Page 99 - JSOM Spring 2024

FIGURE 2 Air Force Pararescuemen working for the Department of as experts and advocates in order to initiate a generational
Defense’s Detachment 3 in support of NASA rescue efforts. relationship between the organizations.
(Photo by Senior Airman Dalton Williams.) 3. Explore and encourage greater awareness and interaction
through appropriate courses, educational opportunities,
and organizational exercises.
4. Advocate for the understanding, inclusion, and cross-pol-
lination of both medical communities by habituating key
interactions of value.

Conclusion
Though their roles and impacts differ, SOF and space medicine
have natural and indisputable commonalities in mission and
challenge. Both communities work at the extremes and limits of
human performance, and both are often in service of no-fail mis-
sion requirements. The professional values of selection, culture,
performance, and advanced and enhanced requirements provide
the foundations for complementary efforts. Emanating from
those cultures and values are clear missions and purpose where
and adopt processes to make contingencies as fluid and tem- both organizations have intrinsic purpose to accelerate change.
pered as possible. International and inter-agency relationships
and their enablement is critical to both functions, and solu- This article is meant to inform and propose enhanced relation-
tions found separately might be of benefit to the other. ships to both the special operations and space communities. The
potential of mutual advantage for each community is evident.
Human Collaborative relationships in human performance, technology
Both operational communities operate in extremely isolated envi- support, and medical research to national efforts could speed
ronment and harsh conditions whereby the simple needs of exer- innovation and shorten the gaps between researcher and prac-
cise, nutrition, sleep, behavioral health, and team care are critical titioner for use. Such an initiative also provides the opportu-
to mission success. Both environments demand unique service nity to support policy and contribute to a joint security concept
support requirements such as medical decision support, human while cross-pollinating operational, human, medical, and tech-
research and physiological risk, readiness and preventive medi- nological information and efforts in both vocations of service.
cine, and facilitating the human system into complex operational
systems characterize common challenges of both communities. Acknowledgments
While the hazards of space flight might not all directly apply to The authors thank Dr. James D. Polk, Chief Medical Officer of
SOF, NASA conducts significant research that may complement NASA, for his unwavering support and advocacy of this effort.
or potentiate lines of effort in SOF in such areas as countering
radiological threats, sex differences for operational application, Author Contributions
and brain health for maximizing performance agility. This work was designed by MH and JF. Revision and confir-
mation of the manuscript was performed by all three authors,
Technological and each read and approved the final manuscript.
Although the significance of technology in our professions is
indisputable, both communities still appreciate analog train- Disclosures
ing and systems as essential. Technologies for space require The authors have no relationships relevant to this article to
terra Earth testing for evolution, and those programs need an disclose.
actor to provide this environment. The ability to make extra-
terrestrial systems simpler, more rugged, and more usable by Funding
the space non-medical caregiver are critical to long-duration, Dr. Fogarty is supported by the NASA Cooperative Agreement
unsupervised, independent missions and provide SOF medi- NNX16AO69A.
cine with opportunity, insight, and new perspectives directly
supporting Army and convergence efforts. References
1. “Relationships are our most valuable asset.” Attributed to General (R)
Joseph L. Votel. Personal communication.
Recommendations 2. NASA Strategic Plan 2022, NPD 1001.0D, Web site https://www.nasa.
gov/ocfo/strategic-plan/. Accessed 15 January 2024.
The following recommendations are not absolute and may not 3. Statement of Lieutenant General Jonathan Braga, Commanding General
fully appreciate all aspects of inter-agency and inter-command United States Army Special Operations Command ( USASOC) Before
The Senate Armed Services Committee Emerging Threats and Capa-
dynamics. However, initial analysis for mutual cooperation bilities Sub-Committee April 27, 2022. https://www.armed-services
and collaboration can be simple, small, seemingly low cost, .senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2022%20USASOC%20Posture%20-%
high impact, and may potentiate later user benefit. 20LTG%20Braga%20-%20SASC-ETC%20(27%20April)%20(Final).
pdf. Accessed 17 December 2023.
4. U.S. Army Special Operations Command. U.S. Army Special Operations
1. Conduct a key billet holder joint working group to educate Forces Strategy. https://www.soc.mil/AssortedPages/ARSOF_Strategy.
organizations and their lines of effort, and challenges in or- pdf. Accessed 17 December 2023.
der to evaluate and analyze potential synergies. 5. Duggan PM. U.S. Special Operations in Cyberspace. The Cyber Defense
Review. Fall 2016. https://cyberdefensereview.army.mil/Portals/6/Documents/
2. Identify and talent manage personalities of future impact CDR%20Journal%20Articles/US_Special_Operations_Duggan_Oren.
from each medical community to invest and commit them pdf?ver=2018-08-01-090209-853. Accessed 17 December 2023.

Special Operations and Space Medicine | 97