Service branches review body composition assessment methods

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Nov 2021 16:18:33 -0400

Some service branches take a fresh look at body composition assessment methods, but weight still a focal point.

The U.S. Army and other branches of the military are taking a fresh look at how they measure body composition to determine if it is accurately associated with performance.

The U.S. Department of Defense instruction 1308.3 mandates that each service branch carry out physical fitness and body fat programs and procedures. In general, the military establishes minimum physical standards for recruitment and retention by measuring body fat based on height and weight tests or based on measurements at the neck and waist. Body composition is calculated using the body mass index (BMI).

The standards are not easy to meet. Right now, according to a Dec. 22, 2020, Congressional Research Service report, “19% of U.S. adults ages 18-24 would not meet standards for accession to the U.S. military due to obesity.”

However, some experts consider BMI-based body composition calculations to be a problematic way to measure body fat overall, gauge healthy weight ranges among and between racial and ethnic groups, or predict health outcomes in general. (See a rundown of the BMI issue at https://www.insider.com/is-bmi-accurate.)

Many of the military’s body composition programs haven’t been updated since the 1940s, when society looked very different, said Katrina Velasquez, a lobbyist with the nonprofit Eating Disorders Coalition. The average American — and service member — is taller with more muscle mass.

Velasquez: Weight-based body composition programs are harmful and stigmatizing

BMI testing is not only an inaccurate measure of health, “it’s actually pretty harmful,” Velasquez said, because it can trigger eating disorders in service members predisposed to develop one.

She said research shows that the service member population is developing eating disorders at a higher rate than the general population, which is roughly 9%. The military has few treatment options for this mental illness, she added.

Velasquez said she’s heard from numerous service members who’ve engaged in unhealthy behaviors to “make weight.” These include eating almost nothing ahead of weigh-ins, wearing plastic to sweat off pounds or taking laxatives. The body composition programs also often layer on stigmatizing and stressful elements such as announcing weights out loud in group settings or separating out or threatening to fire service members who don’t make weight, she said.

Certain service branches look at new assessment methods

The following studies or policy changes suggest that some service branches are open to considering changes to body composition programs:

Army: The U.S. Army on Oct. 18 launched the first evaluation in 30 years of its body composition test, examining its association with physical fitness to determine if changes are needed to regulatory guidance, training and instructional programs, or to the mechanics of the program. The U.S. Army Center for Initial Military Training and the U.S. Army Institute of Environmental Medicine are conducting the research.

Sgt. Major of the Army Michael Grinston kicked off the study at Fort Bragg by taking the test, which uses four techniques to assess body composition: 1) standard AR 600-9 tape test, 2) dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), 3) three-dimensional total body scanning and 4) bioelectrical impedance analysis. Researchers are looking at body size and composition and comparing them to soldiers’ most recent physical fitness score and to dates and types of injuries. For females, the study is reviewing the number and dates of pregnancies, delivery methods, and first postpartum physical fitness score and Army Body Composition Program record. Army officials said initial findings should be out in December, but that final data will be ready in six to nine months.

Marine Corps: The U.S. Marine Corps’ (USMC) Human Performance Office is collaborating with the Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine to study body composition using various methods to assess fat mass, lean mass and bone mineral density. The review aims to determine whether the USMC’s policies and standards balance “health, performance, fitness and appearance.” According to a USMC study webpage, the Quantico-based study, which began in June 2021 and extends through the second quarter of 2022, will inform the future of body composition standards in the Marine Corps.

Navy: The Navy’s body composition assessment protocols, dated April 2021, don’t appear to be under review. (See the guide at https://www.mynavyhr.navy.mil/Portals/55/Support/21stCenturySailor/Physical/Guide%204-Body%20Composition%20Assessment-BCA-APR%202021.pdf?ver=UXBxbuAy0713JcZBkRRy2g%3d%3d.)

Air Force: The U.S. Air Force recently removed waist measurement as a scored component of its soon-to-be-revamped physical fitness test, and distributed those points across three main fitness categories. However, Air Force officials said that waists may still be measured as part of a body composition assessment that was set to start again this fall, according to a May 26 news release. Officials said details would be released at a later date.

Velasquez contended that the military does not need to use weight at all in health assessments. Instead, service members’ fitness could be measured through calculations of metabolic rates, blood pressure or other vital signs.

“From our perspective at the Eating Disorders Coalition, actually having a focus on hitting a certain weight is still going to be triggering into an eating disorder,” Velasquez said.

