US Civil War 'led to ill health'

[maximus otter]

Many soldiers who fought in the 1861 to 1865 US Civil War suffered a life of ill health afterwards, a study says.

A University of California team studied 15,000 soldiers' records and found some 85% suffered physical or mental health problems, with a third having both.

The most common disorders were heart, stomach and mental health-related, the Archives of General Psychiatry said.

It was "objective" evidence of a link between war experiences and a lifetime of health problems, researchers said.

The US Civil War was fought between the Union and a coalition of 11 pro-slavery southern states that wanted independence.

In all, 3m people were involved, with 970,000 being injured or killed - 3% of the population.

The study said young soldiers were the most at risk, with under 17-year-olds being 93% more likely to have suffered ill-health than those aged over 31.

The researchers suggested the finding was because young soldiers were still developing emotionally and physically at the time.

And they found soldiers who were in regiments where more people were killed had a 51% increased risk of problems.

Incidence among prisoners-of-war was also greater.

Lead researcher Professor Roxane Cohen Silver said the data from the US Civil War presented a great opportunity to assess the impacts of war.

"For the first time, we have objective records indicating that horrific war experiences are associated with a lifetime of increased physical disease and mental health difficulties.

It is hard to make comparisons with modern warfare, experts say

"Unfortunately, it's likely that the deleterious health effects seen in a war conducted more than 130 years ago are applicable to the health and well-being of soldiers fighting wars in the 21st century."

A spokeswoman for the UK's National Gulf War Veterans and Families Benevolent Association said it was hard to draw parallels between wars in the 19th Century and modern warfare.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4686656.stm

maximus otter

 

[JD Mandrell]

Makes sense, tramatic experiences often cause lasting negative effects. When I was an EMT, there was a car accident that involved 7 burned bodies, everyone that worked that wreck, (I was off that day, so I didn't) was sent to critical stress debriefing counseling, to help cope with what they saw.

Considering what soldiers see in war, would imagine that would say with them for along time.

 

[mete]

Hardly 'new' evidence. About half of the casualties were said to have been disease .Conditions were terrible. Many regiments went into the field without tents ,without proper clothing such as rain gear or warm coats.Many units also were very poorly fed .In fact there were communities that sent food to their men to help correct this. So malnutrition, exposure plus the pychological effects of sometimes very high casualty rates had a very great effect !!As for POWs read "Andersonville" and the north had the equivalent in places like Rock Island .Did we learn ? not in WWI ! Only in WWII did we start to prepare troops for conditions.

 

[Mike Hull]

On the mental side, PTSD is the most insidious. It's symptoms are far ranging and can mimic many other forms of mental disease, or even physical.

The people affected tend to self medicate as they withdraw from normal society, with drugs, alcohol or the illegal variety.

Of course when drinking, the bouts of anger associated with PTSD are made much worse, but the affected person not knowing these things just self medicates more.

It just goes on like that, a vicious circle, often leading to an early death and misery for all that came in contact with the affected person, like family.

Suicide is a very real side effect of PTSD.

Panic and anxiety disorders are another wretched part of the disease.
It's nasty!!

 

[Rugger]

Imagine living through Shiloh or Anteinam & not being wrecked for life.
Pass the Laudanum please...

 

[FullerH]

You also need to remember that this was prior to the work of Louis Pasteur that led to general acceptance of the germ theory of infection. The lack of steilization in operating areas contributed greatly to the death rate, as did the crowding together of all of these young men from rural situations. That crowding led to disease outbreaks in WWI and, in 1919, ti the Great Flu Pandemic.

 

[mwerner]

Makes you wonder... I maintain that human nature is not changed to any degree, so I wonder to what degree even ancient warriors suffered from attendant stress, battle fatigue, and so forth.
Huge, bloody battles like Agincourt or Crecy...Did the survivors suffer from PSD?

Of course, on average, folks didn't live as long back then; maybe they didn't have time to get really messed up.

 

[shaldag]

WWII was the first major war in which more fatalities were attributed to battlefield wound than to disease.

On the modern battlefield, medical personnel triage wounded: lightly, heavily, critically (the terms vary depending on the army involved, but the principle is the same.

These days, if medical care is quickly available (extensive first aid on the field, and quick evacuation to a place where more extensive treatment is available, then all but critically wounded, and even some of the critically wounded, can survive. However, if those conditions do not apply, many of the others will die as well.

In ther days before the relationship of hygiene and health was known, it was catastrophic. Imagine having a couple of cuts on your hand, and then participating in a burial detail, just for example. The angel of death tarried on the field of battle long after the cannons were silenced. (pardon the poetic license)