Augmented Soldiers

Abstract

Augmented soldiers consist of soldiers who go through a handful or a myriad of physical and cognitive enhancement procedures, achieving supernatural performance levels on the battlefield. The biomedical technologies employed in military human enhancement encompass a multitude of reversible and permanent augmentations, namely performance enhancing drugs (PEDs), gene editing and gene therapy, implants, 3D bioprinted organs, exoskeletons, and advanced prosthetics. Such technologies do offer massive advantages in tactical military operations, but could place soldiers and civilians under serious health and ethical threats. The goal of this paper is to review the different human military enhancement technologies available and under development, as well as to address the complementary ethical issues. Different principles are suggested and evaluated, with a proposed approach to enhancement that could maximize the benefits of super-soldier programs.

Introduction

The definition of Augmented Soldiers – sometimes referred to as “super-soldiers”, can be simplified as the concept of enhancing a soldier’s physical and/or cognitive performances. This notion is a specific application of Human Enhancement – depicted by Transhumanism, despite the two factors being unrelated. Transhumanism, in a nutshell, is a philosophical, cultural, and intellectual yet vague movement that supports the use of science and technology to provide humans with the possibility and choice of transcending beyond their biological limitations, in order to improve the human condition [1]. The concept of Augmented Soldiers borrows the Transhumanists’ approaches to Human Enhancement and applies them specifically to soldiers. These include anything from performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) [2, 3, 4, 5], passing through genetic manipulations [3, 6, 7] and implants [2, 3, 4, 8], all the way to artificial organs [9] and even advanced prosthetics [2, 3, 10], all of which will be well elaborated in this paper. Yet, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish an enhancement from a medical intervention, the former intended to “upgrade” human beings beyond “normal ”, while the latter aimed to restore (i.e., “fix”) humans back to “normal” [2, 11]. In fact, the definition of “normal” can be tricky, especially when considering the disparities among humans that can be narrowed down all the way to the individual level. Therefore, for the sake of this paper, enhancement will encompass technologies and biomedical interventions that span beyond what is required to achieve, sustain, and/or restore health in general, which modify humans either temporarily or permanently [2, 11]. Despite what might be discussed and portrayed on social media lately, military human enhancement to a certain extent is nothing new. Besides special mental and physical training programs, specific nutrition, and tactical gear, different enhancement attempts were performed well before the 20th and 21st centuries. To begin with, the 1775-1783 American Revolutionary War saw the use of vaccination as a tool for enhancing soldiers’ immune system, mostly against smallpox, after alleged use of the virus as a bioweapon by the British [2, 10]. Other forms of enhancement include the use of caffeine, alcohol, cannabis, and even blood doping [2, 3, 4]. But most specifically, military human enhancement was massively experimented in the events of World War 2 (WWII) [2, 3, 4, 6, 11]. In fact, the Nazis were not the only ones who conducted terrific human experiments during WWII; other sides took part as well. Actually, it was claimed that Soviet Russia had a super-soldier program, testing gold brain implants to limit pain, titanium bone implants to improve protection, and even cross-breeding humans and apes to produce strong but less intelligent troops [2, 3]. In addition, Amphetamine was largely used during and after this period by all of the American, British, and German armies, among others [2, 4, 10, 11]. In fact, the US Air Force used Dexedrine to enhance aviators’ alertness and performance in the 1980s, while Pervitin was also taken by Nazi troops in WWII (1937) and US military forces during the Vietnam War – the “first pharmacological war”, as well as in other US operations in the Middle East [2, 3, 11]. This Methamphetamine-based substance provided soldiers with high endurance and sleep resistance, acting as a serious early initiator of augmented soldiers. However, despite the disruption caused by these forms of enhancement, none of them is actually considered radical, which explains the recent hype as well as the major ethical concerns associated with the latest trends in human enhancement technologies. Accordingly, the purpose of this paper is first to summarize the groundbreaking military enhancement techniques, addressing the benefits they bring to the table as well as the limitations of each. Then, an ethical assessment will be performed, with the goal of raising some big questions then trying to tackle them. Finally, an appropriate approach to the concept of military human enhancement will be suggested.

