Foreword
War, which has been a bane to man since his earliest days, has always beencharacterized by the presence of those who attempt to devise more and moreeffective ways to maim and destroy the enemy, of others who strive to developthe means to protect their comrades from the implements of the foe, and of stillothers on both sides who devote themselves to improving techniques for the careand repair of the unfortunates who are the casualties of war. These three facetsof war are interdependent, and one group cannot achieve the best results withoutthe advice and assistance of the others. The thread which binds and correlatestheir activities is the science and application of the principles of woundballistics.
Field Service Regulations, 100-5, Operations, provides that coordinatedaction of all arms and services is essential to success. It is to suchcoordinated action that accomplishments within the U.S. Army in the field ofwound ballistics owe their success. The volume relates the part played by theArmy Medical Service in this mutual endeavor during World War II and, in brieferfashion, during the Korean War.
In the development of personnel armor, the approach of the Army MedicalService is very similar to its approach to a disease entity. Primarily, the ArmyMedical Service is interested in the treatment and recovery of the casualty andin his speedy return to the fighting force. It is also interested in and vitallyconcerned with any methods which can reduce the severity of the wound or anydevices which can bring about complete defeat of a wounding agent. When, as inKorea, the mortality rate of the wounded reaching medical treatment facilitieswas reduced to approximately 2.3 percent, these secondary interests loom large.Capitalizing on the experiences of World War II and the early experiences of theKorean War, the Army in 1951-52 introduced body armor with most significantresults. There was a decrease in the number of wounded and the killed in action.There was a decrease in the severity of wounds, which in turn resulted in morerapid and early convalescence and, because of the lightened workload, permittedsurgical units to provide better care to those requiring it. While these resultswere gratifying, they most definitely indicated the need for continuing researchand development to provide adequate ballistic protection for the head and thoseregions of the body which received the largest number of lethal wounds.
The message which this volume contains for the physician who will be treatingthe wounds of war is clear. War wounds, in many respects, are different fromthose found in peacetime civilian practice. Unless the physician has someknowledge of the weapons and missiles which are creating the wounds and of thewound track characteristic of these causative agents, his clinical
decision as to the treatment necessary is perforceshortsighted, and unwarranted errors may result. Examples of errors of this typeare fully discussed in this and other volumes of the World War II history of theMedical Department, but the basic data contained in this volume, if they arestudied and the lessons learned, should go a long way in dispelling theignorance which leads to such errors.
Finally, the Army Medical Service expresses its deepestgratitude to the contributors to this volume and to all individuals, bothcivilian and military, whose zeal and patriotism made possible, often undertrying circumstances and without precedent, the collection and preparation ofthe original data upon which this work is based. My appreciation is extended toMaj. James C. Beyer, MC, for so admirably accomplishing the arduous and majortask of compiling and editing this volume. His keen interest in this specialfield of military medicine and his exemplary work and experience in Korea and atthe Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, D.C., made him the idealindividual to undertake this project.
LEONARD D. HEATON,
Lieutenant General,
The Surgeon General.
