Posted on Jun 23, 2015
SFC Small Group Leader
42.9K
161
96
9
9
0
Avatar feed
Responses: 61
Capt Richard I P.
22
22
0
1. Build performance standards based on combat. 2. Enforce these standards. 3. Who cares what bodyfat % people have?
(22)
Comment
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
9 y
CW5 (Join to see) Yes, and we have programs that attempt to stem their usage. But Alcohol & Tobacco are distractions from the weight/BF% argument. I agree they are ALSO issues, but they are not the issue at hand. Just because they are also bad, and potentially even worse doesn't make a high BF% acceptable.
(1)
Reply
(0)
CW5 Regimental Chief Warrant Officer
CW5 (Join to see)
9 y
I hear you although I don't agree. We can be overweight, still PT and defeat the enemy. Health is always mentioned when BF is brought up so I counter with this: Our top three causes of death in America all mention quitting smoking as prevention and don't mention weight. (according to the CDC)
(1)
Reply
(0)
1px xxx
Suspended Profile
9 y
Couldn't have said it better myself
MSG Jacqueline Case
MSG Jacqueline Case
9 y
There are so many factors that contribute to the average service member's BF %; stress is the one that stands out. Stress is the biggest contributor to excess weight and who is more stressed that a service member? If the individual is able to do their job, pass the physical fitness test, AND have a good appearance in uniform what does it matter how much the BF % is?
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt Nick Marshall
12
12
0
The standards of fat are irrelevant as long as the person can do the job. My body type categorized me as obese in the Marines, yet I was running marathons.
(12)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
1px xxx
Suspended Profile
The standards are based on actuarial tables from the 1940s and 50s, and are way off base. The most fit sailors/soldiers often have difficult times with the old tape measure because of muscle mass.

The standards do need to be adjusted for mission needs, and perhaps not worry quite so much about "Pride and Professionalism". I'm not sure that program really benefited the fleet anyway...
SGM Steve Wettstein
SGM Steve Wettstein
9 y
LCDR Rabbi Jaron Matlow Sorry Rabbi but I have to disagree with you on this one. I have always been between 30-40 over my make allowed weight. I am a weight lifter and never had a problem taping. I rarely saw or heard of a person, was a weight lifter, not be able to tape under. I have seen body builders get close to failing when they are cutting.
(0)
Reply
(0)
1px xxx
Suspended Profile
9 y
SGM, I'm glad it's worked out for you. I saw plenty of folks for whom it didn't work. And, if like me, you have a skinny neck, it's even worse...
Avatar feed
Considering Evolution, should the body fat standards be relaxed across the U.S. Military?
SSgt Auto Total Loss Claims Associate
6
6
0
One of my best buddies up in Minot got washed out of the force because he failed composition. He was solid muscle. Was a 60 gunner & could carry it like it was a piece of paper. I'll never understand that portion of the AFPT.
(6)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
4
4
0
Edited 9 y ago
Healthy Troops are less expensive Troops. Higher (Actual) bodyfat leads to increases in health concerns.

I don't care what someone actually weighs. I do care what their bodyfat % might be however, because that is a health indicator.

That said, the BMI and current tape test isn't accurate (it's decent, but not great). But it's also a secondary test.

Edit: Spelling
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CW5 Regimental Chief Warrant Officer
3
3
0
IMO, since color, race, or gender have proven to have no bearing on doing your job then perhaps weight should be omitted as well. We are looking at combat effectiveness factors. If you can PT to the standards, do your job and be overweight then what's the problem? If you can't fit in your tank then perhaps reclassification to the needs of the service is in order (you may get another job or you may get booted). Appearance has no factor except in Hollywood and recruiting posters and what is considered professional is qualitative, not quantitative like the current fat tests.

If we are concerned about health then perhaps we should set alcohol, tobacco and junk food consumption standards as well. That all said, we signed the dotted line with the current standards and the chance of anything changing is close to zero until we actually have a problem bringing in recruits.
(3)
Comment
(0)
CW3 C-12 Pilot
CW3 (Join to see)
9 y
..and perhaps all the DFAC stuff should stop being soaked in artificial butter and margarine.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CW2 Bde Ew Tech
CW2 (Join to see)
9 y
but Chief, it's ARTIFICIAL butter! We can eat all we want!
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Sr Security Analyst
3
3
0
Evolution has nothing to do with it. We are living in a fast food, processed food age. Almost everyday I see people consuming more and more simple carbs and energy drinks to keep themselves going while slacking on PT because of one reason or another. It's all bull****. Throw out your pizza, put down the soda, and go buy some real food. Our military force has gone so far off track of what fitness is, it's mind boggling.

In addition to that, do the APFT standards need to be lowered? Absolutely not. Some APFT events need to be added in order to measure "true" fitness, yes. But we can't lower standards. We're out of shape enough as it is.

Finally, as SPC Jeff Daley, PhD already said, the way in which we measure body fat needs to be changed. Having a lot of muscle mass below the neck and then having a thin neck will always result in an obese number. It's ridiculous. Are these cases the exception? Yes. But we still need to find a better method.
(3)
Comment
(0)
MAJ Contracting Officer
MAJ (Join to see)
9 y
The Army does good job by comparison, and with a standard of 20-36% body fat there is ample room to accommodate fat people. Compare the Air Force's horrible test of only measuring the waist. How many Samoan's do you see in the Airforce, almost none as their physiology just doesn't permit them to pass.

So yes the standards need to be improved, I won't say raised or lowered just improved.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt John Henry
2
2
0
In Marine Corps Boot Camp, some new recruits weigh too much to start training. They go to a special recruit platoon made just for them.

They eat less than most recruits and their exercise is cardio-focused. Remarkably, they all lose weight in this platoon.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt Operations Nco
2
2
0
Yes!!!! every time I weigh-in I have to starve for a few days and sometimes dehydrate myself. but I run 280-290 PFT's and always get 300 CFT's. the standards the Marine Corps uses haven't changed since 1950 and it is proven we are wider and more muscled than we were back then. I truly say there should be a score cap that if you hit it doesn't matter if you are over (to an extent of course). I have seen marines nearly kill themselves trying to lose the weight to stay out of the Body Weight Composition Program (BCP) my roommate passed out in formation because he was so severely dehydrated to lose the weight, once again a solid performer but his body type did not fit the standards since he was 6 foot had a 36 inch waist and a 14 inch neck he couldn't tape out. He was in the hospital with a I.V. in his arm for a day. this type of thing goes on in every unit every day in the corps and it's hurting marines bodies. and the company commanders who have the power to say "you don't look fat and you have a good PFT score so your not on BCP" don't do it. they just put a good marine on BCP and let his career go up in flames since you cant get promoted while on BCP and it is horrible for PRO/CON's and FitReps. if you go to the gym and lift you will be heavy and big, it is really what a marine should be especially as infantry since if your buddy goes down you need to be able to carry him and his gear. I'll rap up saying that they need to be edited to fit the way a healthy person is now not 50 years ago.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SPC George Rudenko
2
2
0
I imagine cyber warriors who only ever sit in an office, so I would say... Should there be standards pft and body fat for different MOS's?
(2)
Comment
(0)
MAJ Contracting Officer
MAJ (Join to see)
9 y
I've seen too many good Soldiers removed from intel fields and commo just to be hired on as a private contractor at 4 times the pay doing the same job at the same location because there wasn't anyone else capable of doing it.

IF YOUR JOB DOESN'T REQUIRE PHYSICAL FITNESS STOP THROWING PEOPLE OUT BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF PHYSICAL ABILITIES. Our military is, always has been, and always will be a mix of Soldier's, Government Civilians, and Contractor's fit the talent to the job or just contract out the entirety of DOD.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SFC Special Forces Medical Sergeant
SFC (Join to see)
9 y
To be clear, I was not talking down to Support or Combat Service Support in general but making a point that just because you serve in a support role does not give you duraluth to live a sedentary lifestyle as a service member. I think we are on the same page.
(0)
Reply
(0)
MAJ Contracting Officer
MAJ (Join to see)
9 y
Yes I concur, I'd like to see the fat percentages lowered for combat arms, no way any infantry member could survive his unit let alone combat with a 24% body fat composition.

The problem with CSS members is they are forced by their jobs to live a sedentary lifestyle, they work 10+ hours a day typing and starting at a power point every day, no way PT scores or H/WT will ever be as good as MOS's where you actually do labor as part of your job. Secondly 45 minutes of PT is just not enough for a significant portion of the CSS workforce. As an E4 gets paid significantly less than a GS-12 they'd deploy to do the work it makes far more sense to adjust the standards for hard to fill MOS's than completely remove the PT standards by contracting the work out.

You don't get a choice in lowering the standards or not, it is lower the quality of the workforce through high turnover, adjust the H/WT standards, shrink the size of the military forces, or reduce the amount of time performing technically and spend more doing PT/Soldier tasks. There are Pro's and Con's to every approach.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SPC George Rudenko
SPC George Rudenko
9 y
I wonder if at some point we have to deliniate combat MOS's from those that will never ever see combat,... and establish parameters for both. But that said, I see (from being a cop) that the physical aspects PFT, body fat are the more easily accomodated,... how is the military finding people with the intelligence to do these ever demanding jobs that require brain matter? Makes me wonder...
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close