In recent years, concerns have grown over the invisible injuries soldiers sustain not in combat, but in routine military training. At the heart of these concerns are the experiences of mortar crews, who endure repeated exposure to blast waves that have led to lasting brain damage.
“We had to keep a count of every round we fired, and get the mortar tubes inspected each year, because all those blasts can take a toll on the weapons system,” said Justin Andes, a former Army mortar man. “But no one was doing that for us.” Andes, who left the Army grappling with migraines and cognitive difficulties, symbolizes the broader issue facing many military personnel.
Despite reassurances from the military about the safety of these activities, the personal accounts from veterans tell a different story. Many report symptoms consistent with traumatic brain injury (TBI), including severe headaches, confusion, memory lapses, and emotional instability. “His voice is different, he acts different, he is a different person from the man I married,” said Kristyn Andes, reflecting on the changes in her husband post-service.
While the military has started to limit the number of rounds fired during training and is exploring technical modifications to the mortar systems, these measures do not address the core issue—identifying and treating the injuries caused by these blasts. “The problem is that people who are repeatedly exposed to weapons blasts often cannot pinpoint a specific traumatic event,” explained Stuart W. Hoffman, a director of brain injury research. This makes diagnosing conditions like TBI challenging under current medical standards.
The Army contends that the blasts are not powerful enough to cause brain damage, but veterans’ experiences suggest otherwise. The guidelines for safe exposure may not adequately account for the cumulative effects of repeated blasts, which can differ significantly from a single event.
The disconnect between soldiers’ lived experiences and the military’s diagnostic criteria has led to a troubling oversight in the treatment and recognition of potential brain injuries. As a result, many soldiers leave the service without proper diagnosis or understanding of their ailments, often attributing symptoms to less specific conditions like PTSD or general stress.
Advocates and veterans alike are calling for a more robust approach to studying and mitigating the risks associated with military training. A large-scale, longitudinal study may be necessary to truly understand the implications of routine blast exposure and to develop better protective measures.
As the military continues to evaluate and adapt its training protocols, the voices of those affected by these training regimens remain a powerful reminder of the need for change. “I felt worthless and stupid,” lamented Sergeant Devaul, a sentiment echoed by many of his peers. It’s a poignant illustration of the need for a reevaluation of how the military addresses the health of its personnel, not just in wartime, but in the everyday reality of preparing for it.
