Posted on 11/27/2007 4:30:17 PM PST by ButThreeLeftsDo
Some of the 2,600 Minnesota National Guard members who spent 16 months in Iraq say their tour of duty made them shorter, at least temporarily, and doctors say that's because the 60 to 90 pounds of gear they carried likely caused their spinal discs to compress.
Brian Hesse, 25, of Minnetonka, believes he lost about an inch after toting heavy body armor and gear on convoy and security missions. His armor alone weighed over 30 pounds. He also wore a 4-pound helmet, and carried a 7.5-pound loaded M-4 rifle, and 10 pounds of extra ammunition and other necessities.
"I shrunk," Hesse said, "and got a bit wider. It's like my body said, 'OK, I need a wider base."'
Doctors say musculoskeletal injuries are common for Iraq returnees.
"A good chunk of what we're seeing is actually overuse that we would really anticipate would get better in a short period of time," said Dr. Michael Koopmeiners, who directs community clinics for the Minneapolis VA Medical Center.
Over the next month, Guard members are reporting to Camp Ripley to answer questions about physical injuries and the risk of combat stress or traumatic brain injury. The questions are part of a post-deployment reassessment, identical to a survey issued when the soldiers first finished their tour of duty.
About 1,300 Minnesota National Guard members came back from Iraq and Afghanistan before the 1st Brigade Combat Team. Of those, 716 were referred for health care services after reassessment, the Minnesota National Guard said. The majority had "nagging injuries" to joints and muscles.
Nationwide, more than 96,000 National Guard members and reservists have completed reassessments since October 2006, and 49 percent reported health problems unrelated to combat wounds, the U.S. Defense Department said.
Low back problems are most common, Koopmeiners said, followed by neck, shoulder, knee and ankle injuries.
The risk appears even greater for the 1st Brigade Combat Team, whose 16-month deployment in Iraq is the longest of any U.S. military unit.
"The longer they're deployed," Koopmeiners said, "the more likely that they have injuries, especially to the musculoskeletal system."
Hesse and his girlfriend, Ashley Ekstrom, a sergeant in the Minnesota National Guard, both see signs of wear.
Ekstrom, 24, of Minnetonka, said her initial assessment after her service in Iraq showed she was an inch shorter, too. She has received physical therapy and chiropractor treatments for shooting pains in her back and neck that make it hard to sleep.
Ekstrom said her pains grew steadily from the weight of the body armor and the long convoys on bumpy roads. She already went through her reassessment, and said she gained the inch back, and her pain has eased.
Hesse, a staff sergeant, goes to the gym in hopes that stretching and exercising will help his back and reduce his occasional pain.
"It slows me down from what I used to be (before Iraq)," he said, "but that was also two years ago, when I was a little bit younger and a little bit more mobile." He's still awaiting reassessment.
The incidents of joint and muscle pain pose issues for military leaders.
Body armor and weapons may be getting lighter, but the net weight isn't changing much. Many soldiers are now wearing extra armor plates to protect their sides, throats and groins.
A 2004 study of an Army unit in Afghanistan estimated that riflemen were carrying equipment that equaled 36 percent of their body weight during combat and 55 percent of their body weight during patrols. The recommended load is no more than 30 percent of body weight.
Some soldiers using mortars or heavy weapons carried nearly 100 percent of their body weight at times, the study found.
"Can you imagine walking around carrying yourself, all the time, day in and day out?" asked Charles Dean, a retired Army colonel who led the study. "It would definitely have an impact."
There's also the question of whether muscle and joint pains will become chronic. Even if pain goes away, it could resurface.
"That's one of those things we're going to notice again five or 10 years down the line," said Maj. Gen. Larry Shellito, adjutant general to the Minnesota Guard. "That's why I would like for us to deal with it up front."
Credit Check that is.
I grew two inches after I got discharged at Oakland. I was pretty much a baby soldier.
Agree ........I was of same mindset. Still am. If an item hasn’t multiple uses then it is left behind.
IMHO Troops today have it down to a fine art for the most part, common carry position of key items , team gear is shared, fighting loads vs need for existence loads for the most parts. Only what ya need to fight, communicate and drink/eat and repair the holes in yer body with.
Blow Out kits are IMO the best never leave home without it for EVERY troop to have on em.
I really like the Platybag or Camelbak water bladders, quiet, conforms to body, easy to snag a sip on the run etc etc . Like the old VN era water bladder efforts only better.
Nutrition is better than my old diet of peaches and pound cake.....with coffee creamer and sugar icing of course. we could fill up entire threads with what is or isn’t better......
As always a US GI will always adapt to their own requirements and get the job done .......
He was one of the battlin' bastards of Bastogne -- with the 101st Screamin' Eagles.
He also was captured at Normandy, but was released not too long after I guess when the Germans holding him surrendered or were captured by the advancing army.
Anyway, this cousin of my mother was badly injured at Bastogne.
So after the war, he was told not to lift anything heavy. I think he did move to Tucson, AZ, for health reasons, because of the injuries.
As for not lifting anything heavy, he became Mr. Arizona after working out with weights.
He had his own Weight Lifting factory/company at one time.
I believe he still participates in the Senior Olympics.
Being Airborne, I think they had to go some pretty rough training.
I believe it was Eisenhower that decided to move them to Bastogne because they were receiving extra-hazardous combat pay for being airborne, but they were in rear areas... (But I am somewhat vague on that point -- have to research some more).
Some were probably better for the experience. Maybe some had some permanent injuries -- don't know...
The worst thing for my mother's cousin in the 101st was the fact he lost his good buddy (KIA) at Bastogne. That probably hurt more than all the hardships...
I did make the mistake of saying that Patton rescued them at Bastogne. That was a big mistake -- which I shall never make again.
The only problem at Bastogne was for the rest of the US Army to join up with the Screamin' Eagles.
The Germans paid their price for attacking the 101st.
So maybe there is more truth in that answer of nuts than we comprehend -- first that Germans had to be nuts to attack the 101st, and, second, the 101st was one tough nut to crack...
There were several things wrong with the M14,
- Too long to move or swing through the bush,grass or jungle.
- Too heavy to carry all year.
- Ammo was too bulky and heavy, and it seemed like we ALWAYS carried enough with us to take on the whole damned NVA.
- Flash suppressor subject to damage, thus deflecting rounds.
BUT -— If you could see charlie, you could kill charlie with ONE ROUND from great distances....
Another big plus — we shared the same ammo as our beloved M60, and NO ONE seriously objected to carrying a belt for THAT weapon........it was THAT effective.
Welcome home Bill.
Thanks for sharing that. The 101st at Bastogne were channeling the 300 Spartans for dam sure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.