Posted on 07/05/2010 9:19:43 AM PDT by longtermmemmory
(June 23) -- When most people get in line at Orlando, Fla.'s new Harry Potter theme park, they're worried about the wait -- not their weight.
But according to some Harry Potter lovers, pudgy muggles -- those who weigh about 265 pounds or more -- are getting tossed from line at the most-hyped ride in Universal Studios' Wizarding World of Harry Potter amusement park.
For them, the ride "Harry Potter and the Forbidden Journey" is truly living up to its name -- and that's a big disappointment for fans who resemble Harry's rotund cousin Dudley.
Harry Potter fanatic Jeff Guillaume said he was "quite disappointed" after park officials turned him away from the Hogwarts-touring attraction because his 5-foot, 8-inch, 265-pound frame was deemed too large for the ride's safety harnesses.
"What it boils down to for me, and what surprised and disappointed me the most, was that many of Universal's other rides contain 'modified seating' rows for larger guests, and -- let's face it -- a good number of people in the Harry Potter fandom are a bit heavy, so why didn't Universal anticipate and accommodate us here?" he wrote on his website, the Harry Potter Automatic News Aggregator (HPANA to Potter maniacs).
Universal Studios representatives did not return calls in time for AOL News' deadline, but the Orlando Sentinel reports that park officials have "instituted a screening system" requiring random park-goers to sit in "test seats" installed in the line area of the "Harry Potter and the Forbidden Journey" ride.
"I'm not sure what the system is, but team members take potential riders -- not all of them -- and test whether the safety harnass [sic] will latch," the paper's Theme Park Rangers blog notes.
Some park-goers are hexing Universal Studios officials over rumors that 6-foot-11, 265-pound Orlando Magic center Dwight Howard was permitted on the ride while other heavyset Harry Potter fans were turned away.
But amusement park expert Dennis Speigel says the restrictions likely have as much to do with body type as they do with weight.
"Height can be a factor either way -- too short or too tall -- and girth could be a factor too," said Speigel, who is president of the amusement industry consulting firm International Theme Park Services.
While amusement park visitors are probably accustomed to signs informing them they "must be this tall to ride," Speigel says weight and body type restrictions are prevalent.
"It's not unusual," he says. "You have weight restrictions everywhere from Disney to the smallest mom-and-pop operators. It's for the safety of the guests. ... They aren't penalizing the person to be mean. They are exercising caution as it relates to safety -- and that's the prudent thing to do."
Even though more than one-third of American adults are obese, amusement park designers simply aren't creating rides for people who are very overweight, Speigel says.
"You can't design a ride for an excessively large person," he says. "You can't build for that narrow segment of the population. You try to hit average and little bit above."
Why parrot a fad idiocy! BMI is BOGUS.
1. The person who dreamed up the BMI said explicitly that it could not and should not be used to indicate the level of fatness in an individual.The BMI was introduced in the early 19th century by a Belgian named Lambert Adolphe Jacques Quetelet. He was a mathematician, not a physician. He produced the formula to give a quick and easy way to measure the degree of obesity of the general population to assist the government in allocating resources. In other words, it is a 200-year-old hack.
2. It is scientifically nonsensical.
There is no physiological reason to square a person's height (Quetelet had to square the height to get a formula that matched the overall data. If you can't fix the data, rig the formula!). Moreover, it ignores waist size, which is a clear indicator of obesity level.
3. It is physiologically wrong.
It makes no allowance for the relative proportions of bone, muscle and fat in the body. But bone is denser than muscle and twice as dense as fat, so a person with strong bones, good muscle tone and low fat will have a high BMI. Thus, athletes and fit, health-conscious movie stars who work out a lot tend to find themselves classified as overweight or even obese.
I think people are confusing muscle density and fat content. You can have two people with the same weight but one be out of shape and “rotund” and the other person in shape and compact.
I guess my point is that Disney should be able to accomodate all(or most). The people paying the crazy prices are us “lard asses”, not 50 pound kids. Airplanes are 50 years old. Rides are new and should be designed to accomodate the changing size of America- if possible. Its not like a 750 lb heiffer showed up expecting to ride. We are talking about people in the 200’s. Just my opinion. And the arguement is different than air travel.
BMI is crap. When I weighed 260, my waist never exceeded 38-40 inches. It doesn’t measure fatness or fitness.
We are talking about the people who have elected to ignore a prudent lifestyle of proper eating and exercise. They have the freedome to eat and live as they choose. The business has the freedom to not accomodate them. Obviously their dollars do not matter so what are they upset about?
I'd like to know just how many large framed 5'8" adults are below 172 pounds. I'd also like to see that broken down by age, or decade of age.
The point is not who could, should, has been, will be a lard ass. Its about accomodating consumers. I’m not making judgement on large people, like some others.
They are offering a product that many can’t use. Its their loss and bad PR.
The point I’m making is that BMI does not measure ‘lard assness’ at all. Most hard, muscular small assed persons such as me have “obese level BMI’s” simply because muscle is much denser than fat.
That is use or invocation or labeling people by BMI is slanderous, it’s mean, vile, prejudice.
Point taken. I’m on your side guy.
Thanks!
To be sure, I don’t care one way or the other about the main issue of the thread, although at some point such issues might be interesting to me, which is why I read it at first, and the responses too. You were right to say, in a way, that I took the thread off topic, but this BMI stuff sticks in my craw — today’s medical professionals, including my own, can’t help but practice ‘defensive’ medicine so the BMI think colors — shades, that is — good practice based on real learned wisdoms.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.