kan., recalled getting the wrong type of treatment at the VA.
"They were like it's all psychological, it's all in your head, here are some antidepressants," said Bunker, who has severe headaches and has trouble walking, among other problems.
Since those early years, independent scientists have determined that the symptoms of the veterans do not constitute a single syndrome. They have pointed to pesticide, used to control insects, and pyridostigmine bromide pills, given to protect troops from nerve agents, as probable culprits for some of the symptoms.
Slowly, the veterans have made their case.
In 2001, after a government study determined that those who served in the Gulf War were nearly twice as likely to develop Lou Gehrig's disease as other military personnel, the VA said it would immediately offer disability and survivor benefits to veterans with the disease who fought in the war.
The veterans scored a legislative victory in 1998 with the passage of legislation that created the advisory panel that made the recent recommendations. In 2004, acting on its recommendations, then-VA Secretary Anthony Principi said that the agency would no longer pay for studies that seek to show stress is the primary cause.
It's not immediately clear whether Peake will act on the most recent recommendations. On Friday, he requested that the Institute of Medicine review them.
"I appreciate the committee's work on this report, and I am eager to see the results of further independent study into their findings," Peake said in a statement on Monday.
Most likely, it will be up to the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama and the new Congress to decide what to do next.
_____
Since the panel's recent report, Julie Mock, president of the Veterans of Modern Warfare, said her group's e-mail inbox has been flooded with e-mails from Gulf War veterans hopeful that help could be on the way.
"Most of them are, 'Thank God. Somebody's finally fighting for us,'" said Mock, a Gulf War veteran who has suffered from fatigue, rashes and headaches and was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 2003 that she thinks is related to her war service.
Mock said she hopes the panel's recommendations will open the door for more Gulf War veterans to receive disability compensation.
Another organization, the Disabled American Veterans, is asking for more research for treatments. But it's also urging the VA to immediately appoint a working group to begin defining the health problems afflicting the veterans as something other than "undiagnosed" with the hope that would open the door for more Gulf War veterans to obtain benefits and health care.
"We don't want this to be studied to death," said Thom Wilborn, a DAV spokesman. "This is going to be affecting people for the next 20 years because some people who don't have it now may have it in the future."
Still, some veterans worry that nothing will change.
"I'm very jaded now. It's like, we've had our hopes up before. What makes this time different?" said Denise Nichols, a retired Air Force major who used to teach nursing but quit after the war because of memory problems.
Schwertfager, the Ohio advocate, said he's hopeful Obama will help the veterans because he thinks members of Congress "will see the report and go, 'That's bad, that's bad.' They'll issue a couple of press releases and, just like the past 17 years, it will be swept under the carpet nice and quietly."
Stutts, the Kentucky physician, said some days he can't get out of bed because of the pain, but he tries not to be bitter — even as he hopes that more help could some day be available.
"A lot of people have had it worse. They are now in Arlington cemetery. I can at least be thankful I'm still alive," Stutts said.
____
On the Net:
Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses: http://www1.va.gov/RAC-GWVI/
Department of Veterans Affairs: http://www.va.gov/
Disabled American Veterans: http://www.dav.org/
National Gulf War Resource Center: http://www.ngwrc.org/
Veterans of Modern Warfare: http://www.modernveterans.com/
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Bull shit Secretary Peake, use the authoroty you have to make the known Gulf War medical issues "presumptive" it's in your power, just like Secretary Principi did with ALS.
By passing this study on to the IOM for it's version it just keeps the ill veterans from getting Service Connected for their medical problems for another 3-10 years. Doctor Page has been retired and who is going to write the reports that DOD wants? IOM has not found much in the past 30 years that is service connected their reports leave questions unanswered and dead veterans and widows saying WTF? Agent Orange? The chemical weapons, drug experiments from the Cold War, Operation 112/SHAD the IOM has never found any medical problems related to these exposures, yet everyone else can, just not the IOM who do they work for DOD?
