Slashdot Mirror
DARPA Offers No Food for Thought
frank249 writes "Wired News has an article outlining the US Defense Advanced Research Projects agency's (DARPA) research into ways to keep soldiers fighting for up to 5 days without food. The DARPA project, called 'Metabolic Dominance' or 'peak soldier performance' is part of a wider, future-facing Pentagon research push to develop grunts who are pretty much immune to normal human demands. Perhaps they should call this the Universal Soldier project?"
Offtopic like hell, but now I really want to play that game.
"SCV good to go, Sir!"
I read the jokes about Universal Soldier, super soldiers etc etc...but once we start down that path, how far are we from genetically engineered soldiers?
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
Putting aside any military/war/ethics concerns, there are several interesting civilian benefits that jump out from the article:
* "But [burning fat] for extended periods can produce toxins and can dial down the amount of energy the brain receives. Darpa wants to see if there are ways to burn fats without the side effects."
There's a mega-million-dollar industry in burning off fat, mostly by ingesting snake oil products. Obvious spinoffs here.
* "Mitochondria supplies energy to the cells; the agency would like to see if the powerhouses could be temporarily increased."
Again, weight loss... but beyond that, aren't there metabolism-related illnesses that this would help cure?
* "Increased body heat can boost the production of certain proteins, and these can trigger apoptosis -- programmed cellular death. Darpa wants to find a way to control these proteins..."
Programmed cellular death is the two-edged sword of middle and old age. If it doesn't happen at all, you can get cancer. But if it happens faster than cellular reproduction, you get aging. Any research into this topic will help on both counts.
* "...anaerobic metabolism produces lactic acid -- which is why you feel your biceps burn after lifting dumbbells. Scientists wonder if production of the acid can be slowed or dissipated quicker."
This sort of advance would be snapped up by athletes, but you can also imagine the benefits for others who exert themselves regularly -- from firefighters to construction workers. And exercise is another way to lose weight... though it's laziness, not muscle pain, that keeps *me* from working on my spare tire.
* "And the agency is looking at nutraceuticals, natural products and traditional nutritional supplements to give the body what it requires when there's no food around."
Well, that sounds like the meal-in-a-pill that's been bounced around for a hundred years, from the World's Fair to Willy Wonka. I hear they still have problems with the blueberry dessert.
And speaking of dessert...
* "...$900,000 grant to examine the effects of echinacea and other plants. He believes extracts from the herb can be added to rations -- and that should give soldiers an extra oomph."
Be careful with those herbs... the military wants to eliminate the need for food, but some herbs are known to cause the opposite effect!
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
These guys want to do anything they want without paying repercussions for their actions. Sorry, buds, the universe doesn't quite work that way (until we can figure out AI good enough for the jobs soldiers have to do, i.e. policework, peacemaking etc...) Very often these days, it's the airplanes with the bombs that are the ones who take out the major targets; troops are mainly just to control the ground.
I think it's really sick and sadistic what the gov't is doing to our fighting men and women. They are HUMANS, not machines. Doing this kind of crap to them will royally screw up their everyday lives..
I forsee a situation whereby future soldiers are fubar-ed by all of these shenanigans, much like 'Gulf War Syndrome', and they are turned into drooling wrecks. Lawyers, start your engines now... And while I'm here, imagine a Beowulf clust...
"This is your life, and it's ending one second at a time."
Seriously, if the US had more civil protection training, Iraq would be a safer place.
This isn't a rant against anyone in the US armed forces - they don't get to choose their training, and I'm certain no-one in the US forces would tell them their troops are so poorly trained in those areas.
Spending billions on finding ways to stop soldiers pooing and getting hungry isn't going to stop people suicide-bombing checkpoints next month. Decent training for the job at hand will, however.
You can't solve problems by throwing money at them.
(ps. posting AC as you can never tell how USans react when discussing their armed forces - no offense)
Woe is ye who lose your humanity.
Even more importantly, this could be useful in disaster relief situations, especially where the transportation infrastructure is damaged or there's still a dangerous condition that limits the number or type of vehicles that can get in to the affected area. A helicopter or a HMMWV or an armored vehicle could be used to carry emergency supplies to the victims of a disaster, or to beseiged civilians in a war zone.
I wish there were a law that I would recieve compensation for every dollar I paid into Social Security/Medicare/etc...
We should skip the chemical enhancments and actually train harder. I was in the Marine Corps for over 8 years and the average Marine is in better shape than the average solider/sailor/airman but there's the elite Force Recon/Recon Marines who are already light years better than your average Marine.
How about thinning down the non-combat support types in the military and focusing on training the hell out of what we have left? Longer enlistments, better pay, and you're out if you don't meet physical training standards. Plus skip all of the extra duty billets that take away from your fighting ability/training like recruiting and drill instructor duty
This guy is way out there
I think that even if we did come up with some sort of solution, the range of possible sideffects would be endless.
To quote the article, "What this seems to be asking for is fantastic in every sense of the word," said Marion Nestle, the former chair of NYU's department of nutrition, food studies and public health in an e-mail message. "Calories are calories, laws of thermodynamics still operate, and humans are still human.
Simply put, they are trying to push the body beyond its natural limitations for days on end. Even from an evolutionary point of view (the God factor thus put aside), these biochemical processes have evolved over millions of years to their current state. Now, its true that evolution is a mindless force and that we cannot argue that its end products are most efficient - but we should take into consideration why the efficiency of these processes is as it is.
"Mitochondria supplies energy to the cells; the agency would like to see if the powerhouses could be temporarily increased."
Again, the mitochondrion is a very sophisticated structure. I think it likely that even if we were to "overclock" the mitochondria, eventually the practice would catch up to us in a horrible way. The human body is programmed to run at a very narrow functional range. Taking it out of that range and pushing it beyond its extreme limitations is reckless considering how little knowledge we have about it.
The main problem I see are future side effects. Military scientists aren't of the patient breed - they aren't going to wait 15 or 20 years to see the effects of their little "stimpacks." Once they have what they want (with reasonable success rate) they aren't interested in any further research in the area. Only through civilian research can we safely approach such an issue - and the product has no civilian application.
I just don't think this is worth the risks.
Although DARPA might rejigger people's appetites and metabolism to avoid the need for food, they can't avoid the the physical constraints of conservation of energy. Even if a soldier is just waiting in a fox hole, they need 2000 calories per day of energy. If the fighting is intense (the time when no eating is possible) then they might need more tha 5000 calories per day of energy.
This means a soldiers needs between 10,000 and 25,000 of energy reserves for a 5-day stint. This means that these soldiers wil need 3 to 7 pounds of excess body fat (more if the soldiers is expected to last several rounds of 5-day food deprivation). Without excess body fat, the body will start mateabolizing muscle tissue and that won't be very good for military readiness.
Maybe all those overweight American kids might make good soldiers after all.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Ah, waste perhaps, but perhaps not. With every research initiative, many spin-offs that are semi-related to the original work are created. Who knows what researchers may find as a result of trying to do this kind of research. Many of the great discoveries in science in the past have come from accidents or mistakes in the process of research. Or, sometimes, military research goes directly into the commercial market: GPS, nightvision, etc.
Ssshhh! You're refuting assinine statements with facts, liberals hate it when you do that!
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
It is possible that this research could lead to the development of a drug that controls diabetes and heart disease. Imagine if they found a substance that turned out to be a safe and effective weightloss drug--being overweight is the leading cause of numerous health issues. Americans are fat and it's costing us billions in health care, increased mortality, and lost productivity.
Also, the DoD is currently funding a project at my university to help detect landmines in the soil to protect foot soldiers-- which ultimately will have a major impact on humanitarian work.
Can I bum a sig?
I'm sure a number of you will remember the friendly fire incident in Afghanistan about two years ago. An American pilot dropped a bomb on a live-fire Canadian training exercise. I'm not going to say anything about whether he should've been charged, but the fact is he and his co-pilot were on some kind of uppers. Apparently this is relatively common in the Air Force to keep pilots awake during long night missions. Whether this was a factor in the mistake, I don't know.
But it certainly raises questions. Soliders may be able to go 5 days without food and still operate, but there will always be side effects, subtle or obvious, to messing with human biology. I would NOT trust someone to drive a tank, or man a patriot missle battery, who hadn't eaten, and that applies even more if he's been on drugs for that purpose!
Keep it simple. Spend money on peace-keeper training and foreign-aid, not super-soldiers. As always, just because we can, doesn't mean we should.
No, dogmatic people hate that, and there are plenty of them among liberals, conservatives and any other political group.
While the comparison is far from perfect, Who cares what route the money takes. U.S. Taxpayers pay the bill via Federal, State, or Local Taxes.
According to the quoted source, U.S. tax payers pay roughly similar amounts to educate and to intimidate (killing, actual combat surely costs more).
I've got a safe and effective weight-loss drug; it's called adrenaline. You get it from getting off your lazy ass and exercising!
What a concept.
Americans are fat because they take in far too many calories that they never work off. Very little work done in this country involves manual labor, and yet we consume, as a nation, insane amounts of fast food, loaded with fat, salt, and high-glucose carbohydrates that never...get...used. We always drive places; walking, cycling, and running are 'recreational' activites, not methods of transport. Americans consume something like three times the average amounts of red meat as their European counterparts, and yet I don't see that many people around me who are in training for Olympic power-lifting.
I mean, christ, I mention biking eight miles to the office and people marvel at how I can cover that kind of distance without a car, even though I know seventy-year old diabetics with bowel cancer who bike more than that on a daily basis.
We don't need another drug or fad diet; we need to get people exercising. Something as stupid and simple as an hour's worth of walking on a daily basis would do more for the weight problems of this country than a whole oil-tanker loaded with Ephedra and Dr. Atkins books.
Oh, yeah: Fsck Atkins. Sure, you lose weight -- but it's not a long-term sustainable plan for eating, and it's a diet high in fat and cholesterol. Hell, the only reason why it works at all is because it basically overloads your digestive system -- which is why most Atkins-diet people complain of low energy levels; the Atkins diet is completely incompatible with sustaining any sort of exercise regimen.
--
I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy
What? Federal tax dollars are somehow superior to state and local tax dollars? I didn't realize that my money that I paid to the feds was more important than the money I paid to my state.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
I am mocking you, diablobynight. Hope that helps.
A dangerous habit to have? What are you going to do, have a hissy fit at me? Did I compain about my country? No, I pointed out the false dichotomies and simplistic nature of your world view. If you wish to damn me, then damn me for something I actually said.
Say what? That sounds like the order I'd expect from someone in the South American military of decades back. No, Sir, your unit and the Corps do most certainly not come ahead of your country... that way lies treason and military juntas.
wants to be the first monkey to touch the monolith