effects of a training program for special operations battalion on ...

EFFECTS OF A TRAINING PROGRAM FOR SPECIAL OPERATIONS BATTALION ON SOLDIERS’ FITNESS CHARACTERISTICS GORAN SPORISˇ,1 DRAZEN HARASIN,1 DANIEL BOK,1 DARIO MATIKA,2

AND

DINKO VULETA1

1

Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia; and 2Institute for Research and Development of Defense Systems, Croatian Armed Forces, Zagreb, Croatia

ABSTRACT Sporisˇ, G, Milanovic´, Z, Harasin, D, Trajkovic´, N, and Vuleta, D. Effects of a training program for special operations battalion on soldiers fitness characteristics. J Strength Cond Res 26(10): 2872–2882, 2012—The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of special operations battalion (SOB) training program on soldiers’ fitness parameters. The research was conducted on a sample of 25 members (mean 6 SD: age 27.93 6 5.12 years, height 178.64 6 6.91 cm, body mass 81.42 6 9.18 kg) of the Croatian Armed Forces for SOB, divided into control and experimental groups. Total duration of the SOB basic training was 62 days. The sample of variables consists of 12 tests for the assessment of fitness characteristics, 2 tests for functional capacity, and 18 morphological measures. Morphological parameters were measured according to the instructions of the International Biological Program. Fitness characteristics were measured with the following tests: 1-kg medicine ball throw from a seated position, standing broad jump (SBJ), relative sergeant test, 20-m sprint, the maximum thrust from the bench, push-ups in 2 minutes (PU2minutes), situps in 2 minutes (SU2minutes), pull-ups (PU), thrust from the bench with 70% of body weight (BP70%), crawling and jumping, agility test 93639 with turn (A9-3-6-3-9), and sit and reach. Functional abilities were evaluated with 2 tests: 3,200 m running (SK3200) and 300 yards running (MBI3Y). There was a statistically significant difference in a set of fitness characteristics variables analyzed between the 2 groups in initial and final measurements in the multivariate level. Analyzing the results of t-test, differences of variables, it was evident that the difference after the SOB program occurred in 7 variables in the experimental group: SBJ, PU2minutes, SU2minutes, PU, BP70%, MBI3Y, and SK3200. Basic training for SOB during 8 weeks has produced significant burnout of the body for the

Address correspondence to Goran Sporisˇ, [email protected]. 26(10)/2872–2882 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research Ó 2012 National Strength and Conditioning Association

2872

the

participants who have completed their training. This led to a reduction in fitness performance manifested through the tested variables.

KEY WORDS recruits, conditioning, testing, military, impact INTRODUCTION

M

odern military operations are physically demanding for both the soldiers and their commanders, despite the technological development. Plavina (37) has stated that physical activity is important for soldiers to maintain physical fitness and endurance. Survivability of military personnel is the basis for future military career and the fulfillment of military duties, and daily activities of soldiers are associated with fitness abilities that require a high level of fitness education. Christensen et al. (5) have reported that in the past few years, the military special forces are faced with increasing number of tasks and demands. These tasks can be time-consuming special reconnaissance and support in difficult conditions, infiltration and exfiltration, and food and water logistics. Continuous or constant operational activities are usually carried out by special forces and are one of the specific forms of implementation of special operations. These operations, ranging from a few days to several weeks, happen in a politically sensitive area or at opponents while conducting tasks such as direct action. Aharony et al. (1) concluded that the training of special forces is more demanding than those of elite athletes. It includes strenuous physical activity and periods without sleeping. Soldiers are routinely exposed to efforts such as walking with load that can reach up to 40% of body weight at a distance up to 90 km. Such training generates high levels of stress with the aim of the simulation of combat conditions (27) and candidates are kept physically active for 16–22 hours a day (7,14,46). Chicharro et al. (4) have investigated the 8-week training program for Spanish special forces and have come to the conclusion that such training leads to a state of overtraining and that is why there was a decrease in performance

TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited. Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

the

TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (isometric strength, vertical jump, and Wingate test). In addition, according to Friedl et al. (8), the multiple stressors in a combat environment produce an overall stress burden with consequences similar to those reported in athletic ‘‘overtraining.’’ Burke and Dyer (3) have studied the 8 weeks ranger training and its effects on strength and cardiovascular endurance assessed by a modified Harvard step test, pushups, and pull-ups. The results have shown that the training had produced significant positive changes in the test of aerobic endurance and push-ups and significant negative changes in the test of pull-ups. Shippee et al. (43) stated that during the ranger training program, body weight decreased by 16%, which was reflected in the changes in body composition, reducing the body fat by 10%. The average energy deficit during the 8 weeks of training was 30% and the average amount of sleep was only 4 of 24 hours. Some studies have confirmed that there was no statistically significant difference in reducing the physical performance of specific tasks for soldiers, like a polygon obstacle, uphill running, throwing grenades, shooting, lifting and carrying, and running 1 mile and 300 yards as a consequence of reduced energy intake (10,11,41). Despite that, Montain and Young (33) suggested that performance in individual tests may suggest that diet and malnutrition have no effect. However, this does not mean that daily work productivity will not be without consequences. Because most modern combats take place in an urban area, Vickers and Hodgdon (48) have identified the physical requirements for military operations in urban areas. They concluded that fitness programs for urban operations should focus on muscle strength of upper and lower body and high levels of power in the duration of 0–20 seconds, and stated that an obstacle polygon could be used to develop the required stamina and strength. Pemrick (36) had conducted a study in which he tried to determine how much of each of the components of fitness (aerobic, anaerobic, and muscular endurance; strength; speed; coordination; and flexibility) are involved in physically demanding tasks that will be carried out by the rangers in battle. The results have shown that the ranger regiment has a high standard of fitness abilities and fitness programs that are mainly focused on aerobic endurance. However, such programs do not reflect the need for speed, strength, flexibility, and coordination in a real fight. Bovill et al. (2) stated that special operations forces represent a unique military population and show a behavior similar to that of competitive athletes, especially at the level of fitness training and physical stress. Fitness training for special forces has intensified and contains long runs and sprints, long walking with loads, swimming, climbing and mountaineering, and parachuting. This was confirmed by Harman et al. (12) who have stated that the soldiers are involved in many physically demanding activities on and off the battlefield, such as wearing long heavy backpack on the rugged terrain, and short intense

| www.nsca.com

activities, such as sprints and transitions through various obstacles in rural and urban areas. There are special groups in the army in which physical performance, agility, and speed, among other characteristics, are fundamental. The Special Operations Battalion (SOB) is one of the most elite units of the Croatian Armed Forces, also being one of the best trained and equipped special forces units in the region. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effects of SOB training program on soldiers’ fitness characteristics.

METHODS Experimental Approach to the Problem

The duration of this study was 9 weeks. The training program for the SOB was conducted to determine how well each program physically prepares soldiers for the challenges they would face during military operations. In addition, other physical abilities and morphological parameters were tested to characterize the effects of the training programs. The basic phase (21 days) is designed to test and develop the military skills, physical and mental endurance, stamina, and confidence a soldier must have to successfully accomplish combat missions. The next part was divided into 3 phases, each lasting 7 days: amphibious, mountain, and urban combat phase. The last phase (20 days) was designed to assess the ability of participants in strictly specific and extreme conditions. The students have undergone ;20 hours of training per day, while consuming 2 or fewer meals daily totaling about 2,200 calories (9,200 kJ), with an average of 4 hours of sleep a day. Soldiers are expected to maintain a high degree of physical readiness as operational demands can severely degrade performance capabilities (34). This study examines the physiological consequences of SOB basic training on endurance, strength, agility, power, and body composition. This research is part of the project ‘‘Investigation of Human Resources and Potential’’ implemented by the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Croatia in collaboration with the Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb. Ethics committee of the Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, approved the study. All subjects signed informed consent documents. Subjects

The research was conducted on a sample of 25 members (mean 6 SD: age 27.93 6 5.12 years, height 178.64 6 6.91 cm, body mass 81.42 6 9.18 kg) of the Croatian Armed Forces for SOB, divided into 2 groups. The first group was a control group, comprising those who had not undergone the process of training (n = 13, mean 6 SD: age 31.23 6 4.66 years, height 180.53 6 7.35 cm, body mass 82.88 6 10.82 kg), whereas the experimental group consisted of those examinees who had passed the SOB training process (n = 12, mean 6 SD: age 24.36 6 2.59 years, height 176.60 6 6.05 cm, body mass 79.94 6 7.14 kg). The population from which the sample had been taken was healthy and physically active, with healthy implying that the person had undergone VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 10 | OCTOBER 2012 |

2873


Effects of Training for Special Operations on Soldiers medical examination for military paratroopers ‘‘C’’ category. Being physically active means that those subjects were involved in various sport disciplines or activities, and next to them in this group are the members of special military and police forces (31). The subjects were informed of the purposes and benefits of the study, and all volunteered to participate in the study. All subjects were submitted to health inspection before the testing, and only those with adequate health status and doctor permission were allowed to participate in the study. The participants were allowed to leave the testing protocol if they wanted. The protocol of this study was approved by the ethical committee of the Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, and was according to the revised Declaration of Helsinki. The SOB training program was conducted during summer 2010. The group that underwent the training was to undergo a planned, programmed, and standardized treatment of military training that lasted for 62 days, with strictly controlled conditions of life and work. Strictly controlled conditions relate to complete isolation from the outside world, the same kind of food, the same terms of accommodation, the same amount of sleep, the same geographic-weather conditions (cold, heat, water, rain, wind), and the same amount of the total burden of training. The group that underwent the SOB training was actually in terms of quarantine. The process of this training is very similar to the ranger training conducted by the U.S. Army Ground Forces. The control group attended the basic Croatian army course that consists of 9 weeks of physical and military-specific training. Physical training requirements include aerobic activities such as road marching with weighted packs, obstacle courses, distance running, and sprinting, and also muscle strength training and calisthenic exercises. Military-related activities such as rappelling, weapons training, prolonged standing in formation, and didactic classroom instruction were also required during the course. The control group consisted of members of military forces who carried out the daily tasks of the units and were not related to SOB basic training, which was attended by participants of the experimental groups. Unlike the experimental group, control group was not in strictly controlled conditions. Procedures

The sample of variables consists of 12 tests for the assessment of fitness characteristics, 2 tests for functional capacity, and 18 morphological measures. Morphological parameters were measured according to the instructions of the International Biological Program. All anthropometric variables were measured with a GPM anthropometer (Siber Hegner, Zurich, Switzerland) to the nearest 0.1 cm. Body circumferences were measured using a flexible nonelastic measuring tape to the nearest 0.1 cm. For the measurement of skinfolds, the caliper was used, with accuracy of measurement to 0.1 mm. All morphological characteristics were measured at once, except

2874

the

the skinfolds, which were measured 3 times in a row. Percentage of fat was calculated according to the equation of Siri (44). Measures of the morphological variables were upper arm girth (prone and extended), forearm girth, thigh girth, calf girth, thorax girth, abdominal girth, biceps skinfold, triceps skinfold, subscapular skinfold, abdominal skinfold, suprailiac skinfold, thigh skinfold, calf skinfold, chest skinfold, axillary skinfold, and percentage of body fat. Fitness characteristics were measured with the following tests: 1-kg medicine ball throw from a seated position (MBT), standing broad jump (SBJ), relative sergeant test (RST), 20-m sprint (S20M), the maximum thrust from the bench (BPmax), push-ups in 2 minutes (PU2minutes), sit-ups in 2 minutes (SU2minutes), pull-ups (PU), thrust from the bench with 70% of body weight (BP70%), crawling and jumping (CJ), agility test 93639 with turn (A9-3-6-3-9), and sit and reach (SR). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of the tests used in this investigation were assessed in separate sessions before the commencement of the study. The ICCs of all fitness and functional variables ranged from 0.92 to 0.95, respectively (p , 0.05). Functional abilities were evaluated with 2 tests: 3,200 m running (SK3200), 300 yards running (MBI3Y). Jukic´ et al. (17) have given a detailed description of the measurements of all the morphological, fitness, and functional variables. Many of these variables were used in other studies of military characteristics (12,21,25,45,47). Initial testing for fitness, functional, and morphological characteristics was carried out in 3 days in both groups. Test mechanisms for regulating the intensity of excitation, a mechanism for structuring movement, flexibility tests, and morphological dimensions were measured with 3 particles, and the mean was taken as the true value, which was used in data processing. Tests for the assessment of functional capacity and mechanism for the regulation of excitation were measured with only 1 particle. On the first day, both groups were also tested in the SK3200 test. On the second day, the group that underwent the SOB basic training was tested for the morphological parameters, SBJ, SR, RST, BP70%, and BPmax, whereas the group that did not pass the SOB basic training was tested for the following variables: S20M, A9-3-6-3-9, CJ, MBT, PU2minutes, SU2minutes, PU, and MBI3Y. On the third day, the groups changed the order of the tests they had worked on the previous day. The final test was also carried out in 3 days, except that at the first day of testing, running at 3,200 m was performed in both groups. The control group was tested in all the tests on the second day, whereas the experimental group was tested on the third day. Subjects were instructed not to be involved in strenuous exercise for at least 48 hours before the fitness testing session and consume their normal pretraining diet before the testing session. There was no supplement addition regarding the nutrition of soldiers. None of the subjects were injured 6 months before the initial testing and also during the