Learn more

Review the Army’s news release on its study, dated Oct. 18, 2021: https://www.dvidshub.net/news/407457/us-army-evaluate-relationship-between-body-composition-and-physical-fitness.

Review the Army Body Composition Program guidelines, dated Aug. 16, 2019: https://www.armyresilience.army.mil/ard/images/pdf/Policy/AR%20600-9%20The%20Army%20Body%20Composition%20Program.pdf.

Review the USMC study webpage: https://www.fitness.marines.mil/Body-Composition-and-Resources/Body-Composition-Study/Marine-Corps-Base-Quantico-Body-Composition-Study.

Review the Air Force’s news release on its fitness assessment alternatives, dated July 2, 2021: https://www.afpc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2681139/air-force-releases-cardio-and-strength-fitness-assessment-alternatives-new-onli.

Read the Congressional Research Service report, “Obesity in the United States and Effects on Military Recruiting,” dated Dec. 22, 2020: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IF11708.pdf.

Insider

Response by SPC Margaret Higgins made Nov 3 at 2021 4:56 PM

SPC Margaret Higgins — Wed, 03 Nov 2021 16:56:23 -0400

Maj Private RallyPoint Member Ma'am, I happen to have run around the P.T. (Physical Training) track; the fastest; in Basic Training.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 3 at 2021 5:23 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Nov 2021 17:23:03 -0400

Maj Private RallyPoint Member Thank you for the interesting information Major.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 3 at 2021 8:00 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Nov 2021 20:00:09 -0400

I am glad to see BMI being tossed on its ear - hopefully. It is about time to make fitness personal instead of "one size fits all"!

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 4 at 2021 6:11 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 04 Nov 2021 06:11:53 -0400

The problem with HT/WT standards is that they’re only good for those who are just endurance athletes (distance runners). They aren’t friendly to anyone who has any muscle mass, and more and more people are becoming hybrid athletes (lift heavy, run fast). It’s beyond time those standards get an overhaul.

Response by SFC Ralph E Kelley made Nov 5 at 2021 9:42 AM

SFC Ralph E Kelley — Fri, 05 Nov 2021 09:42:09 -0400

I went into the Army at 230 pounds. In School I played inside linebacker of a 4-4 defense and tight end. On the track team I ran the 1 mile, 2 mile (ran at state), threw shotput, discus and javelin. After AIT I was 215 pounds and always was in the top 10% on the weekly PT testing. I always maxed the old 500 point and later the 300 point AFRT.
All that being said I spent most of my army career being poked, prodded, weighted, and taped until I was sent down to Gorgas Hospital in Panama to be immersion-tested. After the 3rd time I was immersed the Chief Naval Medical Officer (Rear Admiral) stopped my COC from sending me via written letter to them and to be placed in my files.
It has never been purely about just your weight, but also about your AFPT, body tone, agility and performance ability/capacity. If your leadership calls you a fatty just because of a scale then they haven't read the pertinent regulations. They are more comprehensive than poundage. Weight is simply the first indicator.

Response by PO2 Robert Kelly made Nov 5 at 2021 10:30 AM

PO2 Robert Kelly — Fri, 05 Nov 2021 10:30:27 -0400

I was a proud member of the fat boys my entire stint in the Navy. I was also one of the most fit corpsmen in every unit I served in. Could never be a 4.0 sailor because of it but I did get to work out for two hours every day for lunch, still miss that. If you were ever severely wounded I was pretty sure you’d want coming for you instead of the 100 lb, two pack a day smoker who looked good in uniform. I could have gone into the tank and gotten out of the program but thought it undignified and wasn’t willing to give up the workout time.

Response by SPC William Weedman made Nov 6 at 2021 3:15 PM

SPC William Weedman — Sat, 06 Nov 2021 15:15:12 -0400

When I was Active Duty in Korea, we had monthly PT tests & weigh ins. Two sergeants who were weightlifters always held the doors for our company to go into weigh in. They both had less than 5% body fat but their muscle bulk always flagged them as overweight. I was a skinny kid my entire Active Duty time, but had friends who were not overweight but were routinely taped as “over standard”

