Gulf War Illness Gets Medical Recognition, But VA Benefits Lag Behind
- Rawls Law Group
- 2 days ago
- 6 min read
“This is more than just a code. This is long-overdue validation for the suffering of the quarter-million afflicted veterans — and a formal acknowledgment that their illness is real, physical and service-related.”
- Beatrice Golomb, M.D., Ph.D., Professor of Medicine at University of California San Diego School of Medicine
More than three decades after the end of the Gulf War, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has officially recognized Gulf War Illness within their International Classifications of Disease (ICD). The CDC’s recent recognition provides a long overdue validation to the estimated 230,000 troops who have suffered from chronic health symptoms because of their service in the Gulf War. For years, Veteran Affairs (VA) and
community healthcare providers have had to piece together puzzling variations of health complications possibly related to Gulf War service. One of the longstanding problems in diagnosing Gulf War Illness has been that symptoms correlated with the illness resembled other medically explainable disorders. More importantly, symptoms associated with Gulf War Illness vary between cases. This systematically created confusion, as case studies created differing frameworks for the treatment and diagnostic criteria of Gulf War Illness. As a result, the VA preferred not to fully categorize for an overarching gulf war illness because to the VA, “symptoms amongst Gulf War veterans varied widely.” Veterans who sought treatment for their Gulf War-related symptoms were left with a sense of confusion, abandonment, and distress since symptoms appeared to be dismissed and belittled by their presumed healthcare advocates. This blog post will explore the VA’s role in Gulf War Illness recognition, the CDC’s recent recognition of Gulf War Illness, and how the CDC’s recognition will impact VA benefits and the Federal Tort Claim Act (FTCA).
The VA’s Role in Limited Expansion of Gulf War Illness Recognition
Despite the Gulf War being a relatively short conflict, an estimated 700,000 military personnel served in the conflict. Of the estimated 700,000 personnel, 230,000 personnel developed a slew of unexplainable health complications during and following the conflict. While not an extensive list, health complications associated with service in the Gulf War include: gastrointestinal problems, neurocognitive problems, persistent pain, debilitating fatigue, respiratory problems and dermatological (skin) problems. It is important to understand that while all of these symptoms are correlated with service in the Gulf War, not all cases of Gulf War Illness include these symptoms. This is one of the main reasons why pinpointing cases of Gulf War Illness became troublesome for healthcare providers.
On November 17, 2008, the Department of Veterans Affairs Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses (RAC), a Congressionally mandated federal advisory committee, issued a 454-page report that reviewed 1,840 published studies related to Gulf War-related illnesses. The RAC announced that, "Gulf War Illness (GWI) is real” and that GWI is a "distinct physical condition and that it is NOT psychological in nature." In short, the report directly tied the Gulf War veterans’ symptoms to toxic chemical exposure rather than symptoms being tied to combat-related stressors. For the first time, Gulf War veterans were seen. The 2008 RAC report was perceived as an institutional step in the right direction.
As many veterans know, good news within the VA should be taken with a grain of salt. Despite the 2008 RAC report and recommendations, institutional sluggishness in GWI related research in the years following the RAC’s 2008 report seemed apparent. Admittedly, research continued on GWI within the VA and in the Department of Defense; however, it did not appear to be to the level the RAC outlined in their 2008 report. Reports at the time indicate that the VA wanted GWI research to focus more on psychological causes for GWI symptoms. As previously discussed, the RAC had shown that GWI, and therefore its symptoms, were caused by physical exposures and should be viewed as a physical condition. Naturally, these ideological differences caused tension between the VA and the RAC. These tensions came to a head in 2013 when the VA removed a majority of RAC members to shift ideology. Along with the removal of RAC members the VA removed some supervisory tasks and removed the ability of the RAC to publish medical research without permission/approval from the VA. This was viewed as a deliberate attempt by the VA to influence GWI sentiment within the RAC by restricting their already limited autonomy. Needless to say, these institutional problems slowed advancements in GWI research.
What Has Changed?
Obviously, the VA imposed several barriers to limit the advancements of internal Gulf War Illness research. Despite these challenges, advocates made an astounding realization: the VA was not needed to get formal recognition of GWI. Led by Dr. Beatrice Golomb, a professor of medicine at the University of California San Diego, advocates pursued a formal ICD code submission to the CDC in the hopes of establishing a diagnostic code for veterans suffering from Gulf War-related illnesses. Not only would an ICD code provide cohesive diagnosis profiles of veterans to improve research on GWI, but this would also provide veterans with a much-needed victory. In the wake of overwhelming evidence, the CDC formally recognized GWI under ICD-10-CM, and it went into effect October 1, 2025. This was a much-needed victory for veterans and the continuation of research on GWI. As said by Nancy Klimas, M.D., of the Gulf War Illness Clinical Trials and Interventions Consortium at Nova Southeastern University, “This code will help speed research by allowing us to identify patients through medical record searches, rather than relying on social media and word-of-mouth.”
What Does This Mean for Benefits and FTCA?
The CDC’s recent recognition puts pressure on the VA to adjust their current stance on GWI. However, the CDC’s ICD code is a medical recognition, not a benefits recognition. The VA requires separate administrative action to obtain recognition for benefits. Prior challenges with GWI recognition stemmed from institutional conflicts in the wake of overwhelming evidence (i.e., the 2008 RAC report and preceding events). CDC recognition is a starting point, and there are likely to be challenges with institutional recognition within the VA. While slow, history shows that toxic exposure accountability can happen within the VA.
For FTCA claims, the new diagnostics code opens new considerations. When VA providers fail to properly evaluate or treat GWI symptoms, that could constitute negligence now that the condition has formal medical recognition. Previously, providers might claim they could not diagnose an unrecognized condition. That defense may no longer hold. The standard of care now includes awareness of GWI and appropriate treatment. However, many potential claims may already be time-barred. Veterans who received inadequate care years ago can't bring claims now—the two-year FTCA deadline expired (we have blog posts that discuss this dilemma). The code might help veterans with recent VA care failures.
If providers have overlooked symptoms or offered insufficient treatment within the past two years, it is advisable to consult FTCA attorneys promptly. Medical recognition without benefits creates frustration; however, there are still avenues to explore. Veterans can now get properly diagnosed but still fight for disability compensation. The diagnostic code helps documentation—but doesn't automatically qualify veterans for VA benefits.
While this is not an exhaustive discussion on the CDC’s recent GWI recognition, it is a broad overview of the events that have shaped GWI recognition. For more information, please check out the links down below. If you, or a loved one, have been injured by a VA healthcare provider, or VA facility, you may be entitled to compensation. Contact our office and schedule a free consultation.
Sources and Additional Information: