11 ABOUT THE AUTHORSLauren Fish is formerly a Research Associate with the Defense Program at CNAS.Paul Scharre is a Senior Fellow and Director of the Technology and National Security Program at CNAS.ABOUT THIS REPORTThis report, the sixth in theSuper Soldierseries, covers findings of the Center for a New AmericanSecurity’s study on dismounted soldier survivability. This report is in response to a study conducted forthe Army Research Laboratory to identify future concepts and technologies to improve soldier survivabilityand effectiveness over the next 20 to 30 years in order to identify high-payoff science and technologyinvestment areas. While the primary audience for this report is the Army science and technologycommunity, the report’s findings and recommendations may be of interest to a broader group ofstakeholders, including across the Army, the Joint Force, and the wider defense community. The fullseries can be found at cnas/super-soldiers.Views expressed in this report are of the authors alone. CNAS does not take institutional positions. 22 Executive SummaryNo attributes are more foundational to success in combat than the physical and cognitive performance ofwarfighters. Technological advantage has always played a central role in war, from the bow and arrow tomodern missiles, but technologies are mere tools in the hands of warfighters. People, not widgets, fightwars.Militaries have long sought to directly enhance the physical and cognitive performance of warfighters, andindeed some human performance enhancement drugs are widely used across the U.S. military today,such as caffeine. Existing technologies have demonstrated the ability to improve individual physical andcognitive performance above baseline levels and in key areas central to military competition: strength,focus, attention, learning, and resistance to fatigue. Many of these technologies are already being used incivilian settings, in licit or illicit contexts.The U.S. military is not fully capitalizing on the advantages enabled by human performance technologytoday and is woefully unprepared for some of the potential changes that could come from future advancesin biotechnology. War is dangerous, and enhancements that allow soldiers to carry more protective gear,be more alert, or be better trained all have significant payoffs in terms of improving soldier survivability. Human performance enhancement technologies raise important legal, ethical, and social issues, some ofwhich are unique to military settings. The U.S military must carefully consider these issues and balanceany treatment’s risk to a service member against the operational risk the treatment is mitigating. Voluntaryuse is a particularly challenging issue for military personnel, as service members are an inherentlyvulnerable population susceptible to coercion – real or perceived, implicit or explicit – from commanders.Nevertheless, these concerns can be met with appropriate procedures in place. There are pathwaystoday for safe and ethical military research on pharmaceuticals and other enhancement techniques, suchas brain stimulation. Both the Army and Air Force have conducted studies on modafinil, and the Air Forcehas conducted research on non-invasive brain stimulation. These research efforts to date generally havebeen small, however, and the Department of Defense does not have a comprehensive research effortunderway to capitalize on existing technologies, many of which have demonstrated benefits in civiliansettings. At the same time, the reality is that by providing easy access to caffeine while deployed andover-the-counter supplements on military bases, DoD leaders have de facto encouraged widespread, adhoc, unregulated use of human enhancement technologies by warfighters without robust guidelines inplace or physician oversight. This is the least optimal strategy, one that maximizes the risks andminimizes the potential benefit of treatments.DoD must urgently increase research into the benefits and risks of human performance technologies andbegin a cross-disciplinary dialogue on policies surrounding their use in military settings. The United Statesowes its warfighters the very best advantages on the battlefield to improve their survivability, and DoDleaders have a duty to seriously consider enhancements that could potentially save service members’lives.33 RecommendationsThe Army should:Study, evaluate, and approve human enhancement, where appropriate, in accordance with ethicalguidelines .Physical fitness§ Investigate alternative physical fitness training methods to improve strength and operationalperformance on the battlefield. § Leverage emerging technologies such as personal fitness trackers, consistent with DoDguidelines, to collect physical training data across the force and systematically evaluate the bestmethods for improving performance while avoiding injury.Nutrition and dietary supplements§ Develop nutrition guides and provide the necessary supplements to develop muscle mass andimprove performance as a part of nutrition planning, and limit unregulated supplement use. § Where there is insufficient research with regard to a supplement’s effectiveness, sponsorresearch to determine if the supplement has benefits to soldier performance.Sleep§ Institute a comprehensive soldier sleep fitness program that implements the guidelines inALeader’s Guide to Soldier Health and Fitness(February 2016) and inculcates an attitude of “sleepas a weapon” in the force. § Leverage personal fitness devices to track sleep patterns among soldiers and provide objectivefeedback on soldier sleep.Pharmaceuticals and other enhancement techniques§ Institute a high-level policy review of potentially promising methods to enhance soldier physicaland cognitive performance. § Consider potential physical and cognitive enhancements on a case-by-case basis, evaluatedbased on the risks of the specific treatment and the relative operational advantages to soldiersurvivability. § Investigate the efficacy, safety, and operational utility of physical and cognitive enhancementtreatments, consistent with DoD medical guidelines.§ Participation in any research or operational use of enhancements should be voluntary, and theArmy should institute procedures to ensure that soldiers are free from coercion, real or perceived,to take enhancements. 。。。。。。