TM



the

TM


| www.nsca.com

TABLE 1. Global plan of the special operations battalion basic training. 1. Basic Duration 21 days Goal Assessment of participants’ skills testing their physical and mental endurance. Allows students to make important decisions about joining special forces. Soldiers participate in various activities designed to put them into various forms of physical and psychological stress. Estimated the resources and the quality of participants through observation of behavior during extreme effort, analyzing the performance and recording data. Tasks Tests of fitness abilities, exercise, martial arts, physical and combat drills, first aid in battlefield conditions, land navigation, topography, tactical walking, tactical operations, explosives, communications, shooting, movements, avoiding the opponent, patrol, land and air infiltration. 2. Amphibious Duration 7 days Goal Assessment of the ability of participants in an aqueous environment when carrying out tasks and testing the physical and mental endurance in and on the water. Tasks Swimming, boating, diving, amphibious infiltration, the implementation of tactical tasks in the amphibious environment, combat swimming, navigation on the water. 3. Mountain phase Duration 7 days Goal Assessment of the ability of students in a mountain environment when carrying out tasks and testing the physical and mental stamina in the mountain and rugged area. Tasks Walking with load on rugged terrain, exercises, climbing and mountaineering techniques, overcoming natural obstacles, the infiltration of the mountainous area, stay in the mountains, tactical tasks. 4. Urban combat Duration 7 days Goal Assessment of the ability of participants when carrying out tasks in the urban environment and testing the physical and mental endurance in conditions of close combat firearms in closed facilities. Tasks Martial arts and unarmed combat training against an opponent in the implementation of tasks in an urban environment, tactical tasks, shooting battles, and the fight indoor. 5. Constant operations Duration 20 days Goal Assessment of the ability of participants when carrying out tasks under conditions of continuous conducting of special operations in the opponent’s territory and to test the physical and mental endurance under extreme conditions—wake, hunger, thirst, fatigue, inhospitable climate—a geographical area. Synthesis and situational use of previously acquired skills and knowledge. Tasks Survival, evasion, resistance and escape from the opponent, planning and ongoing implementation of special operations in the form of situational exercises with the assumption of action in the opponent’s depth and the constant need to covert movement to evade capture.

training program. In addition, subjects were not taking exogenous anabolic-androgenic steroids and other drugs that might be expected to affect physical performance or hormonal balance during the study. The total duration of SOB basic training was 62 days. All the participants were in complete isolation from the outside world during the 62 days. They were under strictly controlled conditions: a certain amount of and location for sleep, time for a meal and its content, and continuous supervision of an instructor. All participants underwent a similar treatment of training and living conditions, regardless of age, fitness condition, previous work experience, or any other factors. Participants could live the program and resign at any time. Also, any refusal or failure to perform the tasks that were assigned by the instructor would result in automatic exclusion. The training program was conducted regardless of weather conditions (Table 1).

Statistical Analyses

Data were analyzed using Statistica 7.0 for Windows (2004; StatSoft, Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA). Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (K-S) was used to test if data were normally distributed. The coefficient of reliability for multi-item tests was calculated using the Cronbach’s coefficient alpha and the correlation between the particle measurements was determined. The independent samples t-test was used to determine the differences between the groups in the fitness parameters at the beginning and end of the SOB training program. However, because there was a significant difference in the initial measurement between the 2 groups, to determine the actual difference between the 2 points of measurement, multivariate analysis of variance for repeated measurements and paired t-test were performed. The p , 0.05 criterion was used for establishing the statistical signif icance. VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 10 | OCTOBER 2012 |

2875


Effects of Training for Special Operations on Soldiers

TABLE 2. Basic descriptive parameters of morphological variables. Experimental group Initial testing (mean 6 SD)

Variables Upper arm girth—prone (cm) Upper arm girth—extended (cm) Forearm girth (cm) Thigh girth (cm) Calf girth (cm) Thorax girth (cm) Abdominal girth (cm) Body mass (kg) Triceps skinfolds (mm) Subscapular skinfolds (mm) Chest skinfolds (mm) Abdominal skinfolds (mm) Suprailiac skinfolds (mm) Thigh skinfolds (mm) Calf skinfolds (mm) Axillary skinfolds (mm) % Body fat

34.13 6 37.12 6 29.57 6 61.08 6 39.05 6 101.14 6 85.32 6 81.14 6 9.29 6 14.74 6 7.95 6 18.61 6 9.79 6 13.60 6 7.83 6 8.83 6 11.31 6

2.21 2.53 1.85 3.84 1.83 3.05 3.52 7.42 2.38 4.66 2.86 8.58 3.14 6.25 2.08 3.08 4.12

Control group

Final testing (mean 6 SD) 32.70 35.61 30.33 59.55 38.73 100.69 85.32 79.94 8.29 11.87 6.20 13.58 7.51 12.23 7.11 7.55 9.08

6 1.69 6 2.47 6 2.51 6 3.33 6 1.99 6 4.05 6 3.29 6 7.14 6 1.98 6 1.95 6 1.22 6 4.27 6 1.77 6 4.78 6 2.04 6 1.65 6 2.31

Initial testing (mean 6 SD) 34.13 6 2.32 36.80 6 2.40 29.52 6 1.35 60.07 6 4.59 38.47 6 2.73 102.96 6 7.27 87.75 6 6.68 82.38 6 10.74 8.71 6 1.94 15.25 6 7.79 10.25 6 5.70 18.29 6 9.78 8.89 6 2.77 14.92 6 5.62 8.01 6 2.08 8.80 6 3.13 12.45 6 4.84

Final testing (mean 6 SD) 33.91 34.49 29.91 58.66 39.29 102.46 87.94 82.88 8.58 13.06 8.94 18.19 8.76 13.44 7.40 8.78 11.71

6 2.48 6 6.15 6 1.65 6 6.28 6 2.20 6 6.06 6 7.22 6 10.83 6 1.97 6 4.41 6 3.87 6 10.33 6 2.75 6 4.86 6 2.11 6 2.48 6 4.13

TABLE 3. Basic descriptive parameters of motoric variables.* Experimental group Variables

Initial testing (mean 6 SD)

Final testing (mean 6 SD)

CJ (cm) A9-3-6-3-9 (s) MBT (cm) RST (cm) SBJ (cm) S20M (s) PU2minutes (repetitions) SU2minutes (repetitions) PU (repetitions) BP70% (kg) BPmax (kg) SR (cm) MBI3Y (s) SK3200 (s)

11.56 6 1.47 8.45 6 0.41 32.80 6 2.21 48.22 6 4.92 204.78 6 6.32 3.81 6 0.17 75.17 6 18.26 86.42 6 11.77 13.17 6 2.95 23.58 6 5.96 94.50 6 16.84 13.68 6 5.72 63.02 6 2.60 793.50 6 63.99

12.55 6 1.75 8.58 6 0.36 31.70 6 2.08 49.25 6 4.03 212.19 6 16.03 3.83 6 0.24 75.33 6 17.35 81.75 6 9.96 10.67 6 2.50 17.75 6 6.31 88.33 6 14.51 11.65 6 10.62 66.39 6 3.31 951.08 6 8.30

Control group Initial testing (mean 6 SD) 12.90 6 8.65 6 31.87 6 53.05 6 234.56 6 3.75 6 56.46 6 62.46 6 10.77 6 18.69 6 90.38 6 13.57 6 66.61 6 854.38 6

1.80 0.59 2.34 8.06 21.04 0.12 14.71 11.44 4.57 9.70 20.25 6.23 3.65 64.02

Final testing (mean 6 SD) 12.50 8.55 31.42 50.15 225.46 3.87 66.54 70.23 10.31 16.69 89.04 10.72 66.53 886.46

6 1.71 6 0.41 6 3.08 6 7.48 6 23.36 6 0.14 6 14.80 6 10.16 6 3.77 6 9.73 6 17.52 6 9.63 6 2.87 6 126.98

*CJ = crawling and jumping; A9-3-6-3-9 = agility test 93639 with turn; MBT = 1-kg medicine ball throw from a seated position; RST = relative sergeant test; SBJ = standing broad jump; S20M = 20-m sprint; PU2minutes = push-ups in 2 minutes; SU2minutes = sit-ups in 2 minutes; PU = pull-ups; BP70% = thrust from the bench with 70% of body weight; BPmax = the maximum thrust from the bench; SR = sit and reach; MBI3Y = 300 yards running; SK3200 = 3,200 m running.

2876

the

TM



the

TM


| www.nsca.com

TABLE 4. The results of the t-test between the control (n = 13) and the experimental groups (n = 12) for the morphological variables. Initial testing

Final testing

Variables

t

p

F ratio

p var.

t

p

F ratio

p var.

Upper arm girth—prone (cm) Upper arm girth—extended (cm) Forearm girth (cm) Thigh girth (cm) Calf girth (cm) Thorax girth (cm) Abdominal girth (cm) Body mass (kg) Triceps skinfolds (mm) Subscapular skinfolds (mm) Chest skinfolds (mm) Abdominal skinfolds (mm) Suprailiac skinfolds (mm) Thigh skinfolds (mm) Calf skinfolds (mm) Axillary skinfolds (mm) % Body fat

0.00 0.33 0.08 0.59 0.62 20.80 21.12 20.33 0.68 20.19 21.26 0.09 0.76 20.55 20.21 0.03 20.63

1.00 0.74 0.94 0.56 0.54 0.43 0.27 0.74 0.51 0.85 0.22 0.93 0.45 0.58 0.84 0.98 0.53

1.10 1.11 1.88 1.42 2.22 5.68 3.60 2.09 1.50 2.79 3.98 1.30 1.29 1.24 1.00 1.03 1.38

0.88 0.86 0.29 0.57 0.20 0.01 0.04 0.23 0.50 0.10 0.03 0.67 0.67 0.72 1.00 0.97 0.60

21.41 0.59 0.50 0.44 20.66 20.85 21.15 20.79 20.36 20.86 22.35 21.44 21.33 20.63 20.35 21.45 21.94

0.17 0.56 0.62 0.67 0.51 0.40 0.26 0.43 0.72 0.40 0.03 0.16 0.20 0.54 0.73 0.16 0.06

2.16 6.19 2.31 3.55 1.22 2.24 4.82 2.30 1.01 5.10 10.00 5.84 2.42 1.04 1.06 2.27 3.20

0.21 0.00 0.17 0.04 0.75 0.19 0.01 0.18 0.98 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.15 0.96 0.93 0.19 0.06

TABLE 5. The results of the t-test between the control (n = 13) and the experimental groups (n = 12) for the variables of fitness characteristics. Initial testing

Final testing

Variables

t

p

F ratio

p var.

t

p

F ratio

p var.

CJ (cm) A9-3-6-3-9 (s) MBT (cm) RST (cm) SBJ (cm) S20M (s) PU2minutes (repetitions) SU2minutes (repetitions) PU (repetitions) BP70% (kg) BPmax (kg) SR (cm) MBI3Y* (s) SK3200* (s)

22.03 20.96 1.02 21.79 24.70 1.00 2.83 5.16 1.54 1.50 0.55 0.05 22.82 22.38

0.05 0.35 0.32 0.09 0.00* 0.33 0.01* 0.00* 0.14 0.15 0.59 0.96 0.01* 0.03*

1.49 2.03 1.12 2.68 11.09 2.06 1.54 1.06 2.40 2.65 1.45 1.19 1.97 1.00

0.52 0.25 0.86 0.11 0.00 0.23 0.47 0.92 0.16 0.12 0.55 0.78 0.27 1.00

0.07 0.20 0.27 20.37 21.64 20.57 1.37 2.86 0.28 0.32 20.11 0.23 20.11 1.76

0.94 0.84 0.79 0.71 0.11 0.58 0.18 0.01* 0.78 0.75 0.91 0.82 0.91 0.09

1.05 1.32 2.21 3.45 2.12 2.81 1.37 1.04 2.28 2.38 1.46 1.22 1.33 234.31

0.92 0.65 0.20 0.05 0.22 0.09 0.59 0.96 0.18 0.16 0.54 0.74 0.63 0.00

*Level of significance at p , 0.05. CJ = crawling and jumping; A9-3-6-3-9 = agility test 93639 with turn; MBT = 1-kg medicine ball throw from a seated position; RST = relative sergeant test; SBJ = standing broad jump; S20M = 20-m sprint; PU2minutes = push-ups in 2 minutes; SU2minutes = sit-ups in 2 minutes; PU = pull-ups; BP70% = thrust from the bench with 70% of body weight; BPmax = the maximum thrust from the bench; SR = sit and reach; MBI3Y = 300 yards running; SK3200 = 3,200 m running.

VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 10 | OCTOBER 2012 |

2877


Effects of Training for Special Operations on Soldiers girth). Regarding skinfolds and percentage of body fat, the values were almost identical between both groups. Unlike the initial measurement, the final measurement showed a statistically significant difference (p , 0.05) in 1 morphological variable (chest skinfold) between the control and experimental groups (Table 4). The experimental group showed a lower average value in most of the variables until the final measurement in the control group, while most of the variables remained relatively the same since the initial testing. In regards to fitness abilities, there was a statistically significant difference (p , 0.05) in the initial measurement between the experimental and control groups (Table 5). These differences were mainly among the following variables: SBJ, PU2minutes, SU2minutes, MBI3Y, and SK3200. Further into the analysis of the variables that were not significant, it is evident that the experimental group had better results in the following variables: CJ, A9-3-6-3-9, MBT, PU, BP70%, BPmax, and SR. Before the start of the experimental program, the control group had better speed and explosive capabilities based on the anaerobic energy system, whereas the experimental group had a prominent ability of muscle strength and muscular and aerobic endurance. Table 6 shows that there was a statistically significant difference in progress in a set of condition variables analyzed between the 2 groups in the multivariate-level initial and final measurements. Analyzing the results of t-test, differences of variables (Table 8), it was evident that the difference after the SOB program occurred in 7 of

TABLE 6. The results of multivariate tests of significance for battery of tests that assess the fitness capabilities between the experimental and the control groups in the initial and final measurements. Test

Value

F

df

Error df

p

Wilks

0.125

4.98

14

10

0.007

RESULTS The analysis of the K-S test showed that all the measured variables, except for the biceps skinfolds, did not significantly differ from normal distribution. Variable biceps skinfold was removed from further analysis. Removal of this variable did not significantly affect the solution of the first problem of this research because the other 9 variables described the dimension of the subcutaneous adipose tissue. The independent samples t-test revealed the absence of statistically significant differences (p , 0.05) in all morphological variables between the groups in the initial measurement (Table 4). The experimental group had a higher weight ranges in most of the morphological variables that describe body voluminosity (upper arm girth—prone and extended—forearm girth, thigh girth, calf

TABLE 7. The results of the t-test for the control (n = 13) and the experimental groups (n = 12) in morphological variables between the initial and final measurements. Experimental group

Control group

Variables

Difference

t

p

Difference

t

p

Upper arm girth—prone (cm) Upper arm girth—extended (cm) Forearm girth (cm) Thigh girth (cm) Calf girth (cm) Thorax girth (cm) Abdominal girth (cm) Body mass (kg) Triceps skinfolds (mm) Subscapular skinfolds (mm) Chest skinfolds (mm) Abdominal skinfolds (mm) Suprailiac skinfolds (mm) Thigh skinfolds (mm) Calf skinfolds (mm) Axillary skinfolds (mm) % Body fat

1.43 1.52 20.77 1.52 0.32 0.45 20.00 1.20 1.00 2.87 1.75 5.03 2.28 1.38 0.72 1.28 2.23

3.32 2.62 21.36 2.29 1.51 0.74 20.00 1.10 3.56 2.39 2.39 2.56 3.56 1.57 2.76 1.96 2.97

0.007 0.02 0.2 0.04 0.16 0.47 1.00 0.29 0.005 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.004 0.15 0.02 0.08 0.01

0.22 2.31 20.39 1.41 20.82 0.50 20.19 20.49 0.13 2.18 1.30 0.10 0.14 1.48 0.61 0.02 0.73

0.79 1.41 21.05 2.10 21.06 0.79 20.45 21.47 0.28 1.65 1.37 0.08 0.30 2.17 4.34 0.06 1.32

0.45 0.18 0.31 0.06 0.31 0.45 0.66 0.17 0.79 0.12 0.20 0.94 0.77 0.05 0.001 0.96 0.21

*Significantly different at p , 0.05.

2878

the

TM



the

TM


| www.nsca.com

TABLE 8. The results of the t-test for the control (n = 13) and the experimental groups (n = 12) in variables of fitness characteristics between the initial and final measurements. Experimental group

Control group

Variables

Difference

t

p

Difference

t

p

CJ (cm) A9-3-6-3-9 (s) MBT (cm) RST (cm) SBJ (cm) S20M (s) PU2minutes (repetitions) SU2minutes (repetitions) PU (repetitions) BP70% (kg) BPmax (kg) SR (cm) MBI3Y* (s) SK3200* (s)

20.99 20.13 1.10 21.0 27.42 20.02 20.17 4.67 2.50 5.83 6.17 2.03 23.37 2157.58

22.45 21.00 3.74 20.79 22.20 20.55 20.05 1.68 5.33 4.48 2.62 0.96 24.00 29.50

0.03* 0.34 0.003* 0.44 0.05 0.59 0.96 0.12 0.00* 0.00* 0.02* 0.36 0.00* 0.00*

0.40 0.10 0.45 2.90 9.10 20.12 210.08 27.77 0.46 2.00 1.35 2.85 0.09 232.08

0.75 0.81 0.58 1.75 1.96 23.52 24.38 23.27 0.84 1.59 0.53 1.11 0.07 21.48

0.47 0.43 0.57 0.11 0.07 0.004* 0.001* 0.007* 0.42 0.14 0.61 0.29 0.95 0.16

*Level of significance at p , 0.05. CJ = crawling and jumping; A9-3-6-3-9 = agility test 93639 with turn; MBT = 1-kg medicine ball throw from a seated position; RST = relative sergeant test; SBJ = standing broad jump; S20M = 20-m sprint; PU2minutes = push-ups in 2 minutes; SU2minutes = sit-ups in 2 minutes; PU = pull-ups; BP70% = thrust from the bench with 70% of body weight; BPmax = the maximum thrust from the bench; SR = sit and reach; MBI3Y = 300 yards running; SK3200 = 3,200 m running.

the variables in the experimental group: SBJ, PU2minutes, SU2minutes, PU, BP70%, MBI3Y, and SK3200.

DISCUSSION It is evident that after training, there was a decrease in body volume and adipose tissue in the experimental group. Despite the significant difference found only in variable ANP, it is necessary to check whether the differences within groups were also significant. There was a statistically significant difference in morphological characteristics of 10 variables within the experimental group between the initial and final measurements (Table 7), which probably could be attributed to the impact of SOB training. As previously stated, the control group was not under the special regime of work. However, specific activities were carried out based on the daily tasks. Members of special units from which the sample was taken for both groups, without regard to specific forms of training such as SOB training, were involved in a variety of physical activities that are part of their job or that allow them to efficiently perform tasks for which they were intended. As previously stated, all work was carried out in conditions of stress and reduced food intake, and the results were a significant decrease in some morphological parameters. The results obtained in the morphological variables do not agree with the research of Pleban et al. (38) who studied the effects of ranger training. They have found that there was a general military spending on the account of lean body mass, which was not the case with SOB training. The difference could be a result of a particular structure of the training, despite some

general similarities. Nevertheless, some studies have confirmed that an intensive military training has an impact on the reduction of subcutaneous adipose tissue (6,26,28,29), which was consistent with results obtained in this study. Because the military training for special forces is characterized by deliberate reduced food intake to create additional stress (9,43,46), the results obtained in our study were rather expected. Physical exercise during energy restriction has been shown to attenuate the loss of fat-free mass when compared with energy restriction alone (34). Although there was no specifically designed treatment, the daily activities of the control group could not be neglected when interpreting the effects of SOB training. The increase or the decrease of the values of the control group in variables of morphological parameters in the final measurement was numerically, but not statistically, significant, the reason for obtaining the results presented in the final measurements between the groups (Table 1). However, the activities of the control group during the 8 weeks did not produce relevant changes in morphological characteristics. The size of the significant changes in 1 variable obtained in the control group could be considered practically insignificant. Therefore, much more relevant indicators of the SOB training impact on morphological features were the results obtained by comparing the initial and final measurements of the experimental group (Table 7). The conclusion is that the SOB training for 8 weeks did not produce any significant changes in morphological features in the experimental group. The changes were mostly manifested through the reduction of VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 10 | OCTOBER 2012 |

2879


Effects of Training for Special Operations on Soldiers subcutaneous adipose tissue and limbs and as a result of physical effort and body waste during the SOB training. Because there was no time to rest the body, and all activities were carried out one after another, there was an accumulation of the chronic state of fatigue. The consequence was the reduction in fitness abilities in the final measurement. Despite the structure of the various activities that were implemented during the training, it could be concluded that it was the aerobic and muscular endurance abilities that were most activated and that are most affected. The results have shown that it led to the reduction in the area of fitness. Many studies have confirmed that a large number of injuries were associated with the high volume of running during training (23,32,39). This could be probably the reason for the decreased results in the variables SK3200 and MBI3Y because the SOB training was characterized by a highvolume running and has been wasting the body, which affected the results in the final state. Change in the variable SK3200 was 19.85% and in the MBI3Y variable 5.34%. Both changes could be considered as relevant in practice because for the soldiers, fitness ability is very important and this allows them to efficiently and quickly move into the area (30). Because the SOB training is based on endurance training, and may impede protein synthesis (13,24), there was a disruption in the development of strength and power, which was manifested by variables BP70%, BPmax, and MBT. This was confirmed by the research of Nindl et al. (34) and Santtila et al. (42). In the variable BP70%, a reduction of 24.72% occurred, whereas in the variable BPmax, the reduction was 6.52%. These changes could be considered as practically relevant because of the great importance of the ability to manifest these variables in the implementation of specific military tasks such as walking with load. Improvement in the neuromuscular characteristics will not be possible without a reduction in the amount of military training based on endurance and with the increase of training intensity for power and strength during military training. Reduced values for the variable PU after intense military training was also confirmed by Burke and Dyer (3) who studied the impact of ranger training for 8 weeks. The results in the variable PU after SOB training were 18.98% lower than before training. Pull-ups as indicators for strength endurance represent fitness test that check the preparedness of the many armies in the world. There are many specific military activities in which the success depends on the skills that can describe this variable (climbing rope, climbing and crossing various obstacles). This was confirmed by the research of Prusaczyk et al. (40), which stated that in 20 missions conducted by special forces, in 9 of them the most valued segments involved lifting, pulling, carrying, and climbing. Hyde et al. (15) stated that the maximum number of pull-ups is an extremely important measure of physical performance in an attempt to quantify the tasks associated with conducting special operations. Therefore, this change could be considered as practically relevant.

2880

the

During the training, the participants constantly wore the backpack load, which should be considered as a very important factor. The consequence could be a reduction of physical performance and increased risk for injury, which was confirmed by many other studies (18,20–22). This activity has also inevitably influenced the reduction of abilities that were identified at the end of training. Because the soldiers in the SOB training in the final phase (21 days) were subjected to reduced food intake and constant movement with equipment, it led to a decrease in their physical performance, which was confirmed by the research of Montain and Young (33). The same authors have suggested that such operational tempo was not recommended for more than 10 continuous days, whereas in this study, it was a period of 21 days. With decrements in physical performance expected during periods of an extended energy deficit, warfighters should place special emphasis on achieving high levels of strength, power, and muscularity through optimal physical training programs and food (34). Many other studies have shown the decrease in abilities after continuous military operations and the occurrence of chronic fatigue and exhaustion (5,11,16,35,43,49).

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Limitation of this study is the relatively small sample size. However, because of the difficulty to complete the program and a very intense fitness program, most of the studies also included a small sample size. The training program conducted for the subjects in this study was difficult to perform and required a strenuous discipline. In conclusion, basic training for SOB during 9 weeks has produced significant burnout of the body for the participants who have completed the training. This led to a reduction in fitness performance manifested through the tested variables. In addition, the activities of the control group had an impact on getting a certain difference between the groups in the final measurement. However, these differences did not arise as the result of SOB training but because of the changes within the control group. It is thus important to emphasize that this study in no way negates the potential benefits of SOB training for longer-term improvement of militarily physical performance. Individualized training approach within military organizations, at both basic and post–basic training phases, would arguably be the most effective.