Response by SGT Jim Ramge, MBA made Nov 9 at 2021 7:58 AM

SGT Jim Ramge, MBA — Tue, 09 Nov 2021 07:58:05 -0500

The Army’s system is definitely broke! During the 80s, my father, was stationed in Germany. Stationed with him in his unit was a young NCO body builder whom had won Mr. Europe! Tired of being taped, the military lost a good NCO.
During my time in the Army, we lost some good ones as well. Certain gene pools are very discriminatorily held accountable for taping’s at every PT test. I say this because one is born with a certain body composition and they cannot change it, and the system does not care, nor look twice to re-evaluate!
Facts: bone density, muscle mass in the wrong areas, breasts and buttocks sizes are things you cannot reduce or change.
That said, if said soldier is carrying excess in any of those areas due to genetics or are predisposed to having prebuilt muscle and bone density, they are screwed!
Likewise, the PT test and it’s evaluation. Things it measures for certain duty MOS’s and what it should measure for others is something that should be reviewed. Does a doctor, admin, cook, intel, need to run a mile in 12 mins flat? Wouldn’t you prefer to have stronger mechanics breaking track? Or, an all around athletic Infantry, Ranger, Green Beret wo/men? Just some open ended thoughts. I am not saying that none need to be in decent shape, don’t get me wrong - but lean, mean fighting machines for certain MOS’s, some never see the light of combat, let’s be honest… Has a Lawyer ever been “in”? Just food for thought…

Response by SFC William Linnell made Nov 13 at 2021 9:23 AM

SFC William Linnell — Sat, 13 Nov 2021 09:23:29 -0500

I have seen the curse of stupidity with the H/W standards. Personally having buddies then Soldiers who were 5-15 lbs over weight but could still max the APFT and wouldn't make promotion because of it. I have also seen (94ish) the BF % for females by big Army change to giving them 10% more BF%. I being in combat arms, tanker armor units, I never had to track any female records of H/W or BF%.

I too have been subject to the H/W and BF%. At 67" for my age group at the time max weight for me was 167lbs and 18% BF. I was 180lbs and 10% BF. Going to PLDC was the worse. I got the weight and taped 4 different times before I finally was signed in. Also good to have connections with Division CSM at the time too. :) No, I never maxed the PT test. Run time was around 14:30 -15:00.

In around 97' big Army changed the scale of the APFT on males to where those between 27-32 ish ended up having to do more reps and run time that the 21-26 age group. The theory was that the 27-32 were more conditioned then the younger age bracket. WHAT?? Not sure who they were basing that theory on but being in combat arms; tanks, infantry, arty, our body's are beaten up, hammered and FUBARed.

Since retired, I kinda follow the happening of my beloved Army. This new APFT that's been developed that is/was suppose to be no gender all points the same, I saw a huge problem with that. A factor that they always seem to forget and try to make the events the same across the board. After many tests in units they now have a scale, one for male and one for females.

Going back to BF % and H/W, I have no educated solution. I came in at the tail of the water tank, to taping. Females carry weight BF way different to males. Known fact. But to add more carrying BF% increase is not the answer. Also having mandatory PT in the Am and PM wouldn't solve it. As most who work in the motorpool all day in blazing heat, the last thing on Soldiers minds is OH I have to go run some more. No they want to hang their hats, take off the boots and chill.

I wish all you still serving all the best with the ever changing command climate going on. Still the best job I ever had. Also remember....TANKERS RULE. :)

Response by Sgt Jennifer Locker made Nov 27 at 2021 7:58 AM

Sgt Jennifer Locker — Sat, 27 Nov 2021 07:58:52 -0500

As an elder veteran, it's great to have the RWB Red White and Blue Eagle Ethos and Yoga programs to stay in shape.

Response by MSgt Nancy Wilson made Dec 12 at 2021 1:00 PM

MSgt Nancy Wilson — Sun, 12 Dec 2021 13:00:15 -0500

My recruiter told me to eat a big meal before I went in to Basic, because I only weighed 102lbs, standing at 5'8".
However, slim and trim does not equal Strong and Energetic. Huge difference.
I have always been weaker than, and rely upon, others to help me to get through. The thing is that -- there are MANY factors that go into "pulling your weight" and I always did. The weight standards do not -- can not -- look at the whole person.
And BTW, I do believe the weight standards were put into place in the first place because of uniform size -- back then -- they were mass producing standard clothing sizes. I could be wrong about this -- but it is how I understand the weight standard came into being.

Response by MSgt Nancy Wilson made Dec 19 at 2021 8:23 AM

MSgt Nancy Wilson — Sun, 19 Dec 2021 08:23:58 -0500

Perhaps, it is a lost art to say that one would prefer to remain home with the children. Now, we need a fitness test to gauge the fitness of a woman based on how many children she has had? You have to be pretty darned fit to be able to keep up with all those children! Where are we going with this?