What Is It About Combat PTSD?

[babylonsister]

http://scoop.epluribusmedia.org/story/2007/5/30/184932/842

by ilona
Wed May 30, 2007

When I did my research last year for Moving a Nation to Care, one day it occurred to me that, depending upon the volume I had in my hands, what we call post-traumatic stress disorder never seemed to be referred to by the same name.

Actually, it's had at least 80 at my last count (all are in Moving's Chapter Notes, p. 161-162).

What is it about PTSD?

I've been opening my book events by listing a few of these 80 out loud, asking what people think about having so many confusing names for the same thing (the second installment of Gen. Wes Clark Community Network's Troops & Vets series on 'Society and the Soldier' begins in the same way):

Traumatic neurasthenia. Railway spine. War syndrome. Gross stress reaction. Old sergeant syndrome. Neurocirculatory asthenia. Vietnam disease. Cerebro-medullary shock. Simple continued fever. Disordered action of the heart. Buck fever. Swiss disease...

When we speak of post-traumatic stress syndrome, or PTSD, most of us are familiar with a handful of the labels given the after-effects of war. We've probably heard that it used to be called `nostalgia' or `irritable heart' during the Civil War. During World War I it became `shell shock' in reaction to the arrival of powerful industrial weapons of war like the quick firing artillery piece, the machine gun and the magazine rifle. By World War II it became `combat fatigue' or `battle fatigue.' The second-to-last stop before arriving at the definition we use today was `post-Vietnam syndrome.'

While these are the more well-known of labels given to modern post-traumatic stress disorder, by merely repeating these more familiar terms, we lose sight of an important aspect of the history of PTSD: the human resistance to acceptance of the condition - no matter what it's called.

The fact that one generation after another has to `rediscover' PTSD and give it its own name offers a glimpse into society's desire not to have to own up to it, not to have to dig too deeply into the dark recesses of it, not to expand on our understanding of it, perhaps not even to believe it exists.

more...

[lyonn]

1. Dumping on warriors who are confused by the trauma of war

is using and abusing our troops. The military want to establish in the warriors mind that they are "tough" and that when the mind blinks out that they are wimps. What warriors do is not natural and the mind is capable of handling only so much conflicting BS that seems to go along with any war. Your buddy is blown to bits and you are to suck it up and say, that's war. Yet they seem to train them to care and cover for their buddies. Bring them home, don't leave them on the battlefield, etc.

It looks like brainwashing to me. Yes, protect our country If attacked and only then fight the good fight.

[KT2000]

2. You are right - This is done with

politically inconvenient illnesses to keep them under the radar. Chemical sensitivity is another one. Industry has tried to rename it Idiopathic Environmental Intolerances and it also goes by many other names - sick building syndrome, chemical injury, etc.

You may be interested in a book about to be released by Martin Pall, Ph.D.
Explaining Unexplained Illnesses
He is a microbiologist, professor who has found a biological basis for PTSD among other illnesses. It has to do with excess levels of nitric oxide that results from stressors such as chemical exposures, trauma - physical and mental, viral/bacterial assault. It is a natural process in the body that goes awry and becomes a vicious cycle.

He also has a devastating chapter where he challenges with science the bogus explanations given for these illnesses and the reasons for it.