Another way Bush sticks it to the Troops: Field rations letting U.S. troops down

Field rations letting U.S. troops down

By Aamer Madhani
Tribune national correspondent
Published March 25, 2007
NATICK, Mass. -- When Lt. Dave Moore visited infantry units in the remote, rugged mountains of Afghanistan late last year, the Navy medical officer was surprised to hear from many soldiers and Marines that they had lost significant weight.

After conducting more than 150 interviews with medics, officers and troops on the ground, Moore concluded that the portable rations called "Meals, Ready-to-Eat"--long derided by troops, but valued by the Pentagon for their indestructibility--were not doing the job, causing the soldiers to shed pounds that they very much needed.

"The standard Meal, Ready to Eat (MRE) does not provide adequate nutrition for dismounted operations in this type of terrain," said an excerpt of Moore's classified report, which was released by the Marine Corps Center for Lessons Learned. "Many Marines and soldiers lost 20 to 40 pounds of bodyweight during their deployment. At least one soldier was evacuated due to malnutrition and a 60-pound weight loss."

Moore's conclusions have raised concern among military leaders, as well as designers of the field rations at the Natick Soldier Research, Development & Engineering Center outside Boston.

Moore stressed in an interview that the service members he surveyed represented only a small portion of those fighting in Afghanistan--infantry troops deployed to desolate locations where MREs and local cuisine were the only options--but nonetheless he concluded that up to 1,300-calorie MREs were falling short.

A nutrition deficit, he added, could potentially result in fatigue, impaired brain function and lackluster performance.


more at link:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0703250326mar25,1,5984195.story?coll=chi-news-hed

Somehow we could feed the troops in other wars, but now? Nooooo. That would require some pride and attention to detail on the part of some crony...

great, but the chow hall he ate in in Iraq had some of the best food he's ever eaten--he especially loved the omelet bar. I am not kidding.

http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r40_25.pdf

2–2. Nutritional standards for operational and restricted rations
Operational and restricted rations are designed for military personnel in a wide variety of operations, in widely varied
settings, for limited time periods. They provide the entire diet for military personnel during sustained operations. The
NSORs are based on the MDRIs and are designed to support the special nutritional requirements for various actual or
simulated combat situations. Personnel involved in operational ration development will use these standards in the
development, procurement, and evaluation of operational and restricted rations. Table 2-2 prescribes the NSOR.
a. Operational rations include the individual ration (Meal, Ready-to-Eat (MRE)) and group feeding rations (T-ration,
Unitized B ration, and Unitized Group Rations (UGR-A and UGR-H&S (heat and serve)), and are designed to be
nutritionally adequate. Operational ration menus will be designed so the menus, when averaged, meet the NSOR. The
calculated or assayed nutrient content of edible portions of food as offered for consumption will be compared to the
NSOR. Total calories from fat should not exceed 35 percent of calories for these rations.
b. The MRE may be consumed as the sole ration for up to 21 days. After 21 days, other appropriate rations (for
example, the UGR-A, UGR-H&S) will be included in the daily mix of rations. This policy is based on extensive
biochemical evaluations of soldiers consuming MREs for 30 days during field training. No degradation of performance
or nutritional deficit was found before 21 days. When the MRE is the sole ration, units will provide supplements and
enhancements (for example, bread, milk, and fresh fruit) whenever feasible.
c. Some operational rations are designed for special situations. These rations provide for the increased nutritional
requirements imposed by exposure to an extreme environment. This includes the Meal, Cold Weather.
d. The nutritional standards for operational rations do not apply to restricted rations. Restricted rations are nutritionally
incomplete rations used in certain operational scenarios, such as long-range patrol and reconnaissance, when troops
are required to subsist for short periods (up to 10 days) carrying minimal weight. Restricted rations include the Food
Packet, Long-Range Patrol ration. Nutritional standards for restricted rations are outlined in table 2-2.
e. The NSOR do not apply to survival rations. Survival rations include the Food Packet, Survival, General Purpose,
Improved (GP-I) ration; the Food Packet, Survival, Abandon Ship ration; and the Food Packet, Survival, Aircraft/Life
Raft ration. The GP-I contains 1447 calories. The Food Packet, Survival, Abandon Ship ration and the Food Packet,
Survival, Aircraft/Life Raft ration both contain approximately 300 calories, and are strictly short-term survival rations.


_______________________________________________

I wonder how long they were eating the MREs only.

News flash, not everything is Bushes fault. Clinton had eight years to get rid of the MRE's and go back to the much better, Nixon, Johnson and Kennedy era c-rats. :)

This admin might take you at your word and start packaging food made from rats.

Anyway, I get the impression from this article that it's not neccessarily the food itself, but relative quantities, in terms of insufficient calories and protein relative to the amount of effort that these guys are expending. Seems we need to airlift them some steaks.

And how typical for Afghanistan to be the place where we screw up because we can't be bothered to keep enough of a supply chain in place to give the troops good meals. Not enough troops, for too short a time, and without adequate food.

Or maybe Heather Wilson can come emote again, this time in leg irons and on her way to the nearest Federal Penitentiary.

:evilgrin: