Counterintuitive Fall 2024

“Brannan Vines has never been to war”

• A women named Brannen Vines, the women who this article is about has never been in combat between 2 countries
• The author is giving us background information on this women
• This is a factual claim, we can prove that she has never fought in war

“He’s one of 103,200, or 228,875, or 336,000 Americans who served in Iraq or Afghanistan and came back with PTSD”

• This is a numerical claim, but is also a factual claim
• The author is pointing out that her husband is one of the many that suffer from this awful disease

“And as slippery as all that is, even less understood is the collateral damage, to families, to schools, to society—emotional and fiscal costs borne long after the war is over.”

• The author is painting the picture of the toll it takes not just on the person and their family, but on the people around them
• This is an ethical claim because it shows just how bad this can affect everyone, even years after the war is over.
• This can be interpreted that even though people come home from the war its like they can never really escape it.

“And it is dark outside, and the electricity is out. Imagine your nervous system spiking, readying you as you feel your way along the walls, the sensitivity of your hearing, the tautness in your muscles, the alertness shooting around inside your skull.”

• This is an analogy claim, comparing what it’s like to be in the mind of someone with PTSD.
• The author is trying to show that at any moment, even when you’re just in your house you can feel a sense of uncertainty and become very afraid.
• This is based on Brannan and what her symptoms are at times

“Caleb has been home since 2006, way more than enough time for Brannan to catch his symptoms”

• This is a factual claim, you can prove that Caleb has been home from the war since then
• The author is trying to show that PTSD is not something that has to take a while to contract, once exposed it is very easy to get
• In this case Brannan has been around her husband for quite sometime and has started to get the disease

“after making sure she’s at least an arm’s length away in case he wakes up swinging”

• This shows how it affects not only their mental state, but their physical life too. 
• Brannan sleeps an arms length away from Caleb just in case he lashes out in the middle of the night
• This is a evaluative claim, that because people go through this they have to take precocious judgement for their safety.

1. “It’s rampant among returning vets”

Rampant – this word gives a sense of urgency, since the context is usually never good when this word is used

Among returning vets – this could be two vets who have PTSD, which would make it rampant

2. “Imagine there’s a murderer in your house”

Author assumes the reader will do as they say (similar to the Let’s example in class)

3. “Caleb has been home 2006, way more than enough time for Brannan to catch his symptoms”

Who said Brannan has even caught his symptoms and who gave a time frame? It’s like the author is basing this claim thinking “yeah, 5 or 6 years should be enough to rub off your mental illness onto someone”

4. “She sounds like she might start crying, not because she is, but because that’s how she always sounds, like she’s talking from the top of a clenched throat, tonally shaky and thin”

This is the author making judgements on the woman’s voice in relation to her feelings.

That’s how she always sounds – could just be during this interview in which the subject talks about a sensitive topic

Like she’s…thin – author makes assumptions

5. “Not the old ‘Nam guy with a limp, or maybe the young legless Iraq survivor, that you’d expect”

The author makes multiple generalizations in this sentence

Author also makes an assumption about the reader

1. “Granted, diagnosing PTSD is a tricky thing.”

• Why is it tricky or hard? How does the author know this?
• Using the word “granted” makes it seems sarcastic almost and not like it’s okay that doctors aren’t sure if its PSTD or not.
• Saying “tricky thing” also makes the author sound less like a credible source .

2. “PTSD goes up with the number of tours and the amount of combat experienced.”

• What statistics show this?
• How does she know the amount of combat experience has to do with how much PSTD a soldier has?
• Feels irrelevant to Caleb’s story and the author is just adding in facts for nothing.

3. “It’s kind of hard to understand Caleb’s injuries.”

• The author is inferring that us readers don’t understand the effects war has on people or that we don’t know what PTSD is.
• Very fague and unsure statement to start a paragraph with.
• What is Caleb’s “injury” and why is it hard to understand?

4. “Whatever is happening to Caleb, it’s as old as war itself.”

• “Whatever is happening” is very vague and makes the illness seem unimportant.
• How old is war? What does this have to do with Caleb’s illness? 
• Statement is irrelevant to the main topic of the article which is to bring awareness that PTSD can be contagious.

5. Civil War doctors, who couldn’t think of any other thing that might be unpleasant about fighting the Civil War but homesickness, diagnosed thousands with “nostalgia.” 

• This statement makes it seem like doctors in the Civil War didn’t care and then shows no proof of it.
• Again, I think the statement is irrelevant to the article as a whole and steers away from the big picture.
• Infers too much about the Civil War without using actual facts, Caleb did not fight in the civil war so the author should be focused more on the wars that Caleb fought in.

He’s one of 103,200, or 228,875, or 336,000 Americans who served in Iraq or Afghanistan and came back with PTSD, depending on whom you ask, and one of 115,000 to 456,000 with traumatic brain injury.

