Why is AR 600-9 so ate up? Body Mass Index is the most ridiculous, archaic system ever. How could this be solved?

2014-01-02T01:33:17-05:00

I'm so sick of seeing squared away Soldiers freaked out about height and weight like it's the executioner. And before anyone comes on here and says, "Just lose weight, fat ass." Every single one of you has met or knows someone who was good at their job but was just not genetically created in the ridiculous 1940's mold that we're supposed to fit into.

Response by 1SG Steven Stankovich made Jan 2 at 2014 1:44 AM

2014-01-02T01:44:50-05:00

I have been in the Army for a little over 23 years.  For the last 21 years, I have been taped after every weigh-in.  I'm a big guy and that is just the way it is.  If I lose the weight needed to make my "table weight," I believe that I will wither away and die.  I do what I need to do to make tape, not weight.  Right, wrong or indifferent, that has worked for me.  I am not a big fan of our current means of height and weight tables, but those are what are outlined in AR 600-9, and until changed, that is what the regulation is.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 2 at 2014 6:51 AM

2014-01-02T06:51:05-05:00

Also, and I know this is speculative, but it just seems like the height and weight program hasn't been changed in decades because it allows Commanders extreme latitude with regard to who they want to force out of the Army? If numbers come down, we'll just tighten up the height and weight standards in order to force people on the the weight control program, then when they get off if they ever wind of busting tape again we have to initiate chapter paperwork.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 2 at 2014 6:57 AM

2014-01-02T06:57:15-05:00

In today's Army, though, they need some sort of standard and there's no way there is time to dunk a 178-man HHC or something like my old company at Fort Huachuca (450 Soldiers in one company) in water to determine perfect fat content.

Honestly I get taped every time. I hit the gym constantly and I'm in good shape. I don't care that I get taped, I'm like 14-15% bf under.

For every person you meet like in your example that's overweight and fails tape but is good at their job, there's two to three people who are also good at their job and not failing either.

I will leave you with this comment:

Regardless of the inaccuracies and issues with the Army taping system. I have NEVER, in 13 years, EVER, personally taped someone over or met someone who failed tape that was NOT fat. Yeah they may be a few points off percentage, but EVERY LAST PERSON I have ever seen fail a tape has some disgusting looking flabby midsection AT LEAST. EVERY ONE. And I've personally taped HUNDREDS of people, and obviously met a ton in my 13 year career. It's true. I've never looked at someone, even if maybe they had been dunked in water and would have passed, and thought to myself "OMG, I can't believe this guy failed tape." EVER. They're ALWAYS pretty fat. Anyone that lifts up their shirt and you can see their abs, never fails tape. Ever.

Response by CPT Brian Willey made Jan 2 at 2014 9:15 AM

2014-01-02T09:15:18-05:00

SGT Jaynes, you are absolutely right about the antique and archaic height/weight table used. Some clever scientists acquired 3 Caucasian cadavers to boil down, atomically separate, test, burn and analyze to determine fat and fat-free mass of each and develop those tables for the use of insurance companies.

But as with the tape test, it is very easy to get one's height and weight and say, "you are the right weight" or "you are 5 pounds overweight."

SFC Jones made an observation very true to my experience also, I have VERY rarely seen anyone chronically fail to meet BF standards that was not over-fat. The best distinction to be made would be the difference between overweight and over-fat.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jan 2 at 2014 11:05 AM

2014-01-02T11:05:03-05:00

My suggestion would be to tie it to the APFT. Here's a potential way to do it; 290-300: 1st class APFT, exempt from Body Fat testing requirements. 280--289: 2nd class APFT, must meet standards in Body Fat tables, within +/- 5% . 279 and below: 3rd class APFT, must meet the standards per the regulation. So those mythical "300 APFT'ers who can't meet tape" that we always hear about and yet no one has ever seen/met would be taken care of, and it gives people more of an incentive to strive for.

Response by CSM Mike Maynard made Jan 2 at 2014 11:52 PM

2014-01-02T23:52:57-05:00

Most folks don't realize that the services don't just come up with these standards on their own - we are constrained by a DoD Instruction 1308.3 on what we can and cannot do.

In fact the left and right limits (Weight/BMI) are set by this instruction and the Army is no where near being the most stringent or close to the minimum BMI/Body Fat% allowed.

So, the Army is already more lenient than they need to be, so if you don't meet what the Army standard is, then you are way off from what the other services require and what the worst case would be if we went by the most stringent requirements of the DoDI.

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/130803p.pdf

]"¨ó:dYVgÅ(qy°Ð¹°(á¾oþVr4G0I:1Ûÿ$ËF´1Á?@÷|$í×Ef.Ë^F®_»(G>]Ø"r ½·DìýÍ h'PÖõÝdúðx>½þz§L÷a CØ[dô@¯i;ÜK6¦mpyAGø´÷u÷x{viõ `ïøõ .,Zî4xª°#jzÙxà"Ø2·_÷»ò´Ç¡õbGKV,8aÀÒÕ´÷Ùð±ã|*~$RØ...

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Jan 3 at 2014 10:45 AM

2014-01-03T10:45:36-05:00

For the last 10-12 years of my career, as I got older, it became harder to keep the weight off and I had to endure the post APFT tapings. Having been a recruiter earlier in my career and an SGL at PLDC, I became somewhat of an SME where taping was required; to this fact, there are a LOT of individuals that do not know how to properly administer the taping process to either male or female Soldiers. I will give you a personal example as it affected me personally in early 2004: I was at Ft. Knox getting ready to attend the then 19K ANCOC class. I ended up needing to be taped, now I had been taped for oh, the past 3-3 1/2 years, and was well under the % for my age at the time. When I was taped by the SGLs, I was "just over" the %, but when I went and was taped by the Deputy Cmdnt for my "final" chance, I was suddenly about 8% OVER the percentage. I was not admitted and of course went home disheartened and a little pissed off, as the Deputy's taping measurements onmy neck were a full 2.5" smaller than actuial. he taped me at 15" and I was in actuality 17.5", based not only by the tapings done by my unit, but by my class-A shirts!! But I also knew that the cadre at the school are/were the SMEs and my arguments fell on deaf ears there. Now when I got back to my unit, of course every one had to go see the BDE CSM and they taped me on the spot, and low and behold, I met tape, was under the max by 3% and my neck was "AGAIN" at 17.5"....seems to me that with the advancements made in technology, that we could/would have developed something more error free and user friendly over the years. Just remember to enforce the standards you currently have, and hey, utilize the system if you feel that there is a better process to be used!"TREAT 'EM ROUGH!!"

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2014 7:41 AM

2014-01-04T07:41:59-05:00

I personally think the tape test is a cheap response to a complicated issue. Just like the rest of the Army's programs; Cheap. We want an elite force then maybe spending the money on the force is something to be had. I have seen many complain on this thread that it would cost money to train and operate the "dunk tank" but; do you not think that with so much variance in how one person tapes to another that they too should be trained and doesn't that also cost ..... money? Duh! Let's look at some facts: Average height of an American male (1940) - 5'6" Average height of an American male (2010) - 5'10.5" BMI was made for statistical populations and developed in the 1880's where the average height for a North American male was 5'4". Americans are bigger stronger, faster than we were when these "Standards" were developed. I am 6'3" 217lbs 27yrs old. My table weight is 212 lbs. I have never made that table weight yet I am roughly 13% BF and usually score a 270+ on my APFT. Please explain this.....Yet I always fear the tape. Why? Because there has been times where I have been taped damn near the limit and once I was taped over and placed on the ABCP. Was I really out of shape? 270+ APFT? I don't think so. So I requested a re tape where in now I was under the limit. What happened next you ask? No, I was not removed from the ABCP until 30 days passed and I was able to "show progress" and pass another tape. I am currently off the program but, this is just bullshit. Now I will worry for the next 36 months if I get someone who tapes me wrong; Will I get kicked out? Invest into your forces, Not in your pockets. Pay for the right tools to maintain the worlds elite. And if you dont want to invest into the right tools then maybe its time you re-evaluate the standards to the average size of an American today. Stop being Cheap!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2014 3:40 PM

2014-01-04T15:40:39-05:00

I am currently see a civilian nutritionist because according to army standard I am over weight and I barely meet the weight and tape, basically because I am short and naturally curvy and have a small neck (not fat). I have seen the military nutritionist who mind set is calorie count. This might work for some but other it does not.

The military has me at 32% body fat (allowance 34%) however, my nutritionist has me at 24% body fat. That is a huge difference.

I know there is nothing I can do but keep busting my hump to keep my body fat down but the military really does need a new way of determining body fat.

Also, I have seen some really great soldier get discharged due to being over weight. They have great AFPT scores and know their job inside-out. But because of 1 or 2% overage they are dismissed. This in my opinion is messed up.

Response by SGT Suraj Dave made Jan 4 at 2014 3:57 PM

2014-01-04T15:57:40-05:00

These are my thoughts on the tape test:

My genetics (Due to my race and ethnicity [indian incase your wondering]) put me at a disadvantage. My people are skinny people, but we tend to have bigger midsections as our fat does not distribute well. Therefore, even when I was in accordance with weight, I still had a bad belly bulge.

Overweight soldiers CAN lose the weight, but the Permanent Profilers wont ever run/wear gear again. They can not defend themselves, let alone our country in that condition. I believe instead of being so quick to remove overweight soldiers, we remove the permanently broken one (I am not talking about combat wounded, I mean people on permanent profiles from just doing every day PT etc...).

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2014 7:51 PM

2014-01-04T19:51:16-05:00

The Army could do what the USAF did and make your waist measurement part of your score. If you're not 6' with a maximum 32 1/2 inch waist, then you're not getting anywhere near a high score, no matter how fast you run, how many push ups you do, or how many crunches you perform. I think the APFT regulations are fair, not the greatest, but not as bad as they could be.

It is sad that if you can pull off 290 or higher, you fail because of weight and tape. SSG Hasbun is definitely onto something, but I think the 1st Class score could be lowered to 270 or 280. The only gripe I have is the sit-ups... they're terrible for you, and you have to do a bunch to score high. Funny thing is, I'm low body fat, cut mid section, work-out like a maniac (my ab routines are madness), yet struggle to get 70 sit-ups in two minutes... but the guy next to me has a beer belly and blows me away.

So, it may not be fair for bigger guys, but it goes both ways.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 5 at 2014 1:29 PM

2014-01-05T13:29:11-05:00

SGT Jaynes, first of all, the system was not designed in the 1940's; the Army did not start focusing on weight control until the 1970's. Second, no one on this site would degrade another Soldier in that fashion. Third, it is not archaic. It wasn't evolved by the good idea fairy, but researched by personnel in the medical field as the most cost effective way of estimating a Soldier's body fat percentage. If you have a better and cost effective way to measure, the. You can make recommended changed to the regulation, which it outlined in each publication, usually right after the cover page, under recommended suggestions.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 5 at 2014 3:28 PM

2014-01-05T15:28:40-05:00

I
would argue that most Soldiers that don't pass tape are lacking in one area.

First thing first I am not judging any soldier,
but from my experience in the military if you don't meet HT/WT and fail the TAPE
it’s because you lack intensity when doing PT or you don't eat the proper
portions. It does not matter if you do PT twice a day if a person consumes 6000
calories a day they are not going to lose weight. Also, it will not matter if they
eat 1,200 calories a day and don't do high intensity physical training. That
means soldiers/NCOs/Officers they need to have a balance. If not you will be
stress out when APFT/tape comes by.

My advice to the NCOs encourage your soldiers to
eat quality foods, the right portions and push them when leading PT.

No offense to nobody, but genetics play a small
role in the HT/WT, it's been scientifically proven no matter race/gender people
can lose weight/body fat. I am from Puerto Rican descent with a family history
of diabetes, heart conditions and obesity which makes me more aware that I have
to have a balance healthy eating and PT.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 8 at 2014 4:06 PM

2014-01-08T16:06:46-05:00

I am personally up for separation from service due to this issue. It has been very stressful for me, and I have done everything that I could possibly do to meet the standards set for me. I always have to make my neck bigger to make my body more proportionate, which I don't understand has to do with BMI. Every single time I get taped, my measurements jump, even though I lose weight. I will seek help outside my organization for other people to take my measurements, but my company has "official tapers", so it wouldn't count as official for record.

I am so frustrated right now, because people look at me and ask why I would even be considered for separation, and when I tell them, I get funny looks. I've requested an administrative separation board in lieu of a "silent chapter", and requested changes to the regulation so future Soldiers wont have to deal with this issue.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 9 at 2014 3:14 AM

2014-01-09T03:14:41-05:00

If i am remembering right, don't civilian doctors have TOOLS to measure body fat?
some kind of fat-pinch-test.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 9 at 2014 11:08 PM

2014-01-09T23:08:42-05:00

It's not really an answer but it's funny to get into the minds of the senior enlisted. When I was in WLC the commandant was asked the same question and his response was the following. It's a standard like anything else you know what the standard is and it's your job to meet it even if the science is not accurate.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 5:04 AM

2014-01-12T05:04:22-05:00

I think the solution to the "body fat" dillema starts with a good overhaul of the current APFT.  If a good and functional APFT is put in place - with standards that require you to be in good physical condition - you could actually do away with taping all together.  I think that if the Army really believed in it's APFT, this would be the end result.  Others have talked about cost effectiveness... well, this would be the best option.  However, I think we all know this probably won't happen.  So, the next best answer should be a body fat measurement process that actually measures body fat.  We should at least be using calipers.  The Army is administratively separating Soldiers based on their body compostion... shouldn't we be measuring accurately?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 5:21 AM

2014-01-12T05:21:23-05:00

I completely agree with you the height and weight standards should be re-evaluated I myself struggle to make tape every time. The army needs to realize that people are no longer built like that anymore.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 19 at 2014 8:18 AM

2014-03-19T08:18:54-04:00

Its hard for some of the guys in my unit to justify that. Sure its the right thing to do based on the 600-9. But being in FA our bigger guys are our backbone in the paladins, throwing a 100lb round in the tube like its nothing, take a guy who passes pt, and hight and weight, that weighs 140lbs hes good for a few rounds and that's it. Its these bigger guys that get me through the 6 and 7 round fire missions in only a few mins

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2014 8:02 AM

2014-03-21T08:02:57-04:00

SSG Plato, outstanding! You seem from your description to be
a physical specimen; however you would also be the exception to the rule. The
circumference method of determining body composition has been proven time and
again to not be 100% accurate. But, it has been proven time and again as being
accurate for a vast majority of people within an acceptable tolerance for
determining body composition. The current method works for approximately 85% of
the population it is targeted for. The outlying 15% will either be in tolerance
but not measure as so, or be grossly out of tolerance but measure so. We have
all seen them, the stud that can BP 450 lbs but has a skinny neck; and the slug
who is HUGE and has a 22 inch neck to go along with his 48 inch waist. The bottom
line is this test is accurate for the vast majority of the population, is easy
to administer, and perhaps most important, is cheap. It is what we are stuck
with until such time as the Army finds an equally accurate, easy, and cheap
test to administer.

Let’s look at the current allowable body fat allowances we
permit.

Male

Age Group 17-20:
20% Body Fat

Age Group 21-27:
22% Body Fat

Age Group 28-39:
24% Body Fat

Age Group 40+:
26% Body Fat

Female

Age Group 17-20:
30% Body Fat

Age Group 21-27:
32% Body Fat

Age Group 28-39:
34% Body Fat

Age Group 40+:
36% Body Fat

Example: 20 year old male at 6 foot 200lbs, with 20% BF;
would be carrying 40 pounds of fat on his body. That is a lot! If this is the
case he could surely stand to lose 10-20 pounds and would be healthier and
probably more physically fit for doing so. Even with a 3% variance that would
only drop his fat stores to 34 lbs, still quite a bit of fat to be carrying
around. The Army’s maximum allowed BF percentages are very generous.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Apr 14 at 2014 12:22 PM

2014-04-14T12:22:02-04:00

im going to withdawl my statement!

Response by MSgt Keith Hebert made Apr 14 at 2014 5:35 PM

2014-04-14T17:35:19-04:00

It is even harder in guard to keep the ht/wt standards
Between 60 hour work weeks and family obligations finding one day to workout is hard much a steady workout routine.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2014 8:09 PM

2014-04-14T20:09:58-04:00

I was an overweight Soldier for a LONG time. I used to blame the height/weight/tape system for it.

Now before anyone goes screaming "genetics" at me, I'll have you know, I'm half Mexican, half Puerto Rican. I know the struggles of genetics against this system. However, I also know how much I wrongfully attributed the contributions of my people to my weight issues. I like food, I like food a lot. I didn't like to workout & blamed random injuries on why I "couldn't" work out. So when I went in to get taped, I'd rant and rave about how unfair and unjust the system was... One day one of my PSGs let me rant about how unfair it was and how I was being discriminated against by a system meant for "other than brown" people. Once I was done, he said in a very calm voice "SPC Quiles, you're fat. It's not that the system is against you, it's that you refuse to acknowledge that eating the way you do & refusing to work out because you're 'injured' has directly led to your enrollment in the AWCP".

Have I seen Soldiers in the same position I was in? Yes. Have I seen Soldiers who tried and tried to lose weight but couldn't, honestly no. A lot of the time those Soldiers aren't being honest with me or themselves about what they are eating and how much they are working out. I have one Soldier now who was doing exactly that and couldn't understand why he kept busting tape. I finally had to sit him down and say "yes, genetics are against you but they aren't what is keeping you on the program. You are like me, you will have to constantly watch what you eat and workout more than other Soldiers. However, if you do, you will see real results and you will get off the program."

He finally took a hard look at himself; he is now 18% bf and has just earned his first APFT Badge with a 291.

I do have to admit that I like the way the Navy does it & how they implement it into the overall score.

Is the system a bit biased towards the more curvy or blocky built? Sure, a little. Is it insurmountable? Nope. Some of us just need to work a little harder & eat a little more clean (or a lot). The standard is the standard.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2014 9:36 PM

2014-04-14T21:36:20-04:00

Unless I missed something in the reg, we don't use Body Mass Index.

You're right, BMI is an archaic and outdated formula, and we don't use it. It's really only used in medicine to screen potentially overweight individuals. We use body fat percentage, body fat percentage is a medically viable indicator of health. The DOD goal is 16%, every service has a much higher allowable standard. For instance, I am allowed 22% bf. At my height, I can have a 15 inch neck and a 36 inch waist and make tape. That is a small tire around my waist.

There are a few popular arguments I hear against it:

1. Overweight people who max their PT test

2. Overweight people who do their jobs well

3. Tape testing is inaccurate

1. Of the hundreds, possibly thousands, of overweight Soldiers I have encountered in the Army, only a handful could max an APFT, more than half couldn't consistently pass. Ask an NCOES instructor, they tape a wider variety of people than almost anyone else.

2. They may do their job well, but what about that lower ranking Soldier who is hungry and putting in the extra effort to progress? Most junior Soldiers will tell you they have little respect for the NCO who is fat and making on the spot corrections.

3. There are many methods of bf testing. Skin resistance is wildly irregular, varying 4% within a day, and 50% off for anyone near the 12% range. Calipers are more accurate, but require trainin. With the amount of complaints that come from being taped incorrectly, where an inch can equal 1%, can you imagine the errors that would come from caliper testing? Tape measuring has a small margin of error, and is easy to teach.

