2025/08/08 by Pedro Accorsi, Tanisha M. Fazal · 1 voice
Health Professions · #Health and Conflict Studies
paper · pdf · doi:10.1080/09636412.2025.2558844
openalex publication_date 2025/08/08 · openalex created_date 2025/10/23 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/14
Despite extensive scholarship on military effectiveness, the role of military medicine remains largely untested. We argue that robust medical capabilities improve effectiveness by preserving manpower, sustaining unit cohesion, and bolstering morale. Using complementary empirical strategies, we test this claim. A cross-national analysis of conventional wars since 1900 probes the plausibility of the argument and suggests a positive association between physician-to-population ratios and improved battlefield performance. Exploiting the exogenous mid-war introduction of penicillin, we find that United States and British forces markedly improved loss exchange ratios against Germany, whereas penicillin-deprived Soviet forces showed no such improvement. Time-series evidence from the Italian Campaign corroborates these results, and historical and archival accounts demonstrate how penicillin and whole-blood transfusions reduced mortality and expedited returns to duty. Our findings suggest military medicine represents a cost-effective investment with substantial implications for combat outcomes. Understanding medicine’s contribution to military effectiveness is, therefore, crucial for defense planning and resource allocation decisions.