It should not come as much of a surprise that active duty soldiers require more energy on a day to day basis than the civilian population. Experts estimate that typical servicemembers in a garrison take in about 3,250 calories every day. However, less is known about the nutritional needs of special operations forces in the military, and researchers from the U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine (USARIEM) are interested in finding out what they are, Military.com reports.
The study is being conducted to see if any changes are necessary to the Basic Daily Food Allowance (BDFA). Experts believe that special forces may require more calories each day because their training often includes more workouts and is physically demanding, something that could be reflected in the BDFA.
“The special forces have long argued that their people work harder and sustain much higher rates of energy expenditure than the average soldier when they’re training in garrison and subsisting in dining facilities,” Dr. Andrew Young, chief of the Military Nutrition Division, told the website.
Nutrition is particularly important to active duty soldiers, this is especially true as it relates to protein. Experts recommend that servicemembers consume around 20 grams throughout the day and between 30 and 40 grams after a workout.
The impending budget cuts facing the Armed Forces have left many top officials worried, but the concerns extend to military families. Along with potential slashes to benefits and pay, the cuts may also result in longer than normal deployments for active duty soldiers, The Associated Press reports.
Navy officials say the budget cuts could be particularly harmful to their branch. Reduced spending will not only result in fewer funds for training and maintenance, but it could also cause the extension of deployment due to the dearth of resources. Now, the Navy will likely have fewer ships to put across the globe, which increases the likelihood of lengthy deployments. Families say this added uncertainty only increases the stress and anxiety that comes with having a loved one serve overseas.
“Even before the budget cuts and everything, you never have a set time that they’re going to be home. I mean, they have a date, but that can always change so you always have that little bit of a worry that it’s going to be longer than you think,” military spouse Robin Lunsford told the AP.
The military is certainly not ignoring the concerns of the families. For instance, the Navy recently launched a wellness campaign aimed at preventing many of the common problems among the strained military community such as alcohol abuse. The program is a step in the right direction to be sure, but if the across-the-board budget cuts, known as sequestration, take affect starting March 1, there will be other concerns facing the loved ones of servicemembers.
Sequestration could dramatically impact any number of programs available to military families. For instance, schools that cater specifically to children have already seen some changes. In fact, at Randolph Air Force Base in Texas, the school has already had to eliminate some vital positions including English, math and science teachers, according to Stars and Stripes.
Of course, the concerns about the drastic cuts could all be for naught if Congress acts before March 1 to avoid them. The debate echoes a similar one from much of 2012 over whether spending cuts or tax increases are the way to reduce the deficit. Earlier this week, President Barack Obama called on lawmakers to pass a short-term agreement if they could not reach a long-term solution.
The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) recently celebrated its 20th birthday, and in recognition of the milestone the Labor Department announced that it would be extending some of the benefits to the families of servicemembers. The move allows the loved ones of troops to take time off for a variety of issues without having to worry about losing their jobs, reports the Sun Sentinel.
What are the benefits?
The legislation provides a number of benefits for military families. For example, they can take as much as 26 weeks unpaid leave to care for a servicemember with an illness or injury. Furthermore, the announcement also stipulates that military families can take 12 weeks for a number of service-related emergencies such as deployment or struggles upon returning home. To Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth, who is a veteran, the decision to extend benefits for military families was a smart one.
“The Family and Medical Leave act stands up for women, it stands up for families, and it stands up for our brave men and women who serve in our Armed Forces,” she said in a prepared statement. “As someone who went through a personal tragedy that required months of care in the hospital, I know how important it is to have a loved one by your side in those moments.”
Has it worked?
The celebration of the 20th anniversary coincides with the release of a recent study that touts the positive role that the FMLA has played over the last two decades. Conducted by the Labor Department, the study found that 90 percent of workplaces that are covered by the FMLA say that the policy has had a positive impact on the work environment. However, there is still work to be done because an estimated 40 percent of all workers are still not covered by the FMLA.
Importance of FMLA
Military families may be one of the groups that need the FMLA, given that their loved ones’ injuries often require a substantial level of care. This is especially true given the events of the last 12 years. Since 2001, more than 17,670 servicemembers have been wounded due to the war in Afghanistan. The figures were even greater for troops who served in Iraq, with more than 32,200 soldiers wounded between 2003 and 2011.
With baseball season quickly approaching, many troops stationed overseas may be starting to miss America’s pastime, but a group of soldiers serving in Germany recently got a little taste of home in a big way. Baseball legends Wade Boggs, David Justice, Rollie Fingers and Bob Brenly stopped by to play Wiffle Ball with servicemembers from 709th MP Battalion and 172nd Separate Infantry Brigade, Stars and Stripes reports.
The event, dubbed Spring Training to the Troops, was put on by the Fox Sports Media Group and featured more than just a simple Wiffle Ball game. Organizers also flew in cheerleaders, umpires and the game even included play-by-play work from Mario Impemba, who calls games for the Detroit Tigers. Fox Sports has hosted similar events for football before, but this is the first one to include baseball players. Choosing to do it in Grafenwöhr, Germany, seemed like the right choice.