REFERENCES 1. Aharony, S, Milgrom, C, Wolf, T, Barzilay, Y, Applbaum, YH, Schindel, Y, Finestone, A, and Liram, N. Magnetic resonance imaging showed no signs of overuse or permanent injury to the lumbar sacral spine during a Special Forces training course. Spine J 8: 578–583, 2008. 2. Bovill, ME, Tharion, WJ, and Lieberman, HR. Nutrition knowledge and supplement use among elite U.S. Army soldiers. Mil Med 168: 997–1000, 2003. 3. Burke, WP and Dyer, FN. Effects of Ranger Training on Selected Measures of Strength and Cardiovascular Fitness. Defense Technical Information Center OAI-PMH Repository. Alexandria, VA: Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 1998.

TM



the

TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 4. Chicharro, JL, Lo´pez-Mojares, LM, Lucı´a, A, Pe´rez, M, Alvarez, J, Labanda, P, Calvo, F, and Vaquero, AF. Overtraining parameters in special military units. Aviat Space Environ Med 69: 562–568, 1998. 5. Christensen, PA, Jacobsen, O, Woriund, JB, Madsen, T, Moher, C, Jensen, D, Suetta, C, and Aagaard, P. Changes in maximum muscle strength and rapid muscle force characteristics after long-term special support and reconnaissance missions. Mil Med 173: 889–894, 2008. 6. Faff, J and Korneta, K. Changes in aerobic and anaerobic fitness in the Polish army paratroopers during their military service. Aviat Space Environ Med 71: 920–924, 2000. 7. Fairbrother, B, Shippee, RL, Kramer, T, Askew, EW, Mays, MZ, Popp, K, Kramer, M, Hoyt, RW, Tulley, R, Rood, J, DeLany, J, Frykman, P, Marchitelli, L, Arsenault, J, Tessicini, M, and Jezior, D. Nutritional and Immunological Assessment of Soldiers During the Special Forces Assessment and Selection Course. Technical Report T95-22. Natick, MA: U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, 1995. 8. Friedl, KE, Mays, MZ, Kramer, TR, and Shippee, RL. Acute Recovery of Physiological and Cognitive Function in U.S. Army Ranger Students in a Multistressor Field Environment. RTO MP-042. Norway, Oslo: RTO HFM, 1995. 9. Friedl, KE, Moore, RJ, Martinez, LE, Vogel, JA, Askew, EW, Marchitelli, LJ, Hoyt, RW, and Gordon, CG. Lower limit of body fat in healthy active men. J Appl Physiol 77: 933–940, 1994. 10. Fulco, CS, Friedlander, A, Muza, SR, Rock, PB, Robinson, S, Lammi, E, Baker-Fulco, CJ, MacDonald, J, Kambis, K, Braun, B, Lewis, SF, Butterfield, G, and Cymerman, A. Effect of Energy Deficit on Physical Performance at Sea Level and 4300 m Altitude. Technical Report T0110. Natick, MA: U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, 2001. 11. Guezennec, CY, Satabin, P, Legrand, H, and Bigard, AX. Physical performance and metabolic changes induced by combined prolonged exercise and different energy intakes in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol 68: 525–530, 1994. 12. Harman, EA, Gutekunst, DJ, Frykman, PN, Nindl, BC, Alemany, JA, Mello, RP, and Sharp, MA. Effects of two different eight-week training programs on military physical performance. J Strength Cond Res 22: 524–534, 2008. 13. Hickson, RC. Interference of strength development by simultaneously training for strength and endurance. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Phys 45: 255–263, 1980. 14. Hoyt, RW, Opstad, PK, Haugen, AH, Delany, JP, Cymerman, A, and Friedl, KE. Negative energy balance in male and female rangers: Effects of 7 day of sustained exercise and food deprivation. Am J Clin Nutr 83: 1068–1075, 2006. 15. Hyde, D, Thomas, JR, Schrot, J, and Taylor, WF. Quantification of Special Operations Mission-Related Performance: Operational Evaluation of Physical Measures. Technical Report A112183. Bethesda, MD: Naval Medical Research Institute, 1997. 16. Jouanin, JC, Dussault, C, Peres, M, Satabin, P, Pierard, C, and Guezennec, CY. Analysis of heart rate variability after a ranger training course. Mil Med 169: 583–587, 2004. 17. Jukic´, I, Vucˇetic´, V, Aracˇic´, M, Bok, D, Dizdar, D, Sporisˇ, G, and Krizˇanic´, A. Fitness Diagnostic of Soldiers Performance. Zagreb, Croatia: Faculty of Kinesiology, 2008. 18. Knapik, J, Ang, P, Meiselman, H, Johnson, W, Kirk, J, Bensel, C, and Hanlon, W. Soldier performance and strenuous road marching: Influence of load mass and load distribution. Mil Med 162: 197–200, 1997. 19. Knapik, J, Harman, E, and Reynolds, K. Load carriage using packs: A review of physiological, biomechanical and medical aspects. Appl Ergon 27: 207–216, 1996. 20. Knapik, JJ, Harper, W, Crowell, HP, Leiter, K, and Mull, B. Standard and alternative methods of stretcher carriage: Performance, human factors, and cardiorespiratory responses. Ergonomics 43: 639–652, 2000. 21. Knapik, JJ, Rieger, W, Palkoska, F, Van Camp, S, and Darakjy, S. United States Army physical readiness training: Rationale and

