New Concerns on Military Drug Abuse and Combat Stress

Last Wednesday, the Pentagon released a new report on the health and fitness of today's military, based on data collected from military health assessments.

"The 2008 survey indicates that the U.S. armed forces are generally strong, healthy, and ready to accomplish their mission," said Dr. Jack Smith, acting deputy assistant secretary of defense for clinical policy and program policy. "We are pleased with the continued increase of healthy behaviors and preventive health practices reported by our service members."

While the overall fitness of the military remains positive, the report demonstrated a significant spike in prescription drug abuse by military personnel and increases in post-traumatic stress disorder diagnoses. In 2008, 12 percent of American military men and women reported misusing prescription drugs, up from five percent in 2005. Similarly, 11 percent of military personnel required follow-up for PTSD, up from seven percent in 2005.

The Pentagon attributed the spike in prescription drug abuse to more pointed questions on the subject. USA Today reporter Gregg Zoroya, however, reviewed the data and found a potential correlation between prescription drug abuse and combat stress issues such as PTSD.

To read Zoroya's story, Click Here.

The news from the Pentagon on prescription drug abuse and PTSD only reinforced AMVETS' concerns about combat stress. Earlier this week, AMVETS leaders called on the military to improve its PTSD screening and treatment processes in response to another increase in reported Army suicides.

A new Yale University study, commissioned by VA and the National Institutes of Health, demonstrated that the more than half of patients diagnosed with PTSD suffer from comorbid major depressive disorders such as alcoholism and substance abuse.

The Yale study also demonstrated that patients who suffer from such comorbid disorders exhibit different chemical changes in the brain from counterparts only suffering from PTSD.

In light of this week's developments, AMVETS leaders believe a clear correlation exists between increased prescription drug abuse in the military and PTSD, further demonstrating the need for improved screening and treatment within the ranks.

An open letter to the ACLU

Dear ACLU,

I just finished reading your attorneys' commentary on CNN.com regarding President Obama's decision to fight the ill-conceived release of additional detainee mistreatment photos.

In your commentary, you attempted to berate the current President and the previous administration for, "widespread and systemic" abuse. As a veteran who served in Iraq and handled detainees from time to time, this couldn't be further from the truth.

While my unit trained at Ft. Bragg and upon our arrival in Kuwait, we were briefed repeatedly on the rules of engagement, our general orders, and the laws of war to ensure that we would know how to responsibly handle enemy combatants and detainees once they were neutralized on the battlefield. Unfortunately, we had to put our training into practice our first day after crossing the berm.

We encountered about 50 military-aged men looting weapons from an Iraqi military installation in Taji, just north of Baghdad. The unit I was attached to managed to gain control of the situation, took possession of the arms, and built a cordon around the detainees near one of the facility's perimeter walls. We would now need to wait for military police and intelligence units to join up with us to properly vet and process the detainees.

As nightfall rolled in, my teammates and I entered into the equation to pull security on the group. Once Intelligence was on site, they began to speak with each detainee individually. The conversations were often brief and even-tempered. Most of the men were immediately released. However, a handful of the answers didn't satisfy the interrogators, and these men remained in our custody.

Only having a vague knowledge of how to handle detainees from our earlier briefings, the intelligence soldiers pulled us aside and gave us another hasty--albeit critical--briefing on how we needed to handle these men. Time and again they reiterated that we could only use proportional force to ensure they stayed put, until the unit commander decided the best next course of action.

"Proportional" meant that we were only authorized to keep watch over the men and ensure they didn't try to escape or, worse, attack us. Intelligence was very clear that the ONLY circumstances under which we could draw our weapons is if we were in imminent danger of personal harm, meaning that the men somehow gained control of a weapon and turned to use it on us.

Next, we were obligated under international law to feed them, provide them with water, allow them to sleep, and render medical aide, if necessary. We were a little taken aback, since our rations were now on the line to ensure that these potential criminals were treated properly. But we did it. We field stripped a box of MREs, took the matches, hot sauce, and heaters, then demonstrated how to properly eat them with the help of our interpreter.

Contrary to popular belief, we weren't instructed to beat, harass, or otherwise "screw" with the detainees. In fact, Intelligence made it clear that we would face dire consequences if we even thought of mistreating them. The night came and went, the detainees stayed put, and we handed them off to another unit the next day.

We carried the lessons of that day with us throughout the deployment and dozens of other encounters with detainees. Does this sound like "widespread and systemic" patterns of abuse?

Over the years, stories have come to light regarding overseas rendition camps and detainee abuse incidents from troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan. Neither I nor the Pentagon seek to refute incidents of abuse, but the mischaracterization of the actions of all American troops is what troubles me. As I pointed out in my last posting on this issue, enemy combatants will always choose American custody over their local criminal justice system, or the killing houses of Al Qaeda. This should serve as a testament to the professionalism of our troops tasked with handling enemy combatants today.

Unfortunately, from your commentary I've gathered that you believe American troops are actually trained to harass and mistreat detainees as a matter of policy, which is patently false. The Pentagon (especially under the new Administration) has been very candid in its responses to illicit detainee abuse incidents. Today, very stringent measures are in place to assure that detainees are treated equitably, as evidenced by numerous independent reports on American detention facilities, which is why Obama has decided to fight the photos' release.

The Pentagon has taken corrective action. Dated photos from incidents for which justice has been meted out will not provide anything of value to the public discourse.

In your commentary, you also purported that the President's directive lacked a "limiting principle," meaning that blocking the release of these photos would only further the presumption that the Executive enjoys the ability to censor information at will.

The limiting principle to this decision is obvious: These particular, old, subpoenaed detainee photos, which have been used in old investigations that have since been closed do not need to be released publicly. To me, this seems like a clear limit. The Administration has already demonstrated considerable consideration for transparency, even lifting the decades-old ban on filming flag-draped coffins returning from the battlefield. In this individual case the President has chosen national security and the safety of our troops over your voyeuristic desires.

Some have argued that releasing the photos would demonstrate that the United States has changed its "old habits," somehow ensuring that the extremists we're fighting would see it as an olive branch from which we can move forward. We already know this is not true. No sooner had Obama been elected that Al Qaeda released an inflammatory statement seeking to defame him and the nation he now represents. Al Qaeda and its operatives will not respond to symbolic gestures.

However, Al Qaeda will seize on opportunities to use our own transparency against, as we've seen in the past. When the Abu Ghraib incident came to light, violence in Iraq spiked dramatically--from 52 U.S. deaths in March 2004 to 135 U.S. deaths in April 2004 after "60 Minutes" aired the photos.

In the commentary you noted that, "To give the government the power to suppress information because it might anger an unidentified set of people in an unspecified part of the world and ultimately endanger an ill-defined group of U.S. personnel would be to invest it with a virtually unlimited censorial power."

I have already refuted the "unlimited censorship" idea, now I want to refute your remaining ambiguous assertions. The "unidentified set of people" is Al Qaeda and its network of operatives. The "unspecified part of the world" is Southwest Asia, particularly Iraq, Afghanistan and the Peshwar region of Pakistan. Finally, the "ill-defined group of U.S. personnel" is the more than 300,000 American military men and women who have selflessly volunteered to serve in harm's way across the aforementioned regions, as our lives go on tonight. Your argument is not salient, and, as a veteran, I take offense to being labeled as an "ill-defined group of U.S. personnel."

I guess I just don't understand why you want to possess these photos so badly. To generate more hits for your Web sites and blogs? To set in motion a complete reversal of all progress in Iraq? To compromise our latest surge of forces in Afghanistan? To further malign the selfless acts of our military men and women?

I'm appalled and offended by the proposition of releasing these photos, and I'm happy to see that Obama has listened to his top military minds on this issue. I hope these photos never see the light of day, giving our enemies another opportunity to kill or maim Americans fighting to keep us safe.

-Ryan

(Photo: Members of my unit discussing what to do with military-aged Iraqi men caught looting a military installation north of Baghdad in 2003. I am the second soldier from the right, pulling security. Photo courtesy of Ryan Gallucci.)

AMVETS National Commander to visit American Huey 369

Tomorrow afternoon, AMVETS National Commander John C. Hapner will visit with a unique Indiana non-profit organization dedicated to preserving the memory of Bell's Huey helicopters. American Huey 369, a 501 (c)(3) out of Peru, Ind., will host Hapner for a tour of their facilities and a possible ride on one of their restored helicopters, should conditions permit.

Named after the tail number of their first salvaged aircraft, American Huey 369 has worked for years to preserve the Huey as a symbolic gesture to America's veterans--particularly from the Vietnam era--who remember the Huey as a symbol of hope on the battlefield.

American Huey 369 founded Johnnie Walker says the distinctive sound of the Huey's supersonic blades often signified imminent rescue or resupply for troops pinned down deep in the jungles of Southeast Asia.

Since American Huey 369 was founded, they have managed to purchase two surplus Huey helicopters, numbers 369 and 803, restoring each to flight status through the work of an extensive volunteer network.

The organization, which now boasts a membership of more than 1,000, offers annual rides on the Hueys in exchange for volunteer work in support of the organization's mission.

Each year, American Huey 369 takes part in dozens of military and veterans' support events across Indiana and the upper Midwest, such as visits from the roving Vietnam Memorial Wall.

American Huey 369 is constantly looking to expand its reach and showcase its programs on the national stage. If you are interested in becoming involved with American Huey 369, visit their Web page, www.americanhuey369.org.



(Media: Top: Huey 369 is guided in for a landing during an event in 2008. Middle: Volunteers work on Huey 803 at the organization's hanger in 2009. Bottom: Huey 369 hovers over the roving Vietnam Memorial Wall during a Fourth of July weekend veterans' memorial celebration in Auburn, Ind. Video: American Huey 369 call-to-action video. All media courtesy of American Huey 369, used with permission.)

Magazine Update: San Diego Padres, "Team of the Military," open 2009 campaign

The spring 2008 issue of "American Veteran" highlighted Cooper Brannan, a young Marine pitching in the San Diego Padres organization.

Cooper just entered his third year with the team, continuing an improbable foray into professional baseball. Meanwhile, the San Diego Padres organization has marched into the 2009 campaign upholding their reputation as the "Team of the Military" in one of the nation's largest military towns.

The Padres' season of military support kicked off on Wednesday night with Military Opening Night, when the Padres took on division rivals, the Los Angeles Dodgers at PETCO Park. Padres prospect Walter Silva made his major league debut as part of the Padres' tradition, donning the team's desert camouflage jersey. To view the MLB.com gallery from the game, Click Here.

Prior to the game, the Padres honored local military personnel while Vice Adm. Sam Locklear, commander U.S. Third Fleet, and Senior Chief Petty Officer John Kelley, Third Fleet staff, threw out the ceremonial first pitch.

Throughout the season, the Padres will continue to demonstrate their support to the military through a variety of community outreach programs, orchestrated by the team's Military Affairs director, retired Navy Capt. Jack Ensch.

Since 1995, Ensch has made it his personal mission to ensure that the Padres embrace the San Diego military community, offering unparalleled access and support to all who wear the uniform in Southern California. Ensch, a Vietnam veteran and former P.O.W., understands why it is important for the public to support those who serve.

In addition to regular ticket discounts and the special refund program for deployed personnel, the Padres will continue to offer on-field reenlistment ceremonies and military group outings.

In 2009, the Padres will introduce the Host Our Heroes Program, where companies and individuals can show their appreciation to the military community by hosting service members and their families for Padres home games.

The Padres cornerstone military program, Marine Recruit Sundays, will return for 13 Sundays in the regular season. During Sunday home games, the Padres will wear their camouflage uniforms and host the graduating class from San Diego Marine Corps Recruit Depot. In 2001, AMVETS National Communications Director Jay Agg was one of the Marine recruits honored by the Padres.

Aside from this array of in-stadium programs for the military community, the Padres will continue to work extensively with the military units and installations around San Diego. In the past, the Padres have worked closely with U.S. Third Fleet to ensure that sailors could watch games while underway. The team has also arranged player visits to military medical facilities, appearances at military events around the community, and visible contributions to San Diego Fleet Week.

As the season rolls on, check in regularly with American Veteran online to see how the Padres and Capt. Ensch continue to demonstrate their support to those who have served.

To view the Padres' official military programs Web page, Click Here.

(Photos: San Diego Padres Military Opening Night at PETCO Park. Photos courtesy of the San Diego Padres.)

Obama visits with troops in Iraq

During his recent international tour, President Barack Obama made a surprise visit to troops serving on the front lines in Iraq. This visit marks the first time Obama has met with troops in the combat zone since taking office in January.

