Combat Clean is a product from Sweden’s Zymiq and serves a dental enzyme to keep your teeth clean even in the field and has the added benefit of fresh breath.
Combat Clean comes in two formulations, one for general man’s and the other for our K9 companions. The version for humans is a lozenge format and the version for pups is a spray.
www.zymiq.com/brands/combat-clean
CLEVELAND, Ohio – Oct. 29, 2025 – Team Wendy®, a leading provider of innovative head protection systems, presented at the recent Personal Armour Systems Symposium (PASS) held in Bruges, Belgium, where company researchers shared new findings on DREW (Dummy for Rotational Evaluation of Wearables), including a paper published in the proceedings. Aiming to advance helmet testing from traditional linear drops to encompass rotational events, Team Wendy is on a mission to change the way the industry measures head impacts.
Who’s DREW?
Developed by Team Wendy, DREW is a biofidelic (behaves like the human body) helmet-test rig built to simulate real head-to-ground falls and capture both linear and rotational head motion (something legacy linear-drop tests miss). It uses a 50th-percentile Hybrid-III head, neck and torso on a pivoting assembly to recreate front, rear and side impacts, as well as to study both head-direct and whiplash-induced events.
“We want to measure how the brain responds to complex impacts, in ways that we still don’t understand well enough, so we can inform better products and standards going forward,” said Ron Szalkowski, head of R&D at Team Wendy and co-author of the PASS paper. “DREW helps move that conversation beyond linear drops to the rotational forces associated with concussion and other forms of traumatic brain injury (TBI).”
What Team Wendy Discovered
The PASS paper compared Team Wendy’s standard EXFIL® Ballistic helmet liner to a high-density foam ballistic liner tuned for DOT/monorail drops (where the helmeted head form is guided straight down onto an anvil at relatively high impact speeds). Using DREW in a rear, whiplash-induced configuration, as well as a front, direct impact configuration, the foam ballistic liner produced higher head loads (peak linear and angular acceleration) with no meaningful gain reduction in peak angular velocity.
“The foam liner was associated with more jolting to the head, both straight-on and in a twisting motion,” Szalkowski said. “Think of it like tuning a car’s performance on a treadmill, only to learn that it struggles with bumps and turns in the road. The danger is that a helmet design can look good on paper, but increased rigidity, for instance, does not necessarily help you in a real fall.”
The PASS poster also showed how DREW can mimic a real parachute landing. Researchers used sensor data from mouthguards worn by paratroopers to study the rotational dynamics linked to concussion-inducing, head-to-ground impacts. Then they tuned the rig (adjusting the drop angle and whiplash distance) until DREW matched the data within 4%.
“This gives our engineers a realistic target to design helmets against, and it could go so far as to inform future revisions to test procedures and performance criteria,” Szalkowski added.
Headstrong for Safety
Team Wendy’s initiatives at PASS showcase a profound commitment to comprehensive, peer-reviewed research that raises the benchmarks for head protection. Based on these insights, the company is advancing with DREW evaluations across different helmet categories and is supplying data to aid standards development efforts in partnership with academic and governmental entities. To request the PASS paper and poster, please reach out to Sara Jonas, global director of marketing, atsjonas@teamwendy.com. The paper is also available via PASS proceedings.
This material is founded on research funded by the U.S. Office of Naval Research through PANTHER award number N00014-21-1-2916. Team Wendy expresses gratitude to the partners at Robert Morris University for their contributions to FEA modeling and for the RISE3D injury metric utilized in DREW studies.
In recent articles we’ve introduced you to the hidden threat of Blast Over Pressure (BOP) coincidental to firing and being near friendly weapons as well as being an effect of enemy induced BOP, along with considerations on what industry is doing to deal with this newly recognized phenomenon.
To get everyone back up to speed, let’s review the DoD definition for Blast Over Pressure:
The sudden onset of a pressure wave, above normal atmospheric pressure, which occurs from blast (e.g., explosions and weapons firing events). The pressure wave is caused by the energy released during explosions and weapons firing.
Now, let’s take a look at what a small business in Texas is doing to mitigate those effects through focused suppressor design.
Radical Defense has been in the suppressor business for well over a decade and earned its reputation as an innovator by focusing on very specialized suppression projects for US and allied SOF. Always on the lookout for a new problem to solve, they have spent millions of internal research and development dollars.
Radical examined BOP and immediately saw where their suppressor technology could be applied. They began to refer to their approach as Unconventional Weapon Personal Protective Equipment.