• This claim comes off as a factual claim but, the author does not cite any sources, making these numbers not complete reliable.
• Caleb has come back from war suffering from PTSD
• Some Americans who go off to fight in wars come back with PTSD and traumatic brain injuries

Caleb has been home since 2006, way more than enough time for Brannan to catch his symptoms.

• The claim is that the time since the war veteran has been home his wife has had enough time to catch his PTSD symptoms.
• This seems to be more of a casual claim because there is no real study here to show the amount of time to catch the PTSD symptoms.

It’s kind of hard to understand Caleb’s injuries. Even doctors can’t say for sure exactly why he has flashbacks

• Not everyone can understand Caleb’s PTSD.
• The author does not specify how many doctors but claims that doctor can not diagnose why he has PTSD and flashbacks
• This claim seems to be more of an evaluation claim because it is evaluation Caleb’s PTSD.

You can’t see Caleb’s other wound, either. It’s called traumatic brain injury, or TBI, from multiple concussions. In two tours, he was in at least 20 explosions—IEDs, vehicle-borne IEDs, RPGs

• From suffering multiple concussions from explosions Caleb has developed a traumatic brain injury.
• The second claim the author makes it sound like Caleb has developed the traumatic brain injury from just this two-hour period where he suffered many explosions.

1.) And as slippery as all that is, even less understood is the collateral damage, to families, to schools, to society—emotional and fiscal costs borne long after the war is over.

-the word ‘slippery’ indicates the difficulty of having PTSD goes beyond the surface and is way deeper.

-the claim states that PTSD affects more than just the person who goes to war.

-people with PTSD have emotional trauma that follows them even after the war.

2.)You can hear the cat padding around. The air conditioner whooshes, a clock ticks.

-this claim is used to emphasize the quietness of the house.

-a house with living people should not be this quiet, but the claim expresses the severity of their situation.

3.) This PTSD picture is worse than some, but much better, Brannan knows, than those that have devolved into drug addiction and rehab stints and relapses.

-the claim acknowledges that they do not have the best situation, but also not the worst one.

-the couple would rather go through the agitation and stress than be drug addicts

-seems unethical for the author to write this because someone who is a drug addict may think it is better than Brannan’s living situation.

-personal opinion. no factual evidence to support that this is better than being a drug addict.

4.) They don’t know exactly why it comes to him in dreams, and why especially that time he picked up the pieces of Baghdad bombing victims and that lady who appeared to have thrown herself on top of her child to save him only to find the child dead underneath torments him when he’s sleeping, and sometimes awake. 

-he is haunted by the scene of watching a mother try and save her child but fail

-he could feel guilty about not being able to save the child and that is why he feels tormented

-picking up the pieces of bombing victims would be a sight none of us would be able to forget

-getting flashbacks of it while being awake somewhere could be extremely frightening to the people around him who may not know of his condition.

5.) Brannan and Katie’s teacher have conferenced about Katie’s behavior many times. Brannan’s not surprised she’s picked up overreacting and yelling—you don’t have to be at the Vines residence for too long to hear Caleb hollering from his room, where he sometimes hides for 18, 20 hours at a time, and certainly not if you’re there during his nightmares, which Katie is.

– the teacher is concerned about the daughter’s behavior and feels the need to speak to the parents

-katie of course picked up her dad’s behavior since she is around him all the time

-caleb screaming and hiding for 18-20 hours around katie has to have an affect on her behavior.

–

–

“Brannan Vines has never been to war”

• A woman named Brannan Vines has never been to a state of armed conflict between two nations.
• This would be considered a Factual claim, it can be proven that she has never been to war
• The author is giving the readers a known fact before proceeding with their discussion

“But she’s got a warrior’s skills…”

• She has the skills necessary to efficiently fight and take part in armed combat 
• It can be interpreted that she was trained to be a warrior, just did not go to war
• This claim falls under the evaluative claims category because the writer is making a judgement on what Vines “has” based on her actions in the drug store 

“Skills on the battlefield, crazy-person behavior in a drug store, where she was recently standing behind a sweet lady counting out change when she suddenly became so furious her ears literally started ringing”

• The author compares Vines to a “crazy-person” to make an Analogy Claim 
• Also telling the audience that the older women causing Vines’ frustration is a “sweet lady” when there is no reason to believe what type of person she really is 

“Her nose starts running she’s so pissed, and there she is standing in a CVS. Snotty and deaf with rage, like some kind of maniac…”

• Claiming that she can be compared to a maniac or a person showing wild behavior, notably violent and dangerous
• The reason her nose was running was because she was furious, no other reason
• She makes an Analogy claim by making a comparison to Vines as well as an Evaluative claim by analyzing the situation and making a claim based on the events.

Claim “Is PTSD Contagious?”

Blame it on unhappily coded proteins, or a misbehaving amygdala. Family history, or maybe previous trauma.

• If PTSD is present via family history then it can be spread down the family tree
• Family is surrounded by PTSD. PTSD could be triggered in someone through another person’s trauma.
• Members with previous history of trauma could be at a higher risk. 

Secondary traumatic stress has been documented in the spouses of veterans with PTSD from Vietnam

• This claim is proof that secondary stress can be spread to ones that are constantly present with someone who has PTSD
• Families with lots of members that serve can potentially spread secondary stress PTSD to other members
• Is there a time limit on when other people can get secondary PTSD when around someone with PTSD?

Even doctors can’t say for sure exactly why he has flashbacks

• Doctors couldn’t explain the reason why
• This shows how difficult living with this problem could be
• There doctors can do. PTSD is hard to treat
• People dealing with others that have PTSD know there is not a lot of treatments.

Brannan’s not surprised she’s picked up overreacting and yelling—you don’t have to be at the Vines residence for too long to hear Caleb hollering from his room

• This claim shows that living with Caleb can transfer to younger children.
• I feel that with younger children could be more susceptible to picking up Caleb’s actions

Whatever is happening to Caleb is older than war itself.

• This shows that PTSD has been around for ages.
• In WWI it was called Shell shock
• In WWII it was called Battle Fatigue
• Finally after WWII a proper diagnosis was present.
• Shows that PTSD could’ve been blown off when people were actually suffering.

They don’t know exactly why it comes to him in dreams

• PTSD can be hard to wrap your head around. 
• No one knows why certain people will get affected with PTSD and others don’t
• In Caleb’s case he gets flashback to the time. He will “freak out” and most of the time forget about the event some time later

Trauma is a contagious disease; it affects everyone that has close contact with a traumatized person

• Even if someone that is surrounded by PTSD doesn’t pick up the actions of that person there are still affected
• Those people have to view the pain that a loved one goes through during an episode
• Loved ones may have to work harder to satisfy someone affected by PTSD

 “He’s one of 103,200, or 228,875, or 336,000 Americans who served in Iraq or Afghanistan and came back with PTSD”

• This seems that it maybe a factual claim as it is presenting stats on others with PTSD as well
• They couldn’t have randomly said these numbers without factual evidence

“Brannan and Caleb can be tense with their own agitation, and tense about each other’s”

• The claim here is that PTSD doesn’t only affect the person with it, but also the people around them
• This sort of connects straight to the whole article topic of PTSD being contagious because it shows that PTSD does have an affect on more than just the one diagnosed
• PTSD plays a huge role in Caleb’s life as well as his wife’s, Brannan’s as you can tell by the fact of their agitation towards each other

“Trauma is a contagious disease; it affects everyone that has close contact with a traumatized person”

• This claim also directly connects to the topic in a strong manner as it says that it affects everyone around the traumitized person
• Showing that PTSD is more effective too many lives than people may think
• Shows that trauma is very contagious and caution should be taken drastically when dealing with someone with PTSD
• Categorizing PTSD as a disease that is contagious and can be spread

“Trauma is really not something that happens to an individual”

• Claim that trauma symptoms isn’t really received from actually going through a traumatic event
• The people who go through these symptoms of trauma are also the people around the initial person with it
• PTSD recipients are sharing their symptoms even though it’s unintentional

“But she’s got a warrior’s skills: hyperawareness, hypervigilance, adrenaline-sharp quick-scanning for danger, for triggers. Super stimuli-sensitive.”

-assumes the skills of a warrior 

“This PTSD picture is worse than some, but much better, Brannan knows, than those that have devolved into drug addiction and rehab stints and relapses.”

–how do they know what all of people’s PTSD looks like

-how do they know about people who have drug addictions and PTSD if they don’t show any research/examples to prove it

-automatically making it seem as if people who have drug addictions and PTSD have it worse than others

“Some hypotheses for why PTSD only tortures some trauma victims blame it on unhappily coded proteins, or a misbehaving amygdala.”

-with the word “some” we know that there are at least 2 hypotheses involved

-there are more trauma victims that they haven’t talked to and listened to their ideas(putting victims into a category)

-there are probably more hypotheses out there

“Somebody at the VA told me, ‘Kids in Congo and Uganda don’t have PTSD,’”

–do show us what kinds of tests they did to know the kids don’t have PTSD

-categorizing all kids from Congo and Uganda by saying they don’t have PTSD

“But some spouses and loved ones suffer symptoms that are, as one medical journal puts it, ‘almost identical to PTSD except that indirect exposure to the traumatic event through close contact with the primary victim of trauma’ is the catalyst.”

-there’s at least 2 spouses that have almost identical symptoms of PTSD

-they don’t give any examples that have happened to “some” of these spouses

“‘Trauma is a contagious disease; it affects everyone that has close contact with a traumatized person’”

-making it sound like a trauma is a virus or bacterial infection 

-coming to a conclusion that a trauma is a disease 

-putting “everyone that has close contact with a traumatized person” into a category by saying they are effected