Being overweight costs the Army money, a lot of money. Obesity is linked to chronic illnesses that cost a massive amount to treat over a lifetime. Diabetes Type 2, heart disease, high cholesterol, hypertension, knee damage, back pain, and plantar fasciitis. All these require long term medication, and can be managed by diet and exercise. Now, how can we expect a leader to take care of Soldiers and set a good example, when they can't even take care of their own health?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2014 11:25 PM

2014-04-14T23:25:02-04:00

My WLC Instructor had a suggestion that could solve the problem. The Marines allot for those larger soldiers who score in the 300s or just have problems losing weight [but they can still pass their PT Test] an additional 10 lbs or something like that. That way when they pass their PT test those additional alloted lbs gives them a chance to pass height & weight. This maybe a quick fix but if you think about it, that could save a whole lot of problems with soldiers busting tape. However, being in the Army for 5 years now, only lets me know that they're [Army] going to mess it up

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2014 3:50 AM

2014-04-15T03:50:15-04:00

Ok, look. Why do we have the current test? It's all about resources! All you need is a tape, scale, form, and a pen. The current test can be conducted anywhere. It's not perfect, but that's why we have it. Are there better ways? Sure there are. But look at effect of implementing new methods. What would the cost be to the Army to outfit EVERY unit with needed equipment to conduct the test? What about calibration of the "better" equipment. Can it deploy? Etc,. I offer this explanation because sometimes the big picture eludes us. If you look at what we got, to include the PT test from this perspective, it easy to understand why.

Response by SFC Christopher Walker, MAOM, DSL made Apr 25 at 2014 2:23 PM

2014-04-25T14:23:47-04:00

This has been the Army's method for many years. Is it fair? That has been an onging debate since I joined the Army. Everyone has their diffent take on the taping standards. Either way, it's the standard and everyone must met the the requirements until it is changed.

Response by SSgt Gregory Guina made Apr 25 at 2014 2:44 PM

2014-04-25T14:44:35-04:00

This is the DoD policy for determining BF%. It is not the most accurate way of doing it (+/- 4%) but it is the standard. I think the DoD should use this as a screening process and then have a more precise method prior to flagging a service member and ruining his/her career.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2014 2:53 PM

2014-04-25T14:53:34-04:00

I think that they are about as arbitrary as the NCO doing the taping, as well as a not so accurate measurement. Considering that this event will hold a soldier's career in it's hands, I think that a more accurate measurement done by a trained disinterested party should be done.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2014 3:26 PM

2014-04-25T15:26:16-04:00

My buddy just pulled a 400 on the APFT. He passed tape by 1% and has almost 0 body fat. My opinion, the tape is dumb.

Response by SSG William Sutter made Dec 1 at 2014 12:00 AM

2014-12-01T00:00:12-05:00

The Army has talked about getting rid of this before. I would recommend working with the SM until they are squared away. There is nothing anyone can do to avoid this system so work with with the regulation until it changes. You could also write to the publications doctorate to make corrections if you think there needs to be.

Response by SSG Timothy Miller made Aug 31 at 2015 3:14 PM

2015-08-31T15:14:12-04:00

I totally AGREE.

Response by SGT Patrick Reno made Sep 1 at 2015 9:48 AM

2015-09-01T09:48:35-04:00

This just doesn't add up for a lot of guys. Why do they still do this. They were doing this 30 years ago and we lost good people because of it.

Response by SPC Ryan McNamara made Sep 15 at 2015 2:28 PM

2015-09-15T14:28:08-04:00

I had to be taped from day one as according to there stupid charts someone 5'10" weighing 185 lbs is overweight but my body fat was 15% at the time well within regs it's just a test that is not a great fit for accurately judging a soldiers fitness for duty

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2015 3:15 PM

2015-09-15T15:15:36-04:00

Lets get this squared away now BMI = Body Mass Index = Height to weight ratio not I say again NOT Body Fat %. These are two totally different things. Someone over the reckon-mended weight on BMI could be heavy due to been muscular and be classed as been negatively overweight which is a load of tosh! Body Fat % testing is done by totally different means examples electrodes, which run through the body and fat is measured through how much resistance there is, this has to be done with same conditions has previously done, example empty stomach or full stomach time of day etc, you also have body fat calipers, and in pool testing. I think who ever brought the idea of doing the BMI as body fat test needs re educating. What experience do I have British Army - All Arms Physical Training Instructor (qualed July 2004 - refreshed in Mar 2009), Advanced International Personal Training Instructor through Premier Training International, including KB instructor, Pre and Post Natal PTI, Advanced Nutrition for physical performance and weight management! Once again BMI is a crappy test and should be gotton rid of.

If the concern is risk of heart disease due to body fat then they need to measure hip and waist and using the right calculations will give an indication of risk!

Response by SSG John Erny made Sep 15 at 2015 4:01 PM

2015-09-15T16:01:33-04:00

As others have pointed out the data is from the 1940's and likely designed around what your average white person looked like at the time. I do not think that the data used takes in to consideration genetic differences of a more diverse Military. Look at some of the folks from American Samoa, they come in three sizes, large, extra large, and XXL. Some of you have seen the short big and wide guy that could bench press an engine block but because he is short does not make weight. Or the "Swede" who is built like a brick S... House and twice as tough.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2015 4:22 PM

2015-09-15T16:22:57-04:00

I think the bigger problem is fat asses passing because they have big, fat necks.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2015 4:49 PM

2015-09-15T16:49:16-04:00

I am a SPC.. Currently my NCOIC.. Runs everyday with me and I have been on special pops.. I'm a great soldier and by any regular persons standard.. I have curves that women pay for.. But for the Army I am over weight and a horrible soldier because I have to be taped. I pass my PT test every time..never been in trouble.. So I wish this could be changed or seriously looked at..

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2015 4:58 PM

2015-09-15T16:58:10-04:00

I agree with this completely, I did 7 years in the army and I went from 185 to 225 but not from eating and lack of exercise it was from drinking those muscle mass gainer drinks and just weight lifting but tape always give me an issue because of my size

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2015 5:41 PM

2015-09-15T17:41:21-04:00

I agree with you. I have been subjected to this regulation but have always passed tape. I recently came in contact with a soldier at the gym that had an unusually small neck. He was shorter and a tad smaller than me. Because of his neck he never passes tape.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2015 7:43 PM

2015-09-15T19:43:13-04:00

So first we must determine what is the problem, before we can even get ready to solve it. After reading through most of the responses, two points resonate. One, the tape system is inefficient but it is the best mass measurement system we have. Two, we have a lot of "fat" Soldiers on duty right now. So let's write a problem statement.

Currently, within the U.S. Army, the force is utilizing a inefficient Body Fat Calculation System that allows a large margin of error utilizing DOD Directive 1308.1 and AR 600-9 for body composition of its Soldiers.

So this rough draft of a problem statement will allow us to move forward.

With the above two main points complied and the problem statement lets list some facts.
The H/W screening table for the Army is based on BMI.
The Tape Test for the Army is based on Body Fat.
The computation tables compensate for large necks but punish for small necks.
For Males there are only two authorized points of measurement for BF; Females are authorized three.
We do not PT near enough anymore.

Now these facts are not all encompassing and I am certain many more could be added but I am going to stop there.

With the Total Soldier Concept and each Soldier is an Athlete. How many of us can say we actually follow this with ourselves and with our Soldiers? If you are honest and truly honest with yourself, maybe 15% of the people who will read this can say, 'Yep, I do!' The vast majority of the force is focused on PT for an hour in the morning and then their career field the rest of the day. So with this statement, are we making our Soldiers do enough during the day? I venture to say no we are not. If that is true, then is the above problem statement still valid? I say no it is not. So, let's update it.

Currently, within the U.S. Army, the force is utilizing a inefficient Body Fat Calculation System that allows a large margin of error utilizing DOD Directive 1308.1 and AR 600-9 for body composition of its Soldiers; while the greater portion of the force is not active enough to prevent excessive weight retention.

What can we do now to solve our problem?

Well if more PT is the answer then we need to find creative ways to fit more PT into our schedule. Maybe, adding several 15 minute sweat sessions in the day will be the solution. Or adding the stipulation of within your unit area, driving your POV is unauthorized during the duty day, walking or running are the only two forms of travel or government vehicle if required for mission. These are some examples of creative problem solving we can do.

Calorie intake, body output. Has anyone sat down with your high risk population or unit as a whole and given some tips on managing weight? I count calories and count my steps with my smart phone. I know exactly what I need to do every day to reach my goal. I know this because, I am forced too, because if taped I will be at risk of failure.

The DOD directive is pretty clear. All the force is concerned with is "6.2.2.3. Establish percent body fat standards using the circumference based method (body fat calculation equations, measurement sites, and measurement techniques) as prescribed in enclosure 3. These body fat equations rely heavily on assessment of abdominal fat, the region of greatest interest to objectives of military fitness and general health standards." I included the entire statement so there is some context. So let me break this down, there is a test out set forth in regulatory guidance that is focused on specific regions not the total body fat. The Tape Test is not to measure body fat, only belly fat.

If we want to update this and encompass the total Soldier. Then we must update the tape test to take into account more than just your neck, waist, and hips (for females). What else can we do? Well, let us modify this to resemble this for male and female. One measuring standard regardless of gender.

Neck, Chest, Waist, Hips, Dominate Leg Thigh, Dominate Leg Calf, Dominate Leg Ankle, Dominate Arm Bicep, Dominate Arm Forearm, and Dominate Arm Wrist.

If we can about the total Soldier, let's measure the entire Soldier. We can also put in the regulation how to calculate where to measure based on each Soldiers body type and design. Easiest way is to measure each body part and divide by two and that will be that specific Soldiers measuring location.

The H/W BMI screening tables should be updated to take into account our new culture of body building or lifting in our society. How much? I would venture a guess that a general 7-12 pound increase across the board would be sufficient. But, if you read AR 600-9 carefully. While each Soldier may fall under screening weight on the table, they are still required to meet the Body Fat Standard and may be taped at the commanders discretion. The body fat table will be updated automatically but the general requirement of 18 - 25 % based on age will remain.

I will leave you with this general statement. What have you done today for your High Risk Soldiers to mitigate some risk to their weight problem? Whether it is a actual problem or an arbitrary number problem found in some regulation. If your answer is 'Nothing,' then start tomorrow and make a plan, get your Soldiers input, finalize the plan, and tackle this as a team and family should, TOGETHER!

CPT Eric McGinty

Response by SPC Will Keller made Sep 15 at 2015 8:32 PM

2015-09-15T20:32:50-04:00

I feel that body fat shouldn't play that big a part in anything. Unless you're obese. You won't see the skinny guy humping the 240 during a ruck. At least I haven't, it's been the bigger framed soldier. I make poor food choices I lack willpower and motivation. There's no way to motivate that out of someone to help slim them down. If there is PM me, I'm open minded. Thank you for reading.

