Out of interest, if anyone knows: why "modern" warfare? Is this some kind of expression? The old school wars must have been worse for one's mental health, or not?
"Modern" in the context of the article means "after the invention and widespread use of explosives," which lead to the kind of physical brain injuries discussed in the article.
I'm guessing they mean grenades, artillery, rockets....anything that 'thumps' the whole area, including the brain. Even the sustained concussion of a heavy machine gun might be a heavy enough vibration to cause some inflammation, although I'd hope DARPA had long ago tested that theory.
Ancient warfare: anxiety as one anticipates impending war, which may be known months or years in advance (armies were slow), and very bloody melee combat which probably left survivors with PTSD.
Pre-modern warfare: relatively few people lined up and shot each other to death from long distances. People on the front lines knew they were likely going to die.
Modern warfare (WWI and beyond): constant artillery fire inflicts chronic and acute shell shock [1].
Except thar I recently read that some are thinking that PTSD is the result of concussion from being near explosions. PTSD may well be mechanically induced.
IIRC, actual combat hours have increased, a lot. Soldiers were doing front line combat duty for a few weeks during WWII, for months during Vietnam, for years during Iraq. That duty will scramble your brain, sooner or later. With longer combat duty, it's becomes ever more likely.
In addition to the already mentioned explosives, modern helmets and medical care have increased the odds of survival. Dead soldiers don't have chronic health problems.
> What if PTSD Is More Physical Than Psychological?
> A new study supports what a small group of military researchers has suspected for decades: that modern warfare destroys the brain.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/12/magazine/what-if-ptsd-is-m...