When will Body Mass Index (BMI) get a much needed revamp?

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Oct 2017 22:41:39 -0400

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2017 10:43 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Oct 2017 22:43:23 -0400

Ive seen soldiers get 28% body fat on the tape test...then go down to the On-Post nutritionist and have them do the water tank test and show up at 12%

Response by SN Greg Wright made Oct 4 at 2017 1:27 AM

SN Greg Wright — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 01:27:36 -0400

I think all those standards are messed up. When I joined the Navy, I was 6'2", 220 pounds. HS-long varsity wrestling and football, got offers from major schools to play football. In other words, I was in very good shape. But the Navy had a chart at the time that said someone 6'2" could only weigh 180. So I had to get a waiver. When I went to the doc to get it, he laughed and said, "Yeah, you'll weigh 180 roughly 2 years after you're dead," and signed the wavier. BMI, weight, composition...all bullshit in the face of someone that meet the physical requirements regardless. Just this armchair admiral's opinion.

Response by SGM Steve Wettstein made Oct 4 at 2017 8:41 AM

SGM Steve Wettstein — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 08:41:55 -0400

This was made before the weight training days. I would be 215-220, at 72 inches, and was told I was over weight by doctors even though my BF% was around 10%. I would just laugh at them and tell them they needed to look in the mirror before calling someone over weight. They didn't like that very much.

Response by SGT Edward Wilcox made Oct 4 at 2017 9:08 AM

SGT Edward Wilcox — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 09:08:39 -0400

As long as the civilian medical community puts so much emphasis on it, things will never change.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 4 at 2017 1:52 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 13:52:44 -0400

Isn't BMI being reevaluated?

The Army is reevaluating the ABCP regulation and standards.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 4 at 2017 3:26 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 15:26:25 -0400

When we cant make recruiting goals due to BMI results. Right now there is no problem in the eyes of senior leaders or its a problem they are not willing to put much thought towards right now.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 4 at 2017 9:04 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 21:04:41 -0400

It won't.

BMI as a system was created in the 1800's, and widely discredited by professionals in the mid 1900's. It was NEVER meant to apply to individuals, even 200 years ago-- but because it's very easy to look at a chart, it caught on, and stuck.

The military sticks with it because it's field expedient, and because training people on a better, more accurate system requires money and time they are not willing to spend-- just like the APFT.

Discussion always rolls around, but the reality is, it's not affecting manning requirements-- so it's pushed to the back burner, and the affected people fall by the wayside. A very vocal minority, but...still a minority.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 5 at 2017 5:36 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 05 Oct 2017 17:36:39 -0400

It's hard to say if it will change. I have failed height/weight parameters for the last 2 years, but always come in way low on the tape test. I would not call myself a body builder by any means, but I am definitely not a fat boy either.

I wonder if the current method can be used for screening purposes only, with an official follow up to a certified tank as a requirement before any adverse action taken. On the RC/NG side, it is feasible for a more accurate measurement to be taken as part of the annual health assessment through LHI?