Response by 1SG Frank Rocha made Sep 15 at 2015 10:05 PM

2015-09-15T22:05:27-04:00

hydrostatic weighing or DEXA (dual energy X-ray absorptiometry).

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Sep 15 at 2015 10:07 PM

2015-09-15T22:07:34-04:00

BMI does not indicate the fitness level of anyone...

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2015 1:32 AM

2015-09-16T01:32:32-04:00

I agree, I've been taped since I joined the military my genetics has cause me to be flagged. I am 23, 65in and my table weight is 153. Plus my unit is not consistent with the personal taping some don't even know how. I had one NCO tape me at 50 on my hips when the leading NCO did I was 42. It's so frustrating I just wish they reevaluate the height and weight requirement.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2015 7:11 AM

2015-09-16T07:11:27-04:00

BMI is an attempt to measure amount of muscle tissue, bone and body fat. It is a quick but midly inaccurate measurement. If the Army really wanted to know body fat percentages it would use a 3, 5, or 7 point skin fold measurement to determine body fat. Exercise physiologists' have been doing this for decades. It's fast, easy, inexpensive, and way more accurate. Having a certain body fat is the no BS measurement. If you are fat, you are fat. Why the army can't shoot the 7' target on this one is beyond me. No other answer makes sense. Or just drop the vmi altogether and really on your PT test.

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2015 12:53 PM

2015-09-16T12:53:29-04:00

I'm 5'11" and 230 lbs...that's why they have the tape method. Anyone healthy should be able to pass tape.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2015 1:00 PM

2015-09-16T13:00:18-04:00

I have been taped after having children in the Army. There have been times I made weight since then and times I'm taped. I think the culture of the Army will not endorse leniency to the standards because most higher ups don't have the issue, so they don't care! I read in the Army Times and the SMA said skinny people don't complain about height and weight! He don't have the problem as he don't care! I believe that if you have a certain pt score that should have some benefit. In my career I've scored a 285 and almost failed, (because the person didn't know how to tape). Someone who can exceed the physical standards is clearly in the physical shape needed to be a combat soldier... I have a very skinny 1sg that told a soldier that needed to get taped to lose some weight "fatty!" He was super skinny. The Army want to change into a more intelligent Army, but pt is still how we view promotability in soldiers. If you get taped people look down at u! The culture needs to change!!!

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Sep 16 at 2015 3:50 PM

2015-09-16T15:50:05-04:00

until my disability got to the point I couldn't do PT, I never failed a PT test or fell out of a run, but because i was always about 3 pounds over weight, i was screwed. I ran 12 miles a day, my wife cooked fat free food, I used pills so I'd use the head more to lose weight, I'd not eat at times, it was a living hell and took away from doing my MOS, cause I had to worry so much about my weight.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2015 4:31 PM

2015-09-16T16:31:18-04:00

From a commander’s perspective - If my guys pass the PT test and are struggling with HT/WT. I'm not going to go after them aggressively. However, let’s work on it together as a team and generating improvement, commanders have that discretion. If they are struggling with PT in general, again let’s work on it and better the unit’s position. Functional fitness is the key to success.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2015 7:25 PM

2015-09-16T19:25:53-04:00

WE ARE ALL PROFESSIONAL ATHLETES. We are paid to maintain weight and fitness standards much like any professional or ranked athlete. Let's hold ourselves to this higher standard.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2015 9:46 AM

2015-09-17T09:46:55-04:00

I am 5'11 205-210 I make tape, but my doctor got upset when I told her what the Army wanted me to weight and she stated it was not healthy for me to be 194. When I left WOCS I was 195 and my instructor told me to go eat when I got home I looked like skelator. Re looking at the policy should be done, especially if they are going to finally change the PT test..

Response by Cpl Glynis Sakowicz made Sep 17 at 2015 9:56 AM

2015-09-17T09:56:23-04:00

Oh you have no idea what its like for most women! Our bodies naturally carry a higher BMI than men... and you have never seen more freaked out troops than those who have just had a baby, and step on that scale for the first time after that.

I've seen women run (Literally!) until they drop, starve themselves for days... all the while they are nursing a child, because its a choice for them... feed the baby now... have a job to feed the baby in the future... and that is not much of a choice.

Sure, there are some who have weight problems, and others who look fine in uniform, but the BMI says they are a percentage over the limit, and THOSE are the ones that make me scratch my head.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2015 3:25 PM

2015-09-17T15:25:38-04:00

The bottom line is cost. We all know there are better systems out there. Implimenting a new standard piece of equipment to measure body fat Army wide would cost a large some of money. Until something is devised that is more accurate and cheaper than a tape measure and a pencil, and is deployable and wont need calibration, what we have is what we have. Remeber a few years back when the Army was working on a new PT Test? It was scraped due to cost in equipment and manpower needed to conduct it. Remember, its easy to be a critic at the local level. Take a step back and view the big picture and look at it from a bang for buck perspective. The way we do buisness now is not perfect, but it gets it right a majority of the time. We as leaders need to support and defend our policies. I use these issues as a chance to educate our future leaders that by offering a diffrent perspective can alter opinions. The last time I disscussed this i asked a young SGT this: If there was a system in place that was 90-95 percent accurate, would it be feasable to replace the system at double or triple the cost to gain a few percent? If you apply this general question to any system, the answer would be "no"! but apply this to 600-9 and emotions get in volved and we want to change our answer. I am not a fan of our system personnaly because when I was a young E-5 I was on the ABCP ( weight control program then) and I have an NCOER with a needs improvement to illistratre my point. I knew I was going to have a challenge the rest of career so I did what I had to do and fixed the problem. I am now a BN CSM and I share my story because we all make mistakes and I over came mine. Also, we focus on the margin of error hurting our physicaly fit Soliders. What about the Soldiers with big necks that pass and shouldnt. Dont shoot me! I am just offering a diffrent perspective. Not classifing big neck folks as not being fit. I know several big neck folks that can ruck for days, and I know serveral fit low body fat Soldiers that score 300's that cant ruck worth a hoot.

CSM Smith

Response by Cpl Rc Layne made Sep 17 at 2015 10:29 PM

2015-09-17T22:29:31-04:00

I can't speak for the Army, I was in the Corps. I once had a runt of a Warrant Officer put me on weight control. His reasoning was I didn't "possess the classic V body shape" that he thought was necessary to be a good Marine. He could outrun me and do more setups than I could, but he couldn't lift as much as I could or do as many pullups as I could. The BMI was developed by insurance companies to pad their bottom line. Why anyone else pays any attention to it is beyond. Ive seen slender low BMI types that couldn't do crap on a physical event, and one of the best runners I have ever seen was a big bellied Sgt at ITS in 83. He ran all of our dicks in the ground and smoked stinking Prince Albert cigars doing it.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 18 at 2015 10:43 AM

2015-09-18T10:43:37-04:00

You ever ask yourself why the Army's physical fitness test is the way it is? Ask yourself why there are two sets of standards for male and female?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 24 at 2015 10:36 AM

2015-09-24T10:36:51-04:00

How can it be solved? The same way everything else that is wrong with the Army can be solved- external review. Now before the brain of every NCO explodes, hear me out.

Everybody has known for many years that the tape test is one of the least effective methods of body fat. Water displacement, caliper-tests, and a dozen others are proven to work better. Two facts stop the Army from doing anything about it- every other tests costs more money to furnish at the unit level, and there is no political pressure to change it.

The Army runs purely on cash and reputation. There are religious groups that have been trying to gain the ability to list their faith on their ERBs for nearly a decade, a change that requires almost nothing on behalf of the Department o the Army. It hasn't happened because an update to the software that runs it costs money, and there isn't enough public noise to force the Army to take action in order to avoid a black eye. At the same time, QSP and QMP were implemented in less than a year because the Army needed to save money and it could publicly claim to be improving the force by getting rid of the stagnant and the defective.

Outside review overcomes this by taking those without preconceptions about this ridiculous program (or any other Army program) and giving them the ability to objectively assess things that are redundant, broken, outdated, or illegal and correct them. It's the best thing for a complete overhaul of Army policies, processes, and regulations- of which the weight control program would surely be included.

Response by GySgt Moses Lozano made Sep 26 at 2015 12:35 AM

2015-09-26T00:35:29-04:00

One simple remedy would be to go back to weight waivers approved by Commanding Officers. Based on uniform appearance and a more than average Physical Fitness score.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 26 at 2015 6:21 PM

2015-09-26T18:21:40-04:00

Revamp the system with the 21st century version.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 15 at 2017 4:33 AM

2017-05-15T04:33:35-04:00

If the Army overhauled the height and weight to something that was more accurate, then people wouldn't be able the game it like they do now. Personally, from what I can tell, the higherups are perfectly fine with having a sloppy system because it's easy. Why expend the effort on something that might help soldiers when what we have in place is easy and it does what we want?
Same with the APFT. It'll never change to something that's worthwhile, because it's easy to implement and easy to game. We'll never be the "elite" force our leaders envision as long as they continue choosing the easy options.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 20 at 2017 7:43 PM

2017-05-20T19:43:28-04:00

Thank you!!!

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made May 20 at 2019 9:49 PM

2019-05-20T21:49:17-04:00

The tough part is time. When you have 60 people to test you cant dunk em all or put em on an electrical resistance scale. The tape is the "speedy" way to allow the large necked fatties stay in and the pencil necks get on the program.
Its messed up for sure. I'm taped every time. And one time in my career was I actually thankful for it. SERE. Every person who had visible abs had a very tough time, but those of us that were within standards but had a lil extra survived the hunger a lot better.
That is one thing the army never thinks about with this. They want the 1950 standard lean soldier. Well we run less now and having a little extra makes us more survivable in many ways.
Inbody makes a scale that tests a Soldier in less than 5 min and gives a full readout of BMI, water, and even breaks down by extremity. Very effective. It takes as much time as a tape and is more useful. I'd wed use that we could solve everything quickly.