US troops are losing battle of the bulge

The Times (U.K.) ^ | 11/18/2002 | Chris Ayres

[Pokey78]

AS AMERICAN troops prepare for war in Iraq a report is about to reveal that more than half of them are overweight.

A panel of nine medical experts commissioned by the Pentagon is expected to say that 53.9 per cent of US military personnel over the age of 20 would be classified as too fat to fight under federal obesity standards.

A fifth of those aged under 20 would also fail the fat test, The Times has learnt. Iraq may not have such sophisticated weapons, but its soldiers at least fit their uniforms better.

Admitting such flabbiness would be embarrassing and costly for the Pentagon, which would have to take remedial measures and discharge the incurably fat.

A Pentagon document seen by The Times says: “If at some future time (the federal guidelines are adopted), the impact will be to shift a sizeable group of personnel from a category of meeting weight standards to a category of being overweight.

“Such a change would have negative implications for perceptions of readiness of the forces.”

The panellists are, however, expected to provide a loophole, recommending that the Armed Forces ignore the federal standards and continue to use their own, more flexible, guidelines.

Federal guidelines classify an individual as overweight if they have a body mass index (BMI) of more than 25, regardless of age or gender. A BMI is calculated by dividing weight in kilograms by height in metres squared. Someone 5ft 11in and weighing 180lb (1.8m and 81.6kg), for example, has a BMI of just over 25.

Under the military standards it is possible to have a BMI of more than 27 and still be considered in good enough shape to sweat out a battle in the Iraqi desert. As a result, official military health statistics show that only about a fifth of military personnel – regardless of age – are overweight.

“The difficulty in where to draw the line probably suggests that we ought to use a more complex evaluation system, incorporating age, gender, fitness and, possibly, occupation,” Arthur Frank, a medical director at George Washington University and one of the panellists, said.

“The military, of course, has standards for appearances: you don’t want a bunch of fat guys marching in your parade. But how critical is it? It is of significance, but in critical terms, that significance is marginal.”

The military is worried about attracting and keeping recruits from an increasingly overweight population: according to the US Surgeon- General, more than 60 per cent of Americans are overweight or obese.

A successful method used to recruit teenagers is to allow fast-food chains such as McDonald’s and Kentucky Fried Chicken to operate restaurants on bases. Mess food is no longer obligatory.

Barbara Hansen, a panellist and a director of the Obesity and Diabetes Research Centre at Maryland University, said: “There’s no doubt that some functions and roles may be incompatible with excess fatness. But those are probably less than half of the current military force.”

[Righty1]

Pure bunk! I am 54 and have been officially obese for 34 years. I never work out at all however, I have personally nearly killed 2 dozen young gun skiers who thought that they could take me on. If our volunteer forces have the eye of the tiger they will prevail despite this tripe.

[ArcLight]

Eye of the tiger, my foot! If these guys are unfit, they're unfit, and the Army will have to beef up its physical training regimen.

[petuniasevan]

allow fast-food chains such as McDonald’s and Kentucky Fried Chicken to operate restaurants on bases

No surprise here. Pander to the kiddies, let 'em feed their faces, and don't work them too hard 'cause that would hurt their self-esteem.

From the moment we let Political Correctness into our military, we've aided and abetted the enemy. Evil forces worldwide are thrilled when their operatives the liberals manage to undercut United States Military effectiveness and defensive capability.

[Maximum Leader]

Oh yes, the good old Body Mass Index.

The BMI doesn't take into account the percentage of body fat versus muscle. So a bodybuilder with little body fat is considered obese by this scale and someone of average height and weight with no muscle tone is considered fit.

[Paleo Conservative]

How much do you want to bet these guidelines have the same BMI recommendations for both males and females?

[Klunk]

Tacky and disrespectful headline to use about the United States armed forces.

[Righty1]

These GD Ht/Wt charts are for average people. If a male is heavy boned and heavily muscled (in my case my legs alone almost put me over) they will all appear as obese. I would much rather go with the endurance tests the army runs than what a bunch of geeks looking at avoiding heart problems at 60 come up with. Are you familiar with the ecto vs mesomorph human dichotomy.

[cynicom]

During Korean thingy, I saw them take a guy so overweight he had not seen his feet in years. Some change.

[Righty1]

E fing xactly!

[jospehm20]

Most of the overweight guys I have known in the Army were big, weightlifter type guys. The males are allowed between 22-24% body fat depending on age. Women are allowed 32-34% depending on their age. I know people who have looked fit but were overwieght according to Army standards. I have not known many flabby folks in the Army. This index they are talking about must make 95% of the civilian population overweight.

[Tailback]

You are exactly right. The Army has a bizarre fixation with PT, more so than anything else. Most combat units spend up to 2 hours a day on PT but spend maybe 40 hours a year on live fire weapons training. The body-fat standards for the Army are completely stupid. My best friend had the neck of a bull, a chest like Schwarzeneggar, and a 34 inch waist. Under Army standards he was overweight even though he scored around a 280 out of 300 on the PT test.

[Lokibob]

Factually inaccurate.  Here is the weight chart.

 

U.S. Army Weight Chart for Males

HEIGHT IN INCHES	AGE 17 - 20	AGE 21 - 27	AGE 28 - 39	AGE 40 +
58
59
60	132	136	139	141
61	136	140	144	146
62	141	144	148	150
63	145	149	153	155
64	150	154	158	160
65	155	159	163	165
66	160	163	168	170
67	165	169	174	178
68	170	174	179	181
69	175	179	184	186
70	180	185	189	192
71	185	189	194	197
72	190	195	200	203
73	195	200	205	208
74	201	206	211	214
75	206	212	217	220
76	212	217	223	226
77	218	223	229	232
78	223	229	235	238
79	229	235	241	244
80	234	240	247	250

Notes:

1. The height will be measured in stocking feet (without shoes), standing on a flat surface with the chin parallel to the floor. The body should be straight but not rigid, similar to the position of attention. The measurement will be rounded to the nearest inch with the following guidelines:

a. If the height fraction is less than 1/2 inch, round down to the nearest whole number in inches.

b. If the height fraction is 1/2 inch or greater, round up to the next highest whole number in inches.

2. The weight should be measured and recorded to the nearest pound within the following guidelines:

a. If the weight fraction is less than 1/2 pound, round down to the nearest pound.

b. If the weight fraction is 1/2 pound or greater, round up to the nearest pound.

3. All measurement will be in a standard PT uniform (gym shorts and T-shirt, without shoes).

4. If the circumstances preclude weighing soldiers during the APFT, they should be weighed within 30 days of the APFT.

5. Add 6 pounds per inch for males over 80 inches and 5 pounds for females for each inch over 80 inches.

Information Courtesy of U.S. Army

[ArcLight]

Hey, wait a minute...you're right. I should have read the article more carefully. The BMI charts are worthless for measuring obesity. The real measurement to use is the amoutn of body weight made up of fat. That's much harder to measure, but it's important to do so, because many very muscular people have very low body fat but still count as "overweight" because of all that muscle.

Come to think of it, the Wall Street Journal had a piece about this about a year ago, with a listing of famously fit people like Arnold Schwarzenegger who are considered "fat" by BMI standards.

If this is the standard being used by the army, then this may indeed be less of a problem than meets the eye...

[jackbill]

Two points:

1. Under recently released government guidelines, Cal Ripken is classified as overweight.

2. In the military, can we see a breakdown by gender sex?

[Prodigal Son]

The BMI doesn't take into account the percentage of body fat versus muscle.

Exactly. We used to have a body builder in our platoon- he was a big SOB. Had muscles on top of muscles. Every time we'd do a "weigh in" he'd be overweight and they'd have to do a tape test on him. It was so absurd because the guy had very little body fat and was the fittest and physically strongest man in the platoon.

I've run across problems with this issue before. I am a mesomorph, broad shouldered, I put on lean muscle mass very easily. Have a naturally high metabolism and tend naturally towards leanness. But there are some people who tend naturally towards "thickness" have a very hard time losing fat although they put on lean mass easily as well. They can be just as fit as anyone else, they just won't look it. I've seen some really good soldiers get the boot because of this. They were fit, did great on their PT test and excelled at their jobs- they just didn't look quite right in their uniforms.

On the other hand- I also knew some real slobs who were both very fat and very unfit for duty- but they were quite adept at getting around regulations.

I think the Army needs to adopt a guideline that makes sense. I think the first criterion should be fitness and ability to do the job. The PT test should be administered more often (once a month perhaps), I think it should be more than just three exercises measured and this should be the first thing considered when evaluating someone's physical ability to do the job. Are they an asset or a dead weight?

I think another area the Army should look at is diet. They don't teach you that much about diet in the Army unless you are overweight. The mess hall serves up a lot of starchy food. Easy to put on weight if you eat too much of it. Another poster mentioned the availability of Popeye's Chicken and Burger King. The AAFES snack bar is also a culprit. Not only does Joe get a lot of fatty, unhealthy food at these places- he uses a lot of his paycheck needlessly there as well when the mess hall is free for single soldiers. I don't really see what could be done about that. But the command ought to figure out a way to encourage Joe not to overly indulge in eating at these places.

[desertcry]

If the CIC orders the military to fight in the desert after April of 2003, our soldiers better lose fat pronto.
Desert fighting is very cruel to fat soldiers. Heat stroke is far more deadly than bullets, or bioweapons.

[ErnBatavia]

Private Nadler reporting as ordered Sir!

[Justa]

Not to mention the fact that as soon as a soldier goes to the field he loses weight. Having a few extra pounds makes the difference between keeping going and fading out when full rations aren't available. I saw it on many occasions.

If A or T rations aren't available for a few days "Chubby" keeps on going, needing only water to supplement whatever he can eat whereas "Buff" gets all trembly and stammers unless he's chowing down on say 6 MREs a day which is of course an oxymoron. On 3 MREs/day I'd lose 4-8 lbs/week in the field.