Chronic multisymptom illness (CMI) is a serious condition that imposes an enormous burden of suffering on our nation's veterans. Veterans who have CMI often have physical symptoms (such as fatigue, joint and muscle pain, and gastrointestinal symptoms) and cognitive symptoms (such as memory difficulties). For the purposes of this report, the committee defined CMI as the presence of a spectrum of chronic symptoms experienced for 6 months or longer in at least two of six categories-fatigue, mood, and cognition, musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal, respiratory, and neurologic-that may overlap with but are not fully captured by known syndromes (such as CFS, fibromyalgia, and IBS) or other diagnoses. Despite considerable efforts by researchers in the United States and elsewhere, there is no consensus among physicians, researchers, and others as to the cause of CMI. There is a growing belief that no specific causal factor or agent will be identified. Many thousands of Gulf War veterans1 who have CMI live with sometimes debilitating symptoms and seek an effective way to manage their symptoms. Estimates of the numbers of 1991 Gulf War veterans who have CMI range from 175,000 to 250,000 (about 25-35% of the 1991 Gulf War veteran population), and there is evidence that CMI in 1991 Gulf War veterans may not resolve over time. Preliminary data suggest that CMI is occurring in veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as well. In addition to summarizing the available scientific and medical literature regarding the best treatments for chronic multisymptom illness among Gulf War veterans, Gulf War and Health: Volume 9: Treatment for Chronic Multisymptom Illness recommends how best to disseminate this information throughout the VA to improve the care and benefits provided to veterans, recommends additional scientific studies and research initiatives to resolve areas of continuing scientific uncertainty and recommends such legislative or administrative action as the IOM deems appropriate in light of the results of its review.

Many individuals, groups, and federal agencies have a strong interest in finding answers to the numerous and complex questions regarding the health of Gulf War veterans. Various types of research and health measurement are needed to address these diverse issues. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) was asked by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Department of Defense (DoD) to undertake a study to identify important questions concerning the health of Gulf War veterans and then to design a study to answer those questions. The committee determined that it is of fundamental importance to ask how healthy are Gulf War veterans? Are they as healthy as others? What characteristics are associated with differences between the health of Gulf War veterans and the health of others? To address these questions, it will be necessary to measure not only the health status of those who served in the Gulf War, but also to compare Gulf War veterans with other groups. Further, one must continue to follow these groups through time to determine whether the groups differ in the way their health status is changing. As the committee began to develop a design that would address the fundamental questions identified, it realized that such a study could have important implications for understanding not only the health of Gulf War veterans, but also the health of veterans of other conflicts.

This initial volume in an ongoing study of the potential health consequences of service during the Persian Gulf War responds to a request from Congress to determine whether actions taken to evaluate health effects have been appropriate. It reflects the committee's examination of health outcomes and related research efforts, women's health and reproductive health issues, infrastructure and procedures for data collection, health services influences, the role of psychiatric diagnosis, and a review of the activities of boards and coordinating groups, as well as how issues stemming from involvement in the Persian Gulf might be relevant for possible future conflicts. While the committee continues its full-length study of the problem, the recommendations in this volume are for actions it feels should be taken immediately.

In January 1995 the Institute of Medicine released a preliminary report containing initial findings and recommendations on the federal government's response to reports by some veterans and their families that they were suffering from illnesses related to military service in the Persian Gulf War. The committee was asked to review the government's means of collecting and maintaining information for assessing the health consequences of military service and to recommend improvements and epidemiological studies if warranted. This new volume reflects an additional year of study by the committee and the full results of its three-year effort.

The sixth in a series of congressionally mandated reports on Gulf War veterans' health, this volume evaluates the health effects associated with stress. Since the launch of Operation Desert Storm in 1991, there has been growing concern about the physical and psychological health of Gulf War and other veterans. In the late 1990s, Congress responded by asking the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to review and evaluate the scientific and medical literature regarding associations between illness and exposure to toxic agents, environmental or wartime hazards, and preventive medicines or vaccines in members of the armed forces who were exposed to such agents. Deployment to a war zone has a profound impact on the lives of troops and on their family members. There are a plethora of stressors associated with deployment, including constant vigilance against unexpected attack, difficulty distinguishing enemy combatants from civilians, concerns about survival, caring for the badly injured, and witnessing the death of a person. Less traumatic but more pervasive stressors include anxiety about home life, such as loss of a job and income, impacts on relationships, and absence from family. The focus of this report, by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Committee on Gulf War and Health: Physiologic, and Psychosocial Effects of Deployment-Related Stress, is the long-term effects of deployment-related stress. Gulf War and Health: Volume 6. Physiologic, and Psychosocial Effects of Development Related Stress evaluates the scientific literature regarding association between deployment-related stressors and health effects, and provides meaningful recommendations to remedy this problem.

The third in a series of congressionally mandated reports on Gulf War veterans' health, this volume evaluates the long-term, human health effects associated with exposure to selected environmental agents, pollutants, and synthetic chemical compounds believed to have been present during the Gulf War. The committee specifically evaluated the literature on hydrogen sulfide, combustion products, hydrazine and red fuming nitric acid. Both the epidemiologic and toxicologic literature were reviewed.

Congressional hearing on the health problems of Persian Gulf war veterans. Includes statements by a number of doctors, professors, vets, and others concerned with these problems, such as Committee to Review the Health Consequences of Service during the Persian Gulf War, Institute of Medicine; and Director, Gulf War Research Foundation. Also includes statements submitted by a number of doctors, members of Congress, veterans, and others, such as Disabled American Veterans; International Advocacy for Gulf War Syndrome; Pres. Advisory Committee on Persian Gulf Vets' Illnesses, and Nat. Persian Gulf War Resource Center.

In this provocative look at the US military from the Persian Gulf War through the 2003 invasion of Iraq, investigative journalist Gary Matsumoto contends that an anthrax vaccine dispensed by the Department of Defense was the cause of Gulf War Syndrome and the origins of a massive cover-up. Matsumoto calls it the worst friendly-fire incident in military history. A skillfully-woven narrative that serves as a warning about this man-made epidemic, Vaccine A is a much needed account of just what went wrong, and why.