Summary of Enhancement Technologies

It is already highly evident that the latest advancements in science and technology drove humanity forward with an unparalleled speed hitherto, reaching extraordinary levels of breakthroughs in disciplines that were forever categorized under the science-fiction label. Alas, state-of-the-art technology always finds its way to become weaponized. Consequently, what used to be within the comics realm has become under concrete development; the next “Iron Man” or “Captain America” is around the corner [3, 10]. Different augmentation techniques have been exploited by military establishments around the world, mostly theoretically, but sometimes practically too. These enhancement methods can be clustered in diverse classifications, reversible or permanent, external or internal, physical or cognitive, and whatnot [2, 3, 4]. From a holistic perspective, these technologies become hazardous on the soldiers who employ them, as well as the people surrounding them, the more they become irreversible (i.e., permanent). To start with, exoskeletons can be considered the most reversible augmentation technologies [2, 10]. An exoskeleton consists of a suit that soldiers can wear to perform better physical activities [6, 9, 11]. It provides better strength for lifting heavy weight lifting [2, 3, 10], reduces energy losses related to walking or running [2, 6], and can serve as a shield, protecting the soldier from different types of physical damages [3, 6]. Such augmentation is favorable for being incredibly powerful in the battlefield despite its detachable nature, improving the strength, speed, and endurance of the soldier. The integration of electronics to these suits would also allow higher levels of human-machine interaction, providing the possibility of maneuvering drones and weaponized vehicles with ease [3, 6]. While these devices can serve great benefits for the elderly and disabled, many countries such as China, France, Japan, Russia, and the US are instead investing in the technology for military applications, envisioning fast deployment soon, with many prototypes already being openly developed [3]. Other electromechanical technologies exist as well to provide tactical support, versatility, and sensory augmentation; these are advanced prosthetics. Normally, limb prostheses are used as replacements for lost arms or feet. However, when it comes to human augmentation, the purpose of prosthetic devices can differ, exceeding the mere replacement role. Despite some of them being invasive, such as prosthetic eyes, this form of enhancement remains somewhat under the category of reversible augmentation. Military advanced prosthetics aim to not only replace body parts, but also augment them, providing soldiers with enhanced physiological capabilities, such as better vision (IR or telescopic), better sensory feedback, weapon control – as a result of myoelectric prosthetics and brain-machine interfaces (BMI) – as well as fire power and protection [2]. In a far-fetched scenario, the extensive use of artificial components on the human body can create cyborgs, which can be less prone to diseases and injuries – a favorable scenario on the battlefield. Delving into the nanoscale, progress in electronics and nanotechnology is paving the way for military-grade implants, capable of augmenting soldiers beyond what is achievable with the aforementioned technologies. The Soviets’ implantation experiments failed to succeed due to the inflammation triggered by the introduction of foreign metals into the organism [3]. Though, the recent progress in biomaterials and nanofabrication is promising a bright future for medical implants. In fact, different biocompatible grafts and implants are currently being evaluated pre-clinically, with many stepping forward into clinical trials. While use cases remain limited to medical applications for the time being, the technology can act as a solid ground for military purposes. Such implants consist of both actuators and sensors, and could thus give soldiers a better control over their bodies. BMI via brain implants would allow soldiers to better communicate among each other on the battlefield and with the command center, creating a sense of beehive mentality or digital telepathy; and this is not science-fiction anymore. In fact, several pre-clinical experiments are already being conducted on brain chips, with scientists and engineers in USA, Russia, and most probably other countries succeeding to initiate telepathic communication between rats [3], while other private companies are also investigating the use of chips to collect and input brain signals in animals, testing the possibility of mind control or even direct access to the Internet – which enables better data storage and processing. This can raise several ethical issues related to privacy protection, autonomy, and what have you, which will be further detailed in a separate section. Implants can also take organic forms, with organ replacement becoming possible with 3D bioprinting advancements. In brief, 3D bioprinting allows printing organs and tissues from organic materials. In fact, the soldiers are the army’s most valuable asset, and a soldier with an organ failure loses his or her military value. The rise and progress of 3D bioprinting offers a cheap, quick, and fully functional replacement for any bodily defect caused by either natural or military accidents [9]. After the first patent in 2006, different versions of this technology were developed, optimizing speed and efficiency. Printing hearts, ears, eyes, or even muscles can restore the wellbeing of injured soldiers, not once, but multiple times. This technology can also help maintaining military veterans’ bodies, especially those affected by hearing impairment or muscle degradation, due to battles fought or even aging [9]. The versatility of this tool comes from lower rates of implant rejection (normally encountered with xenotransplantation) and portability (the bioprinter can be deployed on the battlefield). Yet, the greater scale of augmentation is linked to offering soldiers organ replacements with better functionalities. For example, soldiers’ hearts can be swapped with “athlete hearts” – which tend to be 20% to 40% larger in size [9]. The greater volume entails higher blood flow rates; thus, faster and denser oxygenation of muscles and vital organs, improving the soldiers’ stamina and general performance. Less invasive yet with greater instances of irreversible long-term effects, performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) include all substances, drugs, and supplements that can enhance a human’s cognitive or physical functions beyond regular levels. These encompass aforementioned stimulants such as caffeine and amphetamines, but also incorporate other biochemicals and pharmaceuticals that can lead to stronger degrees of augmentations. The goal is to provide soldiers with better strength, resilience, attention, memory, and focus. Modafinil – brand name “Provigil ” – is a cognitive enhancing drug capable of drastically enhancing awareness, planning, alertness, pattern recognition, and can also decrease the hours of sleep required for efficient energy levels [2, 4, 5, 10]. This drug caught the attention of many armed forces (e.g., UK, Canada, USA, France), which have been investing millions of dollars on such advanced stimulants [2]. Specifically, the US Air Forces were early adopters of this stimulant for their anti-narcolepsy properties [2, 10]. Other forms of enhancing drugs have also been thought of, in the aim of bypassing physiological limitations, with anabolic steroids – synthetic derivatives of testosterone – being the most pleasing for their ability to enhance muscle building and strength [4, 5]. In fact, different anonymous surveys showed that some US Army personnel have been using steroids illegally without medical prescription [4, 5]. Although there exist a few studies showing the potential increase in strength (up to 20%) induced by steroid injections, and besides the visible physiological changes resulting from them, far less research has been devoted to the dosage, safety, efficacy, and long-term side effects related to using steroids as PEDs for females and males [4, 5, 11]. Of course, any slight increase in muscle strength is deemed very favorable, offering advantage over enemy troops. Recent studies actually revealed that testosterone combined with prior effective training can improve and maintain strength for long durations, in situations where military training might not be possible [5]. Nonetheless, many drawbacks and limitations are linked to reckless intake, which can inflict damage to the soldiers instead of benefiting them. Delving into the literature, studies show various negative side effects linked to steroids. These include uncontrolled aggression, irritability, sexual alterations, psychosis, depression, in addition to other cardiovascular and liver problems, most of which are irreversible [4, 5]. However, many limitations arise, since first, the studies are lab-based and therefore do not mimic effectively real-world conditions, and second, drug-drug interactions as well as dosages can limit the repeatability of the results. One might suggest at this point individual-based assessment and dosing, but just like personalized medicine in general, such approach has a low cost-to-benefit ratio. PEDs are linked to other ethical limitations, especially since not only gender disparity, competitiveness, and peer pressure play a significant role in the decision-making process of PED intake, but the concerns can also go as far as whether it is the soldier or commander who decides. These questions among others will be tackled in a dedicated section. The most powerful and promising technology is arguably gene therapy and genetic modification. In lay terms, gene editing allows the modification of DNA via insertion, deletion, or alteration of its building blocks. The most reliable technology so far is Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR). Coupled to an associated endonuclease and a guide RNA, CRISPR-Cas permits to alter the genetic code at will. CRISPR opens the door for both somatic (non-hereditary) and germline (hereditary) genome editing, both of which are highly irreversible, and might cause huge problems in case of a faulty manipulation, especially that the entire human genome is far from being fully understood. Even so, the technology has already been evaluated in multiple instances, mostly in USA and China [3]. Multiple breakthroughs are being scored on a daily basis, with sophisticated manipulation down till a single nucleotide resolution. This technology is promising for military purposes for several reasons. First, it could equip soldiers with immunity against Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) weapons [6, 7]. In reality, this can be possible by drafting genes from bacteria into human DNA enabling the overexpression of Butyrylcholinesterase, an enzyme with excellent decontamination capabilities against nerve agents, organophosphate compounds as well as other toxic chemicals [6]. This tool was already implemented in mice and acceptable results were observed [7]. Besides, gene editing allows for improving soldiers’ cognitive and physical performances, by targeting genes responsible for strength, height, intelligence, immunity, and so forth [3, 7]. At this pace, it will be possible in the near future to engineer super-soldiers destined to dominate the harshest battlefields. Certainly, gene therapy and manipulation raise several ethical concerns, which will be treated in the following section. Still, the possibility of engineering soldiers from birth under the concept of “Designer Babies” poses even more extreme ethical and moral controversies, reminiscing the notorious notion of Eugenics.

Ethical Aspects

The biomedical field is subject to a myriad of laws and regulations due to the controversial ethical considerations associated with the direct consequences on humans’ fundamental rights. While the distinction between therapy and enhancement is still vague, many international (e.g., EU Charter of Fundamental Rights) and local laws (e.g., French Civil Code) forbid beyond regulation any forms of radical human enhancement, with lots of control over technologies that can interfere with human dignity, rights, and physiology. This comes as tragic news for Transhumanists who keep struggling in convincing the public that the concrete global benefits of human enhancement can exceed many abstract ethical and religious concerns. Yet, again, the military realm is separate from the civilian one. As highlighted earlier, the use of steroids and stimulants has been permitted for military usage whereas it is still forbidden for students or athletes. In fact, the Belmont Report was put to suggest the ethical principles and guidelines that should solely motivate biomedical research involving human subjects, with “Respect for persons”, “Beneficence”, and “Justice” being the three basic adopted standards [11]. In that case, aside from what is forbidden, civilians have the right to choose and have consent before participating in any biomedical research – which’s goal ought to be only the welfare of the subjects. However, armies around the world adopt distinct core values – selflessness and obeying orders, to name a few – in such that individual ethics can sometimes be overridden for the sake of the unit or the country’s wellbeing [11]. Nevertheless, many ethical doubts revolve around the military adoption of augmentation strategies, some of which are still unanswered. To start with, are augmented soldiers regarded as weapons? Just like Autonomous Lethal Weapons, the ethical community does not have clear and definitive response to this question, in terms of classification and regulations. Though, in the case of augmented soldiers, the soldiers themselves cannot be distinguished anymore from their weapons; and therefore, the problem becomes even harder to address. If so, will super-soldiers become subject to regulations under the Geneva Conventions, the Laws of Armed Conflict, the Nuremberg Code, or possibly the Declaration of Helsinki? [6, 9, 10] Or maybe augmented soldiers would be considered as CBRNs – which they are essentially intended to endure – and hence be subject to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention [6]? As long as the definition of super-soldiers by itself is still ambiguous and the technologies adopted are very flexible, it is challenging to define which laws and regulations need to be considered when addressing the ethical issues of augmented soldiers, how these soldiers will impact the International Humanitarian Law [2, 10], or whether new set of codes need to be established. Even if such enhancements become legalized, other concerns remain existent. Would soldiers decide on whether they get enhanced or not? In the military space, voluntary consent is not always applicable, which adds to the segregation between civilian and military ethics [10]. In this case, it is unclear whether a soldier will be able to abstain from undergoing genetic manipulation or taking certain PEDs when ordered to do so. To better deal with this query, three ethical principles are indicated in military ethics of enhancement: proportionality, paternalism, and fairness [11]. The proportionality principle obligates the commander to impose an augmentation-linked risk on his forces only when no other alternative with lower risk is possible to accomplish a mission – which has to have a legitimate objective. This principle integrates two norms within it: First, “the greater the risk, the higher the level of command”. In other words, the level of order for decision-making must be proportional to the risk imposed on fighters involved. Second, commanders must be accountable for their decisions when enforcing risks due to enhancement. The paternalism principle reinforces the first principle by insisting on the necessity of making commanders the sole responsible for the wellbeing of their squad. Finally, the fairness principle is comparable to Justice in civilian bioethics. It forbids discrimination when risks are involved, refrains commanders from imposing risks on weaker soldiers, and bans the use of biomedical threats as punishments [11]. Nonetheless, these principles pose additional ethical question marks. In reality, military personnel are ordered, not asked for their opinions. Accordingly, if a General deems a certain form of enhancement valid, will individual soldiers be able to refuse undergoing augmentation? If so, what about the unknown side effects? And would punishment be actually prevented in such cases? In effect, the three military bioethical laws do not plainly explain whether super-soldier can be better rewarded compared to regular soldiers [11]. In addition, they do not clearly tell whether augmented and non-augmented soldiers will be able to operate flawlessly together and treated equally, ceteris paribus [6, 10]. A typical example can be the gender disparities involved when imposing anabolic steroids on both male and female personnel [5]. Additional factors come in to play, especially with the inherent long-term effects linked to rather permanent enhancements. In the case of reversible enhancements, the outcomes are temporary, mainly limited to the operation. Thus, no long-term effects are carried on after the task is performed. These forms of augmentation are arguably considered as more favorable for being “more ethical” in a sense [6]. On the other hand, how to deal with the long-term effects of non-reversible augmentation is still a matter of skepticism. Can permanent risks be quantified? And what are the safety implications on the soldiers and their ecosystem? Typically, after service, a soldier becomes a civilian again. However, how can an augmented soldier integrate back into a society where human enhancement is forbidden? Such issue is heavily researched with no definite solutions offered yet [6, 10, 11]. War “super-veterans” may have to stay forever in the army to avoid physical and cognitive supremacy over other civilians, and perhaps may even be obliged to disconnect from the civilian space eternally, once augmented. The disparity between super-soldiers and civilians will not be further tackled in this paper, for it is a dense topic of its own. As highlighted, competitiveness may arise among augmented and non-augmented soldiers, as well as among super-soldiers and civilians. However, the introduction of augmented soldiers by a country can trigger mass conflicts on the diplomatic level. Once a country deploys augmented soldiers in the battlefield, what will be the response of others [9]? Will augmentation technologies be prohibited for certain countries, just as nuclear weapons? It is unlikely that this will be the case because most of the technologies involved can be engineered in labs, which can be done discreetly (if not the case). A bigger problem hence arises if dictatorships implement such technologies. One cannot really predict the future because technology is not deterministic [8]. However, it is dubious that a unit of the Korean People's Army would be worried about any of the aforementioned ethical issues. Even worse, if the super-soldier recipe falls in the hands of a terrorist group, a “super-terrorist” would be the greatest nightmare of all [3] – which might be a good reason for sovereign countries to seriously consider the potential threat of uncontrolled augmentation. Moreover, enhancement technologies may make the soldiers vulnerable to hacking and biohacking attempts, either directly by hacking the soldier, or indirectly by accessing the military’s classified blueprints, which pose yet another burden [8, 9]. Furthermore, moral and philosophical suspicions stem from military augmentation. Although military ethics are rather separated from international civilian conventions, some loopholes still exist. Indeed, the Geneva and Hague Conventions ban the intentional torture of enemy forces; however, super-soldiers would be able to resist suffering to higher extents [10]. Therefore, is it ethical to torment a soldier with traditional techniques if the latter can withstand them? What about augmented animals? No clear resolution is available so far. Another moral issue is the change of behavior related to PEDs. It is proven that steroids, for instance, have irreversible effects on behavior and decision-making, leading to aggression and even depression [5]. Is it morally justifiable to conduct such enhancements over humans? What about genetic modifications? These enhancements are judged as inappropriate by many religious and moral groups, who consider human enhancement as “playing God”, interfering with the human nature [9]. This could largely slow down the implementation of super-soldier programs in countries where Religion and Morality are highly valued.