Obama took the opportunity to praise America's fighting men and women for their accomplishments in the conflict--specifically ousting Saddam Hussein, reducing fractious violence, and holding multiple national elections. Obama stressed responsibility in his approach to drawing down the U.S. presence in Iraq, to which he received a round of applause for the troops.



Obama then had a long sit-down at Camp Victory with U.S. commanders to assess the situationon the ground. Obama also met with key Iraqi leaders during his visit and called for increased cooperation among Iraqi factions to help ease the transition of U.S. troops out of the country.

The Washington Post reported that Obama's visit was met warmly by the Iraqi public and American troops alike.


(Media, Top: President Obama receives a fist-jab as he greets troops at Camp Victory in Iraq, White House photo by Pete Sousa. Middle: Video of Obama's speech to troops at Camp Victory, praising their accomplishments throughout the war in Iraq. Public video from the White House. Bottom: Obama pins an Army Sergeant with his Purple Heart medal during an awards ceremony at Camp Victory. White House photo by Pete Sousa. All White House media materials are part of the Creative Commons within the public domain.)

Women in Service: Air Force Lt. Col. Martha McSally

For the next installment of our Women in Service series, American Veteran has chosen to highlight Air Force Lt. Col. Martha McSally, America's first female combat pilot and the first woman to command an Air Force fighter squadron.

The U.S. military lifted the ban on women flying in combat 1991 and McSally was among the first female selectees to attend fighter training school. McSally graduated from the program in 1993 and was given her first combat assignment in 1995 with an operational A-10 Thunderbolt II squadron in Kuwait.

During her tour, McSally flew combat patrols over Iraq to enforce the no-fly zone in support of Operation Southern Watch. In 2000, she returned to the Middle East with another operational squadron stationed in Riyhad, Saudi Arabia fulfilling the same enforcement role.

In 2004, McSally broke another benchmark for female aviators when she assumed command of the 354th Fighter Squadron for a combat deployment to Afghanistan. In a recent interview with Air University, McSally recalled her most memorable moments in Afghanistan, providing close air support for troops on the ground, and engaging the enemy.

According to Air University, McSally's unit flew nearly 2,000 sorties and compiled more than 7,000 combat flight hours during their tour in Afghanistan. For their accomplishments on the tour, McSally and her unit received the Air Force Association's David C. Shilling Award for "best aerospace contribution to national defense."

McSally is a native of Warwick, R.I. and a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy. She continues to serve in the U.S. Air Force and expects to pin on Colonel later this month. She is currently a student at the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama and her name is currently on the list for Air Force Group Command.

(Photo: McSally stands for a photo alongside her A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft. U.S. Air Force photo.)

Women in Service: Army Sgt. Monica Lin Brown

For the next installment of our Women in Service series, American Veteran has chosen to highlight Army Sgt. Monica Lin Brown, who earned the Silver Star while serving in Afghanistan in 2007.

Brown, an Army medic from Lake Jackson, Texas, was in a convoy with the 4/82nd Airborne Division in the Paktia province of Afghanistan, when one of their Humvees was hit with a roadside bomb. Brown and her team were now stuck in the kill zone.

With small arms fire and mortar rounds raining down, Brown grabbed her medic bag and sprinted for the disabled vehicle. Five of Brown's fellow soldiers were strewn across the road near the Humvee, which was now engulfed in flames.

Rounds started to cook off inside the truck, forcing Brown to move the soldiers, if she had any intention of treating them. One-by-one, Brown pulled the troops to safety about 500 meters away from their burning Humvee, all the while using her own body to shield them from errant rounds and shrapnel from the falling mortars.

Thanks to her decisive action, Brown saved the lives of all five soldiers, who were quickly medivaced from the location. For her courageous and selfless acts under fire, Brown was awarded the Silver Star by Vice President Dick Cheney in March 2008.


(Photos, Top: Then-Army Spc. Monica Lin Brown receives the Silver Star from Vice President Dick Cheney during an awards ceremony in 2008. U.S. Army photo by Pfc. Scott Davis, released. Bottom: Brown draws blood from a boy while nearing the end of her deployment to Afghanistan in 2008. U.S. Army photo by Spc. Micah E. Clare, released.)

Obama outlines plan for Afghanistan; more troops to aide training

A new day is dawning on the war in Afghanistan, as President Barack Obama presented his new strategy to achieve victory in the central conflict to the Global War on Terrorism.