“When we talked to the military, finding out there was a training installation, the biggest one in Europe, it made sense,” Chris Hannan, senior vice president for Fox Sports, told the publication.
Sports and the military have a long history together. In the days leading up to the Pro Bowl and Super Bowl, there were a number of events geared toward military families. The military has also long been a sponsor for NASCAR.
The Pentagon avoided sequestration – a series of across-the-board budget cuts – when Congress took action toward the end of 2012, but the move only delayed the cuts to March 1. Now, as that deadline looms once again, the Department of Defense (DOD) has to grapple with potential budget constraints in the near future. On Wednesday it was revealed that outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will recommend cutting pay to active duty troops, reports CNN.
“Uncertainties” cause cuts
While sequestration has yet to take effect, and it’s unclear if it will, Panetta’s decision is indicative of the growing uncertainty surrounding the military budget, one Pentagon official told CNN. Though it has yet to be officially announced, the cut in pay would come in the form of lowering the annual raise, which is usually due to a cost of living adjustment. Under the new plan, that annual increase would shrink from about 1.7 percent to just 1 percent.
A politically motivated move
The announcement may be one of the last acts of Panetta’s tenure as Secretary of Defense, as he is slated to be replaced by former Senator Chuck Hagel in the coming days. Not only that, but it may be one of his smartest moves as well. Analysts say that the proposed cut in pay will be so unpopular that it will put pressure on Congress to act more quickly to help avoid sequestration.
“It’s a smart move, it puts it in Congress’ hands,” a military officer told CNN.
More than just military pay
Sequestration would trigger additional budget cuts of about $500 billion, which would impact significantly more than the pay going to active duty troops. It would also harm the readiness of troops, especially since it could cause delays to brigade combat teams’ (BCT) training, according to a memo obtained by Defense News.
“With the exception of one BCT, all non-deploying or non-forward stationed units (78 percent of all brigade combat teams) will incur several months delay for required training to meet [combatant commander] requirements,” the memo said.
Another delay?
With the March 1 deadline quickly approaching, President Barack Obama has called on Congress to push it back once more. Speaking to reporters earlier this week, he said that if lawmakers are not able to reach a compromise on reducing the deficit, they should pass a smaller bill to stave off sequestration, according to CBS News.
First responders and recovery workers who rushed to the scene on 9/11 have been embroiled in a long battle to receive payments for the medical treatment required due to their time at Ground Zero, and late last month the first group of recipients was paid – nearly 12 years after the attacks. The benefits were given to 14 firefighters and one corrections officer, and while it’s an important step forward, advocates for the first responders say it’s long overdue, according to DNAinfo.com.
The payments ranged from $10,000 to $1.5 million and were a result of the much-discussed Zadroga Act, which provided $4.3 billion to compensate the workers who became sick after responding on 9/11. However, despite it being signed into law more than two years ago, the payouts were slow as advocates fought to add some cancers to the list of covered diseases.
“I’m happy to see the wheels of justice finally turning, but there’s still a lot of work to do,” John Feal, who was part of the 9/11 process, told the website. “I’m happy, but there were also nine first responders who died in January because of cancer and respiratory illness who weren’t able to benefit from this fund.”
The first payments come shortly after a recent analysis revealed that firefighters who were at Ground Zero were at a much greater risk for a number of diseases. Specifically, the rate of prostate cancer was about 40 percent higher than the average population among the more than 9,800 firefighters working in New York City.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan presented the military with many challenges not seen before in combat history. Everything from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to a nebulous enemy made fighting more difficult, but also created the potential for some adverse health effects troops of the past did not encounter. In an effort to better treat such conditions, the Veterans Affairs Department (VA) recently announced its intentions to conduct a lengthy study to investigate the unique impact serving in Iraq and Afghanistan had on the health of troops.
The study
The VA is interested in what impact exposure to open air burn pits and other environmental hazards had on the well-being of soldiers. In particular, researchers are focused on whether there is a link between serving in the two countries and an increased risk of certain cancers, respiratory diseases, circulatory problems and neurological conditions. The announcement is somewhat of a change in policy for the VA, which has said that there was no need for a study focused on veterans of the two wars because they were included in several other trials. However, the department says the findings could be important in providing benefits.
“VA believes such studies would be helpful in properly assessing affected veterans for compensation purposes as well as for medical evaluation, treatment and follow up,” the department announced.
Big step forward
The announcement will likely be seen as a success for many veterans advocates who say the widespread use of burn pits, which were used to dispose of everything from hazardous materials to vehicles, had been causing significant health problems in veterans. In fact, earlier this year President Barack Obama signed a bill into law that instructed the VA to design a registry to track any soldier who spent time living around a burn pit, whether it was in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else abroad.
“The new registry will enhance VA’s ability to monitor the effects of exposure and keep veterans informed about studies and treatments,” the VA wrote after the bill was signed into law.