Suggested Approach

Indeed, humans forever thought of augmentation. Early humans crafted sophisticated tools that help in manipulating nature, created complex writing systems to ease the effort of memory, and designed lethal weapons to protect their tribes. Hitherto, human progress never slowed down; on the contrary, it is moving forward at unprecedented speed and does not seem to cease. The pursuit of enhancement is therefore inherent and inevitable. Yet history is full of advancements that caused tremendous damage to the planet as a whole, and today, despite living in relatively the most peaceful era historically, humans possess the power to destroy Earth multiple times [8]. Truly, military advantage is necessary in war, and fairness on the battlefield is undesirable, which as seen can be problematic [4]. Thus, different approaches have been suggested regarding military augmentation, such as Colonel Russo’s four-part criteria regarding cognitive enhancing drugs: voluntary consent, ensured safety, appropriate dosage, and reliable research [4]. Yet, military human enhancement does not consist of a mere Arms Race. Used properly, it can be valuable for several applications, enhancing efficiency and accuracy. In reality, super-soldiers can be of great benefit in Search & Rescue operations, Anti-Terrorism interventions, as well as space exploration. This can confine the use cases to high-privilege missions only [10]. In this paper, the author suggests an additional approach to military enhancement. In reality, the existential threats linked to military augmentation are not to be exaggerated. The high capital investments and maintenance required for such technologies can limit implementation in situations where the cost-to-benefit ratio is low. In addition, the tangible effect of dangerous technologies is sometimes largely misinterpreted. Developing weapons of mass destruction (WMD) forced countries to become more peaceful, contrarily to mass beliefs [8]. After the two atomic bombings on Japan in WWII, the risk of a nuclear war dropped with time. The 2022 Ukrainian-Russian conflict proved that WMD are but tools to threaten and not employ, because the outcomes will be the total extinction of the human race. Accordingly, augmented soldiers’ effects would be similar to WMD, carefully and rarely used, and probably limited to the three use cases aforementioned. Nevertheless, random enhancement can generate chaos, and thus, some prerequisites are needed. These prerequisites consist of a systematic approach to enhancement, beginning first with a cognitive and mental enhancement of all humans, equipping humanity with bias-proof levels of awareness, cognition, and decision-making, so that further enhancement steps would be better calculated, or perhaps not needed anymore. A sophisticated sense of judgement and analysis would reduce the need for aggressive military interventions, and hopefully set an upper limit for augmentation.

Conclusion

In summary, the idea of augmented soldiers consists of using different human enhancement technologies to upgrade soldiers both physically and mentally. Although super-soldiers can provide many benefits to a country’s arsenal, many technological, biomedical, and ethical limitations restrict the fast adoption of such programs. A systematic approach starting with mass cognitive enhancement accompanied with macro assessment of the associated outcomes could offer a better methodology to the execution of super-soldier programs.

References

1. Transhumanism. Humanity+. Retrieved from https://www.humanityplus.org/transhumanism/
2. Jessup, T. (2021). 'Avengers, [lawfully] assemble!' – military human enhancement and the disruption of fundamental principles of international humanitarian law. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3847474
3. Niruthan, N. (2018, August 26). Beyond human: Rise of the super-soldiers – A Primer. Small Wars Journal. Retrieved from https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/beyond-human-rise-super-soldiers-primer
4. Fish, L. & Scharre, P. (2018, November 7). Human Performance Enhancement. CNAS. Retrieved from https://www.cnas.org/publications/reports/human-performance-enhancement-1
5. Peltier C. & Pettijohn K. (2018). The Future of Steroids for Performance Enhancement in the U.S. Military. Military Medicine, Volume 183, Issue 7-8, July-August 2018, Pages 151–153. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usy093
6. Heslop, D.J. (2019). Beyond traditional CBRN force protection – a future of CBRN hardened super-soldiers?. Global Biosecurity, 1(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.31646/gbio.3
7. Schwartz P. H. (2020). Ethics of Gene Therapy in the Military: Promise and Potential Problems. Molecular therapy: the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy, 28(4), 987–988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymthe.2020.03.008
8. Harari, Y. N. (2018). Homo Deus: A brief history of Tomorrow. Harper.
9. Campobasso T. (2015, August 12). Super Soldiers: 3d Bioprinting and The Future Fighter. Small Wars Journal. Retrieved from https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/super-soldiers-3d-bioprinting-and-the-future-fighter
10. Lin P. (2012, February 16). More Than Human? The Ethics of Biologically Enhancing Soldiers. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/02/more-than-human-the-ethics-of-biologically-enhancing-soldiers/253217/
11. Mehlman M. (2019). Bioethics of military performance enhancement. Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps, 165(4), 226–231. https://doi.org/10.1136/jramc-2018-001130