"To the terrorists, our message is the same. We will defeat you." said Obama this morning, as he outlined the Administration's plan during a press conference alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

Obama reiterated that the U.S. military must focus on the top threat to American security: Al Qaeda operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Though the Taliban was swiftly removed from power in 2001, 2008 was the deadliest year for U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan and Al Qaeda's operations remain fully operational across the region. To view an excerpt from the speech, check out CNN's video from the press conference, which we have included here:


The President outlined that the current U.S. policy is not to control the government of Afghanistan, but, rather to "disrupt, dismantle, and defeat" Al Qaeda, which operates with impunity in the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan. He went on to say that U.S. intelligence indicates that Al Qaeda is planning additional attacks on the United States, and Al Qaeda forces are chiefly responsible for most of the world's deadliest terrorist attacks over the last eight years.

Obama officially announced an additional increase of more than 4,000 American troops for the region, asked Congress to approve increased aide to allies in Pakistan, and tasked the Pentagon to focus its resources on the conflict. Obama also appointed Ambassador Richard Holbrooke as special envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan to ensure that each nation's government is included in the process to dismantle Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Obama also called on the international community to provide grassroots support to the people of Afghanistan to ensure that the Taliban and their promises or prosperity do not take root within the traditionally tribal culture.

Obama's tough stance on Afghanistan is a welcome announcement to veterans' community, which has clamored for a viable victory strategy on Afghanistan. Though the conflict in Iraq has turned a corner, the United States must not lose focus on a brutal, reconsolidated enemy that continues to threaten our way of life.

In the coming months, check back regularly with American Veteran for continued coverage of our mission in Afghanistan.

To view the Obama Administration's white paper on the situations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Click Here.

(Media: Photo: Army Sgt. Robert Newman watches the sun rise while on patrol in Afghanistan in 2009. U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Adam Mancini, released. Video: Embedded video courtesy of CNN.com, used with permission.)

Pentagon to End Stop Loss

This afternoon, the Associated Press reported that defense officials will curb implementation of the controversial Stop Loss policy this summer. AP also reported that troops held past their ETS dates will be entitled to an additional $500 per month for the duration of their extended service. The new benefit, called Stop Loss Special Pay, will be retroactive for members of the military held beyond their ETS after Oct. 1, 2008.

Stop Loss is the oft-criticized military policy to hold mission-critical troops beyond their contract or retirement dates. Stop-loss is often referred to as a "backdoor draft" which is responsible for forcing thousands of troops to continue serving in the military long beyond their prescribed time in service. (It was also the subject of the controversial 2008 MTV Film "Stop Loss.")

According to a Department of Defense press release, the Army Reserve and National Guard will deploy their first Stop Loss-free units in August 2009. The active component will follow in January 2010.

Personally, I couldn't be happier to see DoD give Stop Loss the axe. During my time in the Army Reserve, I saw the ways in which the policy affected the morale of troops, both in the field and in garrison. Once Stop Loss in enacted, the sense of hopelessness can permeate well beyond the affected soldier. Their battle buddies feel the same loss of purpose and motivation when faced with a suddenly open-ended military obligation.

When my unit returned from Iraq in 2004, our MOS, civil affairs, was held under Stop Loss. Though the policy did not directly affect me, since I was still under contract, the loss of morale was palpable. Some of my closest friends--friends with ambitions of college, ambitions of a normal family life, ambitions of a civilian life--were suddenly deciding to reenlist!

Naturally, I asked why. After all, they were quite adamant about leaving the military after a rough year in Iraq. They simply told me that they had no other option. The Army was going to hold onto them anyway, so they might as well cash in on the bonus.

In no way do I intend to disparage the service of career military men and women. Nothing is more noble than to dedicate your life to serving your country. But I must ask what might have been for the men and women who epitomized the mantra "Army life is not my style," yet decided to re-up.

The military has repeatedly touted the necessity of the program over the years, saying that it was essential to the mission to retain the best and brightest. I'm happy to see that DoD has changed its tone, despite of continued operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Bill Carr, deputy undersecretary of defense for military personnel policy reiterated my thoughts in his statement on Stop Loss today:

"Stop Loss disrupts the plans of those who have serve their intended obligation. As such, it is employed only when necessary to ensure minimal staffing in deploying units, when needed to ensure safe and effective unit performance. It is more easily rationalized in the early stages of conflict when events are most dynamic; but tempo changes in this war have frustrated our efforts to end it altogether."