To beat the BOP challenge, Radical first had to develop a test protocol to measure against. Working with industry partners, they established a protocol similar to that used to test sound measurements. However, there are certain challenges to measuring BOP with the microphones used for standard sound pressure reduction as opposed to a blast microphone or a blast gauge. The microphones are capable of capturing the full pressure curve of an overpressure event, whereas the blast gauges record the event itself, but only if the pressure event is over a certain, predetermined value. Additionally, the microphone provides a delta that is easily observed for comparative analysis of unsuppressed to suppressed. The blast gauges themselves act as “Go / No-Go” gauge of sorts, immediately alerting the user of an event, while the microphone offers fidelity recording the entire event as well as capturing and assigning a value in Pascal (Pa) or Pounds per Square Inch (PSI). Radical Defense has informed me that they would be willing to share their protocol with others interested in working to mitigate BOP through the use of suppressor technology.
Like many companies in the suppressor business, Radical Defense has leaned heavily into computer modeling and additive manufacturing. This allowed them to quickly modify designs to increase their effectiveness in mitigating BOP.
Initially they sought out a solution for .50 weapons. For one thing, between the M107, M2, and M3, the caliber is found in every service throughout the military except for Space Force and is one of the calibers which places service members at risk. Additionally, since they had already done the hard work on suppressing the M2, it was a natural progression.
One such project was the BAD-21 suppressor (designed for the GAU-21). Internal testing revealed an 88% reduction in blast over pressure measured 4 feet on either side of the muzzle with a 77% reduction at the shooter’s head.
As an added bonus, Radical Defense found that their work on Blast Overpressure mitigation protects sensitive electronics and sensors from undue wear and tear as well as from errant readings during operations. The same goes for ground vehicles which increasingly carry vulnerable items like satellite antennas, shot locators, and Unmanned Aerial Systems countermeasures.
Radical Defense continues to develop new Unconventional Weapon Personal Protective Equipment for an ever increasing number of calibers and weapons. Some of them may even surprise you. Hopefully, they’ll let me share some of the other systems as well as results of work they have done for the military.
The Luminae IFAK Refill Kit is a complete, all-in-one medical contents package designed to restock or build your individual first aid kit or med pouch. It includes everything you SHOULD carry to treat life-threatening injuries in the field. Each component is sourced from trusted, industry-standard suppliers to ensure reliability, performance and quality when it matters most.
Rheinmetall has received an order from the Federal Office of Bundeswehr Equipment, Information Technology and In-Service Support (BAAINBw) to supply highly mobile medical facilities to the German Armed Forces. The framework agreement concluded in September 2025 has an initial call-off value of over €300 million. The first of these protected, highly mobile medical facilities, which meet NATO Role 2B standards, is scheduled to be delivered to the Bundeswehr as a series model in 2029. The systems are intended for use by the German brigade in Lithuania, among others. The contract will be implemented by Rheinmetall Project Solutions GmbH.
Each of the medical facilities consists of a total of eleven vehicles with associated multifunctional containers. The contract is valid until 2040 and allows for the ordering of additional systems.
The containers remain on the vehicles during operation. These are military HX trucks from Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles. This makes the medical facilities highly mobile and allows them to be deployed in national and alliance defence operations in line with the threat situation. Seriously injured personnel can thus be treated close to the front line. In terms of mobility and protection, there is currently no comparable system available in NATO.
With the Role 2B medical facilities now on order, the Bundeswehr will have a highly mobile, protected system for life-saving emergency surgery and intensive care in the immediate vicinity of mechanised land forces. ‘This will enable us to provide our soldiers on the ground with the best possible medical care,’ said Dr Deniz Akitürk, Managing Director of Rheinmetall Project Solutions GmbH.
Last week I wrote about Service Member exposure to the effects of Blast Over Pressure (BOP) firing weapons during training and combat.
There has been a great deal of innovation in the suppressor industry over the past few years as government demands and manufacturing technology both increase. However, most of the improvements have been on four areas:
1. Sound suppression
2. Light suppression
3. Thermal dissipation
4. Particulate blowback
We’ll break those down one by one and look at ways industry has worked to improve performance in those areas.
Sound Suppression
Silencers as they were known at the time were initially created to deaden the sound of a firing weapon. It’s a very straightforward concept and different construction techniques and materials have been used over the years to facilitate the process. Manufacturers have become so good at this attribute that they are willing to sacrifice some performance for improvements in the other areas described here. Interestingly, the desire to suppress more and more weapons has increased. There is even discussion of suppressing the upcoming Precision Grenadier System, a semi-automatic, magazine-fed grenade launcher.
The advent of additive manufacturing, or as it is commonly known, 3-D printing, has given rise to very complicated designs, which can control the release of sound from firing as well as other advantages we’ll get into next.