A widespread issue
It’s hard to measure just how many soldiers may be at risk for health problems due to burn pits. According to the Oxford American, the pit at Balad Air Base (which was shut down in 2009), may have exposed as many as 25,000 servicemembers to potentially toxic fumes.
Soldiers often face a difficult transition upon returning home from the battlefield. It can be a challenge to reconnect with family members and also to acclimate to a different environment, and a new study found that active duty soldiers also tend to experience significant problems sleeping after leaving combat zones. Researchers from Washington’s Madigan Army Medical Center say the findings should spur a change in how the military addresses sleep problems.
The study
Researchers relied on findings from a trial conducted in 2010 at the medical center that focused on how active duty soldiers slept. They discovered that more than 85 percent of the participants had a clinically relevant sleep disorder. The most commonly diagnosed issue was obstructive sleep disorder, with 51.2 percent of participants exhibiting the condition. Insomnia was also common, with 24.7 percent of soldiers showing symptoms. Additionally, scientists found that the average in-home sleep duration stood at just 5.74 hours each night.
What does it mean?
While more studies are needed to solidify the findings, the results suggest that sleep deprivation, which is often an assumed part of military service, could have a much larger impact than originally thought. Researchers posit that certain injuries and medical conditions that are common to veterans could also be playing a big role, because more than 58 percent of participants had a service-related medical condition such as traumatic brain injury (TBI), depression or anxiety.
“Their findings highlight the need for policy and culture change in our military organizations and continued research to understand and ameliorate the injuries these veterans have sustained,” Nita Lewis Shattuck wrote in an editorial accompanying the study. “Better appreciation of the causal factors associated with veterans’ health will lead to better policies for transition to civilian life and ultimately minimize the cost of veterans’ healthcare to society.”
A good night’s sleep can help
Though there are no definite statistics, some experts estimate that as much as 20 percent of post-9/11 veterans have some form of post-traumatic stress disorder or TBI, and getting enough sleep can help some of them manage the symptoms, according to The News Tribune. Lt. Col. Vincent Mysliwiec, who lead the study, told the newspaper that since TBI and PTSD are often accompanied by troubles sleeping, addressing those issues could play a vital role in treatment.
The Pentagon lifted the ban on women serving in combat roles last month, opening thousands of new positions up to women in the military. Although this progress was good news for many, some are now expressing doubts about whether women have enough physical strength to take on certain positions, USA Today reports.
Military creates “gender neutral” physical test
The question of “are they physically strong enough?” for the roles is being answered by a new, “gender neutral” test that is designed to determine whether all members of the military, women included, are fit to serve in front line positions.
“We’re not going to just throw open the doors and say, ‘OK, go at it,'” Marine Lt. Gen. Robert Milstead, deputy commandant for manpower and reserve affairs, told the news outlet. “We’re doing this responsibly.”
Milstead added that “if a woman can do it, then we’re all for it,” but said the military just needs to make sure these troops can perform at the same physical level as men.
The new test will gauge how women perform under certain circumstances, like carrying 40-pound tank shells, loading them into main guns, for instance. Other challenges may bring up issues of subjectivity – how far should troops be required to walk with a 100-pound load to pass the test? What height should he or she be able to clear?
Milstead emphasizes the consideration he and his colleagues are taking to ensure fairness in the testing while building the strongest possible military.
“I think we are going to be challenged every step of the way,” Milstead told the publication. “There will be people who question: Why do you have that standard?”
Obama expresses support for women in combat
In an interview with CBS’ Scott Pelley on CBS Evening News Sunday, President Obama pointed out that women already are serving in combat.
“They may not get treated like they’re in combat, but when they’re in theater, in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, they are vulnerable, they are wounded, and they’ve been killed,” Obama said. “They have carried out their jobs with extraordinary patriotism and distinction.”
“I mean, extraordinary women in uniform, who can do everything a man can and more,” he added.
The lift on the ban is as much about the physical strength of the military as it is about gender equality in the workplace. It could open up as many as 230,000 positions to women across all services, allowing them opportunities for career advancement that were once closed.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics released its latest unemployment findings on Friday, and while the national jobless rate stayed the same, the news wasn’t quite as good for post-9/11 veterans. During January, the unemployment rate for the veterans of the most recent wars rose to 11.7 percent, up considerably from 9.9 percent in December.
The results are somewhat of a step back for the concerted effort being made to help servicemembers find jobs once they leave the Armed Forces. There have been a number of programs launched over the last several months aimed at providing vets with the training to help them land in-demand jobs. For instance, the Veterans Retraining Assistance Program has been lauded as a big step forward, but it is still too young to have any graduates. Additionally, the transition assistance program has been revamped to offer more training for troops.
Despite the best efforts of Congress and the Department of Defense, it’s clear that something else needs to be done to help chip away at the high unemployment figures. Some new bills have been proposed in Congress that might help, including one that would extend in-state GI Bill benefits to soldiers who live out of state.
Veterans looking for assistance with the job hunt can visit AFBA’s Career Center, which helps pair employers and recruiters with qualified servicemembers.