If you have stories of your experiences with DoD's Stop Loss policy, let us here about it!

-Ryan

(Photo: In 2007, then-Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno delivered the oath of enlistment to soldiers from 2nd Infantry Division at Joint Security Station East in Iraq. Photo by Staff Sgt. Curt Cashour, released.)

Changing the Rules: Let us know what you think

Last week, the veterans' community received word of a proposal to bill veterans' private insurance companies for health care related to service-connected conditions. AMVETS vehemently opposes this idea. We understand that the costs of health care keep skyrocketing, but that does not preclude the VA from fulfilling its obligations to our veterans.

Service-connected conditions are quite different from the kinds of health care conditions many Americans cope with. Service-connected conditions are injuries and maladies that the VA has acknowledged have a direct link to our time in the military; a time when we each forfeit certain rights and priviledges to defend our fellow countrymen and our way of life. In return for agreeing to go wherever we are asked to go, and do whatever we are asked to do, our government has made a promise to take care of us, should something happen in the line of duty. Now the government wants to pass this burden onto our private insurance companies.

I understand if the VA wants to treat normal patient triage as any private hospital would by billing third-party insurers for routine visits, but it is the VA's obligation to ensure that service-connected conditions are treated at no cost to the veteran.

Proponents of third-party billing may believe that this will simply help the VA save some much-needed cash in a turbulent economic time, since many veterans already enjoy adequate third-party coverage. However, this could create dire unintended consequences when insurance companies start to drop veterans from their plans. Under the current scenario, private insurance companies can look the other way when a veteran needs monthly counseling for PTSD or repairs to a prosthesis. But once the bills start rolling in for Blue Cross or United, somebody is going to have to reassess the situation. Veterans will become a greater liability.

The new Administration has proposed a much-needed increase in funding for the VA in FY2010. Unfortunately, third-party billing for service-connected conditions may be a part of their equation. This would be a tremendous disservice to our veterans, and I hope that the White House and Congress will not seriously consider this move. AMVETS is waiting anxiously to see the President's full budget proposal in early April. In the meantime, let us know what you think about the third-party billing proposal by posting your comments below.

-Ryan

(U.S. Navy photo by MC3 Jake Berenguer, released)

Ecstasy to Treat PTSD???

This morning, Military.com reported on a South Carolina psychiatrist exploring the affects of the party drug MDMA, or ecstasy, on PTSD sufferers. After reading the story, I, personally, think there may be some merit to this study. Patients were under the watchful eye of qualified physicians, and the drug seemed to help them properly connect with their emotions. As a veteran of the war in Iraq, and having dealt with this issue first-hand, I realize that confronting suppressed memories and properly connecting with emotions are often the most difficult hurdles in treating combat stress. Why shouldn't the VA give MDMA a look, since its primary function is to enhance emotional response?

Today, most doctors prescribe a barrage of antidepressents and anxiety meds for PTSD sufferers. To me, this seems like the easy way out. I've never been a fan of antidepressents or their side-effects. I find it hard to believe that these drugs would be the only answer. The former Army Ranger quoted in the story said, "I don't want to be part of the Prozac nation. I know some of those people and they don't feel up or down or anything at all."

PTSD has long been an issue for the military, dating back to cases of "shell shock" in WWII. Vietnam Veterans were hung out to dry when they sought to address their mental health issues. It didn't really come to the forefront until this conflict. Unfortunately, the VA still seems to be struggling to adequately treat the condition, as evidenced by recent studies showing a dramatic rise in soldier suicides.

MDMA, like any other pharmaceutical, can have dire consequences if used inappropriately. However, there could be a proper clinical use for the drug after all. I've seen first-hand the kind of effects PTSD can have on troops when they come home. If there's a viable treatment out there, I think the VA should investigate. (Though I guess I can understand their skepticism, in light of last year's Chantix dabacle.)

-Ryan

PS-If you're suffering from combat stress, DO NOT TAKE ECSTASY ON YOUR OWN. The South Carolina study was conducted in a controlled environment and properly sanctioned by the FDA. Ecstasy is still ILLEGAL, and, like any drug, if self-medicate with it, you could DIE. If you're having issues, call the VA. Their 24-hour number is at the bottom of this blog.

(Official DEA photo)