Should army find a new way to fat test soldiers???

2014-03-12T22:54:19-04:00

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 15 at 2014 6:32 AM

2014-03-15T06:32:44-04:00

Not sure about the BMI tests, but I would not be opposed to a new APFT. Maybe one day it will be changed, or at the very least revised.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 15 at 2014 6:54 AM

2014-03-15T06:54:16-04:00

No, because while the tape test is not very accurate percentage-wise, it's the quickest and most cost effective way to gauge if someone has too much fat. Even if you're 60 pounds over your max as most bodybuilders are, you will not fail the tape test unless you're actually fat. The abs don't lie.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 15 at 2014 8:51 AM

2014-03-15T08:51:31-04:00

In my opinion? Yes the military should use 1 standardized system throught all branches and it should be developed in conjuction with civilian health professionals in order to determine the most accurate method possible. We are talking about people's careers and the effects on thousands of family members....having said that service members should do their best so that weight never becomes an issue to begin with.

Realistically, the services will never agree on one standard and the tape is the fastest, cheapest method.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 15 at 2014 10:26 AM

2014-03-15T10:26:22-04:00

YES!!!!! Pinch test and the water dunk test have proven effective. But sadly the Army will use the cheap method which is BS and unfair

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 28 at 2014 12:57 PM

2014-03-28T12:57:40-04:00

Yes, but as other have already said, the tape method is the fastest and least knowledgeable method but also grossly innaccurate. About a +/- 4% error.

I started in 2013 using a 9 point caliper system (and a trained person measuring) that is almost as good as a water test. The army bodyfat tape test got me at 24%, right on the edge for my age (41), (actually it's 26% I'm so used to <= 40...LOL) while the 9 point bodyfat test got me at 22.6%. This was July of 2013.

Passing an APFT is never an issue, I score around 263 - 275 most times. I've never failed a bodyfat test EVER. Today 2014 using the 9 point bodyfat test I'm at 17% BF and by May I should be at 15%. I have lost 1 inch on my waist.

The big problem is soldiers at all levels (SGT - LTC) don't properly council others on the problem and it isn't your physical training, IT'S YOUR DIET. Pt helps but diet is key and the Army is sadly lacking in diet training.

The tape test can also discourage because when losing weight the last part to go is your waist so you may do all this extra work and not see anything and that is discouraging.

The 9 point BF test can pick this up. You will lose in your arms, neck, face, legs before you lose one inch on your stomach.

Also using a scale is also discouraging because you may lose fat and gain muscle and think nothing happened. My first weight was 246.4 Lbs and at 22.6% bodyfat my bodyfat weight was 55.6 Lbs. Today I'm 245.2 with 17% bodyfat giving me a fat weight of 41.8 Lbs. That's a 13.8 Lb purely fat weight drop.

This is all about physical fitness and we all can do better. but I would say to go to a 9 point system and train all soldiers on how to measure properly. but also I am stressing diet as well and to train all officer and enlisted NCO's on diet.

Will it happen, probably not, we will stick with the tape test because it's easier. But I would recommend all soldiers to check with a 9 point caliper test and use those measurements to track progress.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Mar 28 at 2014 1:04 PM

2014-03-28T13:04:07-04:00

We don't say "fat", that's rude. It's "excess energy stored in potential form, carried externally".

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 28 at 2014 1:13 PM

2014-03-28T13:13:43-04:00

So what the I see hear is that its the fastest way to do it right, but yet how much of our day is spent sitting around all day? Last time I checked the senior leadership are the ones that are always crunched for time, the Master Fitness Trainer conducting the tests can easily be trained on the caliper method that is more accurate so I dont want to hear that there is such a lack of time to administer a more accurate test. Cost effective, how much is a caliper instrument? The Army has more wasteful spending than any other organization I have ever seen. I think that the fact of the matter is that we just dont want to change it much like the current PT program, which is a bunch of BS and needs to change. We changed the PT program for the new generation of soldier that never went outside to play as a kid and was sheltered indoors glued to an XBox or PS3.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 28 at 2014 2:01 PM

2014-03-28T14:01:07-04:00

Absolutely. And they don't even need to "find" it, it's always been available. It's called using BF % calipers and a BF index chart. Takes 3 times to get an accurate percentage, exact same as the tape method. EXCEPT its your actual body fat percentage! And for people talking about time and costs, a pair is cheaper or equal to the price of the tape, and takes as much time to do. And it is accurate, as long as you follow the instructions (pinch 1 inch above the right hip bone ((using same place, less error)) pinch with calipers.) and ta da! You have an accurate body fat %. My issue with the tape method, is you have soldiers that OBVIOUSLY have "more to love and lots of it" that somehow pass tape. How? They have big necks. Not cool big Army, lets stop the madness and switch to the calipers.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 7 at 2014 1:21 PM

2014-04-07T13:21:53-04:00

Be careful what you wish for. Tests show that the people who REALLY have to worry about bodyfat percentages, i.e. >20%BF would probably test higher with calipers than circumference.

"A closer analysis of individual data shows a general trend. It seems that the abdominal skin fold method over estimates BF when compared to the seven point method. The abdominal circumference method, on the other hand, underestimates BF when the subject is above average BF according to the seven site method. This "cut off" seemed to be somewhere within 15.59 % BF and 22.68 % BF. When BF was 15.59 % and lower, according to the seven site method, the abdominal circumference method over estimated BF. It can be seen how an greater than normal musculature of the midsection could falsely decrease the LBW calculation therefore increasing the % BF calculation. The over estimation of BF on some calculations and an under estimation of BF on others is most likely responsible for the seemingly high correlation with the seven point method shown above. Despite the ambiguity of the abdominal circumference method, it was thought to be more reliable than the seven site skinfold with those individuals above 22.68 % BF. It is known that the more obese individuals pose a greater threat to the reliability of skinfold measurements. (Lohman and Roche)"

http://www.exrx.net/Testing/BFTestComparisonStudy.html

A Comparison of Skinfold and Circumference Methods in Predicting Body Composition in Weight Trained Subjects

Typically, a simple
and reasonably accurate method of assessing changes in body composition
have included skin fold measurements. The seven point skin fold
method is used by many ...

Response by CW2 Jonathan Kantor made Apr 16 at 2014 4:20 PM

2014-04-16T16:20:58-04:00

I can't offer an alternative means of testing overweight Troops, but I have been hearing for years how outdated our BFP scale is. Evidently, there are much more modern means of determining body fat percentages that make a lot more sense.

Response by 1SG Michael Blount made Apr 16 at 2014 4:39 PM

2014-04-16T16:39:24-04:00

If you can show me a more accurate body fat measurement method that's as fast or faster than what we now use, I'd certainly give it a try.

Response by MSG Wade Huffman made Apr 16 at 2014 8:08 PM

2014-04-16T20:08:30-04:00

Am I the only one that remembers the OLD pinch test??? At least the tape is more accurate that that was (and much less subjective). I'm just glad I never had to worry about it then... of course there may be a slight problem if I were to ever be recalled to active duty! LOL!

Response by CMSgt James Nolan made Apr 16 at 2014 9:43 PM

2014-04-16T21:43:48-04:00

This is just a theory for everyone, but hear it out briefly.  Why worry about the body fat measurements?  Why not just have strict enforcement of the PT standards?  Wait now. If the ultimate goal behind weight loss is fitness anyway, why would fitness not be the major emphasis.  I mean, what do I care if you are heavier than I am, if you blow the Fitness Test out of the water?  We need warriors that can haul someone from a blown apart Hummer, who can hump weapons, ammo and gear.  Additionally, not everyone is designed to be "thin", some of us are just big boned, some tall, some short, some big chested, and narrow waisted, some big waisted and narrow chested.  But...if you are big boned, you have got to be able to run.......I would rather work with a big guy who can gut out a PT test, than someone who can't pick up a ruck.

Response by SSG Laureano Pabon made Apr 16 at 2014 10:32 PM

2014-04-16T22:32:52-04:00

Personally why test? if testing is all that is going to be done, then what is the purpose behind, I would say. What the army needs to do is find out what causes weight gain and how to lose it. But then we all know the answer for that, so why test.

