Undiagnosed brain injury - the hidden legacy of Iraq

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by armchair_jihad, Oct 27, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,2200330,00.html
  2. Basically they are "punch drunk" but without the punching?
  3. Thanks Armchair, I was going to post this article- it makes for very interesting reading and should hopefully prompt a wider debate on the subject.
  4. Well they are being punched - just with blast. And they don't have to appear 'dazed' for there to be a brain injury.
  5. Er, that's what I said.

    Punch Drunk is a state boxers can get in after one too many slaps on the head.

    They exhibit the same symptoms and aren't "dazed" either, they may be at the time of punching but not neccesarily days after, although they still have the brain injuries.

    They often have slowed responses too, and at worst their speech may be slurred as if they ARE actully drunk (hence the name).
  6. Brain damage from being too close to explosions,
    Now I have an excuse for being a muppet. :p
  7. So how do we go about getting 'screened'?
  8. I had an interview with Matthew Taylor two weeks ago. Reference the Medical Discharge / War Pensions Idea (it's in the Charity and Welfare forum). The fact of this issue is, we have a very bad record within the UK for looking after our physically injured soldiers, so what chance has a mentally injured soldier got?

    Matthew, has done an awful lot of research into this area, and although I would agree that he is correct about his findings, getting the MoD to acknowledge this is an issue when they still dispute Gulf War Syndrone, will be near-on impossible.


  10. Ahh Liam Fox, the voice of reason. Actually just a politician who will say anything to anybody if it means scoring some points. As the Defence spokesman for the Conservatives his comments are unhelpful and show a complete lack of understanding of the situation.

    At the danger of moving slightly outside of my box (see the name for a clue what I do!) this is not new information. The US studies are contested with huge amounts of research going on to finding out if this really is a problem. As I said both internally and internationally thought is divided. It might just be blast \ helmet \ head related or it could be PTSD; or, and sorry to the ambulance chasers, it maybe unproven or non-existent.

    The US work is expansive, often fuelled by lawyers, but worth getting our hands on. UK watches this, and has been since it first came up (which was ages before the press got hold of it). International work was already being done in this area as ballistic materials in helmets get close to being able to stop AK rounds. The transmitted shock to the head and neck was being assessed to understand the issues. This is a follow on.

    Before people assess every US study and believe every Politian be a bit critical. For a start think what the transmitted blast wave has to travel through; US helmets have very different characteristics to ours so it would reason that the effects will be different. I have no vested interest in this field but see what’s going on and 75% of what’s being written is rubbish. Prudent advice while medical research goes on does not constitute proof of a 'disease'.

    If Politian’s want to help perhaps they can convince our winged brethren to dump the Para helmet in favour of something ballisticaly better; such as a paper hat. That should get a response!
  11. Oh dear armchair jihad, beaten at your own tedious slash and paste game.

    Already done

    You clearly can't offer an opinion, never having been near an explosion - so whats your excuse for being brain dead?
  12. But you have the choice of not being too close.
  13. Not always
  14. If being to close to explosions then how did we survive WW2 and the Blitz
  15. W. anchor
    We didn't survive unscathed as anyone growing up in the fifties can tell you.
    Woman used to complain about their nerves. Men of course didn't complain, wasn't allowed but they suffered from their 'nerves' as well.
    Of course no one mentioned why they suffered nerve troubles. It would have been un Churchillian to do so. But some kids aren't stupid. Some of them could see the cause right enough even if the adults weren't going to talk about it.
    Back in the fifties there were still plenty of women around who taking a leaf from old Queen Vic always wore black having lost a husband in the first world war.
    The effects of war have long run outs whether one is victorious or not.