Light Suppression
Early in the Global War On Terror, Special Operators who operated primarily at night began to realize that sound suppression was only of particular advantage during the first memory’s of contact with the enemy. After that, visual cues in the form of flames coming out the end of weapons identify the location of operators and they asked suppressor manufacturers to deal with the issue. Now, shooters observe only a first round pop visual signature as initial gasses in the suppressor are ignited while other manufacturers have eliminated even that.
Thermal Dissipation
As suppressors heat up under fire they often take on an orange glow in the visual spectrum and almost serve as a beacon when observed under thermal or Infrared sensors. Not to mention, they plain old get hot and can burn the operator. US Special Operations Command’s Suppressed Upper Receiver Group program attempted to acquire an integrally suppressed M4 upper receiver with the suppressor under the weapon’s handguard but ended up buying a URP with a suppressor featuring a cage to prevent burn injuries.
As opponents on the battelfield began to use sophisticated sensors, special operators began to be targeted for their hot weapons and several systems and techniques were investigated to mitigate the threat. This remains a requirement in new NATO weapon acquisition programs.
Particulate Blowback
Special operators have been using suppressors for decades and have taken for granted being gassed in the face, particularly during sustained fire or in confined spaces. The burning of the eyes and difficulty breathing became the cost of doing business but the advantages of using a suppressor far outweighed the discomfort.
But as the Army and Marines Corps began to experiment with suppressors, the troops who were unused to the blowback started to complain and the acquisition community began to take a look at the issue. Turns out, sucking down fumes created by the combustion of propellants is very bad for your health.
When a semiautomatic firearm is suppressed, the suppressor doesn’t allow all of the propellant gases from flowing forward and out the end of the barrel. Many are pulled rearward into the shooter’s face during cycling.
Getting the Balance Just Right
The US Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapon program is one of the first that demanded that this new capability would be suppressed and provide sound and light suppression as well as mitigation from propellant fumes.
As the requirement was added during the competition, all three of the companies involved had to hit the ground running and tweak their systems to lower the amount of particulate expelled into the face of the firer.
SIG already had some experience with this answering the SURG requirement when they reduced the amount of fumes that reach the operator by up to 80%, but as it turns out, the Army and SOCOM have different particulate standards and measure differently meaning they still had their work cut out for them. All three met the requirement after learning a few things and applying some changes and the firers of the current NGSW rifle are exposed to lower noxious fumes levels than Soldiers firing the M4.
Still more may be done to mitigate the exposure to noxious fumes as propellant manufacturers rise to the challenge.
Meanwhile, some companies like SureFire have taken to using super computers at the national laboratories to conduct exhaustive fluid dynamic simulations to try out different suppressor designs before they actually cut any metal.
Attacking Blast Over Pressure
Unfortunately, the government had not until recently identified the medical threat posed by BOP. Consequently, industry has just begun to attack this new problem. Multiple concepts have been proposed, and several have made it past the white paper stage into actual material solutions. It’s a new frontier that will affect design and how weapons are employed, particularly during training.
Once thought to be the Holy Grail, we are learning it is attainable. In our next installment we are going to look at how one company has balanced the already identified suppressor attributes with a new capability, to mitigate the effects of BOP on both man and material and on me of the most difficult weapons to suppress, the M2 heavy machine gun.
Just over a year ago, the Deputy Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum updating the requirements for managing brain health risks from overlooked sources of overpressure such as training with common weapon systems. It established DoD requirements and direction for the management of health risks to DoD personnel from exposures to Blast Over Pressure (BOP) and offers information on risks, ways to mitigate them, PPE suggestions, and who is likely at risk. The linked guide helps with specific techniques.
We’ve long known about the dangers of BOP resulting from Improvised Explosives Devices and other high order explosive events. The sudden onset of a pressure wave and associated above normal atmospheric pressure has led to physical injuries such as Traumatic Brain Injuries as well as hearing and vision loss. The damage to our troops is widespread. In 2020, there were 1.3 million Veterans receiving benefits for hearing loss while studies show that close to half-a-million Veterans have sustained TBIs.
What we’ve learned is that our troops have also been exposed to BOP in training for combat, just like they are when bullets are flying in both directions.
In particular, the policy focuses on exposures to BOP above 4 pounds per square inch (psi) which studies have shown can result in adverse effects on brain health and cognitive performance ( e.g., headache, decreased reaction time, attention difficulty, memory loss) resulting from acute (e.g., single or short-term) and chronic (e.g., repetitive or continuous) exposure to BOP.
In addition to damaging the personnel that wield those weapons, they can also affect any platforms they are mounted to such as light vehicles and aircraft as well as sensors and other weapons mounted to those platforms. This could include guided munitions, proximity fuzed warheads, and ISR gear. Now, we are facing a drone threat and have just begun fielding sensors and fire direction systems for the CUAS fight. Damaged equipment results in increased costs and down time for maintenance and in some cases, it can result in fatalities.
The policy memo does not preclude or unreasonably restrict commanders from conducting mission-essential weapons training. Rather, it establishes requirements for practical risk management actions to mitigate and track BOP exposures across the military.
My main issue with the memo itself is that it named specific careerfields as those likely to be exposed to BOP and overlooks some combat related specialties (enlisted AFSW) as well as those enablers assigned to close combat forces who often man crew served weapons in both training and defense of their formations. More appropriate would have been a more broad approach which included personnel assigned to certain types of units.
This matters for two reasons. First, some leaders may overlook personnel during risk management and second, the Veterans Administration will assuredly use this memo to deny services and compensation to those not specifically listed in the memo.
Regardless of who the memo includes, the reality is that anyone who uses or is in close proximity to these weapon systems during firing is exposed to the same overpressure forces. Fortunately, the military is beginning to take measures to limit unnecessary exposure and mitigate the effects where possible. Over the next couple of weeks we are going to examine how industry is working with government to create blast reduction standards and apply them to weapon systems in the form of Unconventional Personal Protective Equipment such as suppressors.
ORLANDO, Fla., Oct. 2, 2025 — The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) currently reports a disability claims backlog of more than 190,000 unresolved cases across the country. While this marks progress compared to historic highs, veterans are still facing average wait times of 12 to 18 months — and in many cases, delays stretching two years or morebefore receiving a decision.
In recent years, the backlog has swelled dramatically, topping 300,000 cases and even approaching 400,000 at its peak, driven in part by the implementation of the PACT Act and a surge of new claims related to toxic exposure. For veterans with urgent health needs, these numbers translate into months — and often years — of uncertainty, lost income, and untreated conditions.
Shield of Odin, a veteran-focused healthcare and medical-legal services provider, is working to close that gap by offering veterans an alternative pathway to strengthen their claims and avoid repeated cycles of denials and appeals. Through its nationwide network of licensed physicians, nurse practitioners, psychologists, and vocational experts, the organization provides independent medical evaluations, Nexus Letters, Disability Benefits Questionnaires (DBQs), vocational assessments, and peer-reviewed evidence tailored to VA rating criteria.
The goal: ensure veterans can submit fully developed claims that stand on solid medical-legal evidence, reducing the risk of denial and expediting access to benefits.
“The VA’s official backlog today is just under 200,000 claims — but anyone watching this system knows how quickly those numbers can rise, and how devastating the wait can be,” said Ryan Hawley, CEO of Shield of Odin. “For a veteran with lung disease from burn pit exposure or PTSD from combat service, being forced to wait 18 months or longer is not simply a delay; it’s a barrier to care, stability, and dignity. Our mission at Shield of Odin is to ensure those veterans are not left behind.”
Shield of Odin emphasizes that the backlog is not merely a matter of statistics but of lived human impact. Veterans awaiting benefits often face mounting medical costs, difficulty maintaining employment, and mental health struggles as they navigate a system strained by volume and complexity.
“The averages don’t tell the full story — behind every number is a veteran and a family in crisis,”said Dean Johnston, COO of Shield of Odin and a board member of Heros of the Sea. “We see veterans waiting 24 months or more for a claim to move forward. Some pass away before ever receiving a decision. That’s why we’ve built a system to provide timely, accurate evidence that can cut through the bureaucracy and accelerate the process.”
VA Backlog by the Numbers (2025)
Current backlog (May 2025): 190,000+ unresolved claims (VA official reporting)
Peak backlog in recent years: Over 300,000 cases, with spikes near 400,000
Average wait time: 12–18 months for resolution
Extended delays: 24+ months common in complex or toxic exposure cases
First-time claim denials: Nearly 70% linked to insufficient or incomplete medical evidence
Rural veterans: Face 30–40% longer waits due to limited examiner availability
(Sources: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VA News, Military Times, Federal News Network, advocacy group analyses)
Shield of Odin’s Role in Solutions
Shield of Odin has developed a nationwide telehealth platform that connects veterans with qualified practitioners across all 50 states, ensuring even those in rural or underserved areas can access timely support. Services include:
Telehealth Nexus Letters and DBQs to establish medical connections between service and condition
Independent Medical Exams (IMEs) for complex or contested cases
Vocational impact assessments linking disabilities to occupational limitations
Peer-reviewed, evidence-based opinions aligned with VA rating criteria and legal precedent
By providing medical-legal documentation that is both rigorous and veteran-centric, Shield of Odin helps veterans avoid common pitfalls that result in denials, repeat appeals, and further time lost in the system.