First what do you gain for being over weight?

one can gain many harmful physical conditions that may be too late to recover from, making it harder for the SM whom has a weight problem lose the weight he needs to lose to meet standards. I'm not a Doctor or Physician to make statements but I know many people I know that are over weight do have the hardest time losing that weight.

I personally can make recommendations, but when they are not taken, I gather that they seem to enjoy being over weight and not taking the matter serious until a heart condition or diabetes kicks in and its too late.

Response by PO2 Rocky Kleeger made Apr 17 at 2014 8:04 AM

2014-04-17T08:04:52-04:00

I know that the Navy sure does. I'm 61", and according to the Navy I can only weigh 147lbs. So, now we go to the tape and their formula says I'm at 19% BMI. The calipers, which are a more accurate way to go, say I"m 14%.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2014 9:57 AM

2014-04-17T09:57:50-04:00

I am not sure of a better method because I am not to educated on this I just wanted to come here to post this quote: "You can't out work bad nutrition". As many have said eating right is more important than PT. I have never been taped because I obsess over health. You have one body, take care of it.

Also, I am not talking about people with legit disabilities. I know it can be a struggle for soldier with combat injuries / injuries in general.

Response by SSG Jason Deters made Apr 18 at 2014 12:55 PM

2014-04-18T12:55:20-04:00

YES. I say all branches should use the Pillsbury method. place the index finger one inch below the belly button and press firmly. The depth of impression is measured and recorded. If the soldier sounds off with "HMMMM HMMMM" the soldier is placed on a weight control program.

Seriously though, the tape method is not completely accurate but is more practical than other more accurate methods such as the displacement test.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 6 at 2014 7:12 AM

2014-09-06T07:12:35-04:00

Why not use http://www.amazon.com/My-Weigh-Galileo-Digital-Scale/dp/B004C3CRCK. It is fast and easily as accurate as the way we do it now.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 6 at 2014 9:18 AM

2014-09-06T09:18:34-04:00

Yes. All of the "veteran fat boys" know all of the tricks for passing tape (sauna, bodywraps, dehydration, no eating the day before, "cleansing" products, neck slapping....) , when they know they shouldn't be able to.

Here is an example of a flaw with the current system. One time I saw a 5'4" guy, 200+ pounds, with a 40+" waist pass because he had a 21" neck. He actually came in with a lower BF% than me.....

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 11 at 2014 2:24 PM

2014-09-11T14:24:16-04:00

Yes.

As many have commented, the real issue here is the way the military measures body fat (with the tape test) and how the military bases who is "fat" or "overweight" based on the tape test. There is NO science to the tape test, studies have shown that it can be off by up to 15%. We can do better.

The argument against hydrostatic body fat measurements is usually that they are too hard to do or that the equipment costs too much. Some knowledge is required to use these systems, and they do cost a bit more than the tape used for a tape test. But they aren't that difficult to operate and they aren't that expensive, really. Remember, this is the DoD, which has a multi-billion dollar annual budget. I just did a google search; the first hydrostatic setup I found (http://www.vacumed.com/zcom/product/Product.do?compid=27&prodid=296) costs about $25,000. If DoD bought 2,000 of these, that would cost $50 million. Add in a couple million for annual maintenance, upgrade, repair, etc, and we could probably have a DoD-wide set of these for about $100 million. Chump change in the DoD budget.

The other argument against using technology to measure body fat is that the tape test can be used in austere environments, such as deployments. I've deployed a few times, and each time, not only were APFT requirements waived during the deployment, but so were height and weight requirements. So, I don't buy this argument, either.

VacuMed | Metabolic Testing equiptment, Cardiopulmonary Testing systems

Hydrostatic measurements are based on the assumption that density and specific gravity of lean tissue is greater than that of fat tissue. Therefore, lean tissue will sink in water and fat tissue will float. By comparing a test subject's weight measured out of the water and submerged underwater, body composition can be calculated.