| www.nsca.com

evaluation of the physical training doctrine. J Strength Cond Res 23: 1353–1362, 2009. 22. Knapik, J, Staab, J, Bahrke, M, Reynolds, K, Vogel, J, and O’Connor, J. Soldier performance and mood states following a strenuous road march. Mil Med 156: 197–200, 1991. 23. Koplan, JP, Powell, KE, Sikes, RK, Shirley, RW, and Campbell, CC. An epidemiologic study of the benefits and risks of running. J Am Med Assoc 248: 3118–3121, 1982. 24. Kraemer, WJ, Patton, JF, Gordon, SE, Harman, EA, Deschenes, MR, Reynolds, K, Newton, RU, Triplett, NT, and Dziados, JE. Compatibility of high-intensity strength and endurance training on hormonal and skeletal muscle adaptations. J Appl Physiol 78: 976–989, 1995. 25. Kraemer, WJ, Vescovi, JD, Volek, JS, Nindl, BC, Newton, RU, Patton, JF, Dziados, JE, French, DN, and Hakkinen, K. Effects of concurrent resistance and aerobic training on load-bearing performance and the Army physical fitness test. Mil Med 169: 994–999, 2004. 26. Kramer, TR, Moore, RJ, Shippee, RL, Friedl, KE, Martinez-Lopez, L, Chan, MM, and Askew, EW. Effects of food restriction in military training on T-lymphocyte responses. Int J Sports Med 18: 84–90, 1997. 27. Lieberman, HR, Bathalon, GP, Falco, CM, Kramer, FM, Morgan, CA, and Niro, P. Severe decrements in cognition function and mood induced by sleep loss, heat, dehydration, and undernutrition during simulated combat. Biol Psychiatr 57: 422–429, 2005. 28. Malavolti, M, Battistini, NC, Dugoni, M, Bagni, B, Bagni, I, and Pietrobelli, A. Effect of intense military training on body composition. J Strength Cond Res 22: 503–508, 2008. 29. Malesˇ, B, Katic´, R, and Poklepovic´, D. Effect of programmed special treatment on the development of aerobic endurance and repetitive strength of the morphological changes. Sˇkolski Vjesnik 46: 139–144, 1997. 30. Malesˇ, B, Zˇuvela, F, and Krstulovic´, S. Effect of treatment on the military relationship of the morphological characteristics and capabilities of running. In: Proceedings of the Programming Work in the Field of Education, Sports, Sports Recreation and Kinesiotherapy. U.V. Findak, ed. Rovinj, Croatia: Faculty of Kinesiology, 2002. pp. 147–149. 31. Markovic´, G. Effect of High Jump and Sprint Training on Quantitative and Qualitative Changes in Some Motor and Morphological Features [doctor’s thesis]. University of Zagreb, Rovinj, Croatia, 2004. 32. Marti, B, Vader, JP, Minder, CE, and Abelin, T. On the epidemiology of running injuries. The 1984 Bern Grand-Prix study. Am J Sports Med 16: 285–294, 1988. 33. Montain, SJ and Young, AJ. Diet and physical performance. Appetite 40: 255–267, 2003. 34. Nindl, BC, Barnes, BR, Alemany, JA, Frykman, PN, Shippee, RL, and Friedl, KE. Physiological consequences of U.S. Army Ranger training. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39: 1380–1387, 2007. 35. Nindl, BC, Leone, CD, Tharion, W, Johnson, RF, Castellani, J, Patton, JF, and Montain, SJ. Physical performance responses during 72 h of military operational stress. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34: 1814–1822, 2002. 36. Pemrick, MD. Physical Fitness and the 75th Ranger Regiment: The Component of Physical Fitness and the Ranger Mission. Technical Report A267763. Fort Leavenworth, KS: Army Command and General Staff College, 1999. 37. Plavina, L. Preparedness and physical fitness of military personnel. Paper Anthropol 17: 255–264, 2008. 38. Pleban, RJ, Valentine, PJ, Penetar, DM, Redmond, DP, and Belenky, GL. Characterization of sleep and body composition changes during ranger training. Mil Psychol 2: 145–156, 1990. 39. Powell, KE, Kohl, HW, Caspersen, CJ, and Blair, SN. An epidemiological perspective on the causes of running injuries. Phys Sports Med 14: 100–114, 1986. VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 10 | OCTOBER 2012 |

2881


Effects of Training for Special Operations on Soldiers 40. Prusaczyk, WK, Stuster, JW, Goforth, HW, Smith, TS, and Meyer, LT. Physical Demands of U.S. Navy Sea-Air-Land (SEAL) Operations. Technical Report A598403. San Diego, CA: Naval Health Research Center, 1995.

44. Siri, WE. Body composition from fluid space and density. In: Techniques for Measuring Body Composition. J. Brozek and A. Hanschel, eds. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science, 1961. pp. 223–244.

41. Rognum, TO, Vartdal, F, Rodahl, K, Opstad, PK, Knudsen-Baas, O, Kindt, E, and Withey, WR. Physical and mental performance of soldiers on high- and low-energy diets during prolonged heavy exercise combined with sleep deprivation. Ergonomics 29: 859–867, 1986.

45. Taylor, MK, Markham, AE, Reis, JP, Padilla, GA, Potterat, EG, Drummond, SPA, and Mujica-Parodi, LR. Physical fitness influences stress reactions to extreme military training. Mil Med 173: 738–742, 2008.

42. Santtila, M, Kyro¨la¨inen, H, and Ha¨kkinen, K. Changes in maximal and explosive strength, electromyography, and muscle thickness of lower and upper extremities induced by combined strength and endurance training in soldiers. J Strength Cond Res 23: 1300–1308, 2009. 43. Shippee, RL, Friedl, KE, Kramer, T, Mays, M, Popp, K, Askew, EW, Fairbrother, B, Hoyt, R, Vogel, J, Marchitelli, L, Frykman, P, Martinez-Lopez, L, Bernton, E, Kramer, M, Tulley, R, Rood, J, DeLany, J, Jezior, D, and Arsenault, J. Nutritional and Immunological Assessment of Ranger Students With Increased Caloric Intake. Technical Report T95-5. Natick, MA: U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, 1994.

2882

the

46. Tharion, WJ, Lieberman, HR, Montain, SJ, Young, AJ, Baker-Fulco, CJ, DeLany, JP, and Hoyt, RW. Energy requirements of military personnel. Appetite 44: 47–65, 2005. 47. Thomas, DG, Lumpp, SA, Schreiber, JA, and Keith, JA. Physical fitness profile of Army ROTC cadets. J Strength Cond Res 18: 904–907, 2004. 48. Vickers, RR and Hodgdon, JA. Summary of Findings for Initial Task Identification for Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT). Technical Report A286024. San Diego, CA: Naval Health Research Center, 1999. 49. Welsh, TT, Alemany, JA, Montain, SJ, Frykman, PN, Tuckow, AP, Young, AJ, and Nindl, BC. Effects of intensified military field training on jumping performance. Int J Sports Med 29: 45–52, 2008.

TM

