A recent report is out that around 70,000 Soldiers in the Army are clinically obese. What if anything should the Army do about it?

2015-12-14T11:15:56-05:00

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 11:18 AM

2015-12-14T11:18:49-05:00

For one thing, the height and weight charts found in AR 600-9 need to be updated to reflect modern people. Those charts are from the 1950s. They do not take into account those who bodybuild, yet are still very "in shape" and/or "fit." According to the charts, those people are outside the Army's idea of "in shape."

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 11:20 AM

2015-12-14T11:20:10-05:00

I can't see anything they can do about it. We have a standard. Leaders know it. It takes command and leader intervention to take action and if they fail to do so then what do we do? Investigate every command to ensure they are chaptering out 600-9 failures or properly implementing an overweight program?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 11:24 AM

2015-12-14T11:24:55-05:00

If we disregard BMI when considering clinically obese then those numbers go down. That alone is a horribly outdated idea that doesn't take anything besides ht/wt into consideration. Change how we define it so we know how much of a problem we actually have, that's the first step.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 11:30 AM

2015-12-14T11:30:26-05:00

I pass the tape test but my BMI says I'm a fatty. I'll care when I can no longer pull myself over a wall in kit.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 11:30 AM

2015-12-14T11:30:44-05:00

Clinical obesity is defined by BMI, in the military we use body fat instead. BMI isn't really a good indicator of obesity for muscular people because it only compares height to weight.
It sounds like a sensationalist headline, 70,00 that's about 1 in 7 right now. That's a little far fetched. I see some fatties running around, but not that many.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 11:39 AM

2015-12-14T11:39:50-05:00

Hell, let's put everyone on the remedial pt program. that way no one gets singled out and no individual feelings are hurt.

Response by SSG Todd Halverson made Dec 14 at 2015 11:46 AM

2015-12-14T11:46:19-05:00

I am not too concerned as that number seems a little skewed. I believe that the clinical study used BMI and not the body fat program the Military uses. Two totally different charts and measurements for being overweight.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 11:47 AM

2015-12-14T11:47:31-05:00

They need to have healthy alternatives to Taco Johns, Sherwood Forest Pizzas, Burger King, and Pizza joints on base.

Response by SGT William Howell made Dec 14 at 2015 11:52 AM

2015-12-14T11:52:25-05:00

When I was in my best shape of my life I was 235 and at 10% body fat. I was clinically obese. I was doing my OCS physical and they made me do flutter kicks to increase my heart rate so the EKG could get a good reading. I had to tape every time I took a PT test. So I would say the test is FOS.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Dec 14 at 2015 11:56 AM

2015-12-14T11:56:20-05:00

If we continue downsizing the Army to 450,000, it seems that there is a way to fix this situation. Downsizing and obesity, Hmmm.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 12:20 PM

2015-12-14T12:20:30-05:00

Nothing at all. It's terribly misleading figures to look at because our definition of obese doesn't account for anything. It's simply a height and weight measurement.

Of all the patients I see a day I have to go through obesity counseling on all but those skinny stick like blokes we got running around. Nearly every 1SG and CSM I encounter are counted Obese. going off "clinically" obese alone.

What can we do about?
Change the standards of height and weight to factor whether the person is muscularly built or if I'm actually sitting there dealing with a tubs.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Dec 14 at 2015 12:34 PM

2015-12-14T12:34:06-05:00

CPT Private RallyPoint Member I was 6'2, 220 when I joined the Navy. I played 4 years of varsity football and wrestling, and went to boot camp the day after I graduated. I was in the best shape of my life. When the SEAL recruiters came around to our class (they did that back then), I figured, what the hell, and took the preliminary physical tests. I passed them all but the hanging pull-ups. My size got me there. I would have had to train specifically for that, and didn't. But otherwise, I could do the rest. (To be clear, I'm in no way saying I was SEAL material. That initial test is laughable relative to what they eventually do.)

At the time, they had a chart that said someone 6'2 could only weigh 180 pounds. I had to get a waiver. When I went to the doc, he laughed, told me I'd weigh 180 some 2 years after I die, and sent me on my way with the waiver.

The official numbers don't reflect reality. They need to be revisited.

Response by 1SG Paul DeStout made Dec 14 at 2015 1:02 PM

2015-12-14T13:02:02-05:00

I agree the AR 600-9 standard is outdated and the taping of Soldiers is too subjective. I can take three NCOs teams and have each one tape the same Soldier and come up with three different set of measurements. I new, more constant system is needed.

But I don't think this is so much of a military problem but a total american social issue. A shocking 20 percent of all male recruits and 40 percent of female recruits are too heavy to enter into the military ranks. Basically, the new recruits have to lose weight so they can barely pass the minimum standards in both the height/weight measurements as well as the physical fitness tests. In doing so we are injuring them before they even get out of basic because of the time constraints to get them to AIT, we are destroying their knees and backs with the PT program.

Lastly, we need to have a better overweight program at the unit level. Our NCOs are not trained as personnel trainers and nutritionist. In conclusion, holding Soldiers to standards and commands following through with what the ARs states about separation for overweight failures is the key.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 2:02 PM

2015-12-14T14:02:16-05:00

The Army should deal with obese personnel the way it always has -
Train them until they meet the standard.
Counsel them to choose healthy foods and an active lifestyle
If they don't get it, throw them out.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 2:07 PM

2015-12-14T14:07:46-05:00

agree with SSG Unger on this one. For those that are bodybuilders/in shape in that way; they really shouldn't be put on "PT duty' or whatever it is nowadays...but those that are OBVIOUSLY overweight, I agree SOMETHING needs to be done to either help them, figure out what is going on with them. Then get to work with them.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Dec 14 at 2015 4:33 PM

2015-12-14T16:33:19-05:00

If we used the "industry" standards in place of the Army's own outdated standards, a LOT more troops who thought they were ok, would find themselves being taped and failing. Sooner or later someone up high is going to have to take a look at this, but even then they'll fall back on "it's the regs" as a means to not do what needs to be done. But let anything happen and lets see how quickly the regs are pushed to the side in order to get bodies in place, just so those same bodies are put out once they're no longer needed.....

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 6:26 PM

2015-12-14T18:26:44-05:00

One thing is for sure.. 1 hour of PT once a day will not make you a Master Fitness Trainer. Ask your soldiers at your next Sgt's time.. How many know this, how many PU, SU, and Run they need to get 100... Then ask how many know the minimum.. The results may surprise you.. If you only require 60% then you only get 60%.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 6:31 PM

2015-12-14T18:31:29-05:00

more focuses on PT. Enforce PT/ height & weight from top down.

Response by SGT Jerrold Pesz made Dec 14 at 2015 6:45 PM

2015-12-14T18:45:14-05:00

Give them the boot. Uncle Sam wants to reduce the number serving anyway and this would be a start.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 7:10 PM

2015-12-14T19:10:15-05:00

Change The portions in the DFAC, and stop doing training on computers. Conduct ALL training outdoors and away from the Company area. Foot march to designated training area and train, then foot march back. Put down the Cell phone and get sweaty and dirty when you train, it burns more calories.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 10:10 PM

2015-12-14T22:10:54-05:00

purge

Response by SGT Victoria Belbusti made Dec 15 at 2015 8:45 AM

2015-12-15T08:45:47-05:00

I'm guessing they are going off BMI? If so that's not accurate. Using an actual BF% by qualified Personal Trainers would get us a better glimpse into this. Also why not teach all soldiers nutrition and healthy cooking skills?
Alas this would cost too much money and god forbid we close down defacs to be healthy and stop treating the barracks like they are college freshman.

Response by SSG Audwin Scott made Dec 15 at 2015 10:26 AM

2015-12-15T10:26:58-05:00

I can pretty much guarantee most are obese because of back to back deployments which result in lack of PT and poor eating habits.

Response by SGT Alfina Hopkins-Wasnuk made Dec 15 at 2015 10:32 AM

2015-12-15T10:32:43-05:00

When I was in every time we took our PT test I was taped. This was nothing new for me. At my height and where I weigh in at my NCO'S would look and retake my weight and retake me. The system use is outdated. Those who are very tall and carry their weight evenly compare to those who maybe shorter and weight is pronounced, however both may have the same bmi something does need to change. Secondly you have males who body build does this make them over weight, women who may be with child or just had a child. Who are we to say who is or not health. Just revise the whole system. People come with meat on their bones. If you are asking them to carry an extra 80 to 100 lbs on their body, skin and bones will not cut it.

Response by CPL Jay Strickland made Dec 15 at 2015 4:48 PM

2015-12-15T16:48:28-05:00

There was a solider in my unit who was over 50 pounds over weight. He got that way because he had a master's in English and a general used him to proof read policy letters and other official correspondence. Sadly we chaptered him out because he was unable to lose the weight. I believe if the general had not protected him for so long he might not have been a lost cause.

Response by SSG Michael Patton made Dec 15 at 2015 4:58 PM

2015-12-15T16:58:13-05:00

I was at Ft Stewart Ga in 1982-83 when the Army began strictly enforcing BMI. Our Division CG was MG Norman Schwarzkopf, who was also over BMI. He issued a directive that NO soldier, under his command, would face any adverse action for weight, until 30 days AFTER he met standards himself. He was well respected for that decision.

Response by SGT Jason Baker made Dec 15 at 2015 5:07 PM

2015-12-15T17:07:56-05:00

When I was a private just entering the military I was a measly 5'6" and 160lbs. By the time I was out of basic training I weighed in at 189lbs of cut muscle. I still weigh in at 189lbs. I only passed tape once in my career. Yet I was a 300 scorer up until the age of 30. Then age and deployments dropped me to a 290. The system is broke. Now those that can't pass an apft that are young enough to get fit and are just lazy I say boot them. Senior NCO's who have issues due to combat related issues I say if they are close enough to retirement let them retire. Otherwise lead from the front backbones.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2015 6:56 PM

2015-12-15T18:56:31-05:00

If you are medically non-deployable for your weight, you should be separated. We are military of volunteers who want to be here. Part of being here requires you to be able to maintain certain standards. If you cannot meet minimum standards you've got to go.

Response by SPC Christopher Pilkington made Dec 15 at 2015 8:29 PM

2015-12-15T20:29:03-05:00

BMI is a horrible standard to go by. It's not really accurate in the sense that it considers Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson and those of that ilk as morbidly obese.

Response by SPC Seth Wilson made Dec 16 at 2015 3:13 AM

2015-12-16T03:13:46-05:00

A few years ago, I was 6 ft 240 lbs, by the standards, I failed. My father didn't understand why so he took my measurements to his civilian dr, who said I'd pass by his standards. The point is, civilian medicine for body weight standards change with the years and average population, the military doesn't. If we took our current standards to troops in the 17 and 1800s, many would be under standards because they were smaller people. Throughout history, people have steadily grown taller and weighed more. When the ARs were made, the average person met the regs, now we are getting bigger as a whole, so they need updated. Who knows, troops in the next 50 yrs may be even bigger.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 16 at 2015 5:02 AM

2015-12-16T05:02:03-05:00

Height and weight standards are a joke period, and should be updated. As others have stated before the standards are out of date and need to be revised to take into account modern society, and not ones set decades ago.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 16 at 2015 5:48 AM

2015-12-16T05:48:28-05:00

In 19 years I have only seen one Soldier removed from service for inability to conform to the standards of 600-9, but yet was in good physical shape. But, he had a medical condition and "selected" himself for separation ( whole other story).
The Bottom line is, most of the overweight folks in the Army are not Physically fit. And, I will Caveat to say that just because you can pass a three event APFT doesn't mean you are physically fit.
If MSG Short was able to change the way this was done (prepare for Soap Box moment), I would redesign everything from the ground up.
First off, from the first day of basic we need to pound it into Soldiers that Soldiering is an Athletic Lifestyle. Being a Soldier is not just a job, it is a life style. Every aspect of your life needs to reflect that. Yeah it is "Spartan-esque". But every Spartan could carry a shield and fight.
Second is we need to take a look at both ends of the spectrum for Body types and meet in the middle where there still is a Professional Appearance. Stay away from BMI, that is lie. Stay away from Dr Doolittle's electrolysis test. Move away tape. A simple and easily trainable method is the Caliper system. It is 100%, nope. But, I like it, and remember I am in charge. And stop using terms like "big boned", I have never seen a skeleton with larger than normal bones. If someone has a picture of one, please share.
Third we need to create a harsh physical fitness standard across the board. It is pass or fail. If you fail and you have less than two years in the Army, you have a month to retrain. If you have more than two years, you have to weeks. Second failure is automatic chapter. No "he is a good Soldier". A good Soldier is well rounded and succeeds at every part of being a Soldier. The Army Creedo is SHOOT (tactical), MOVE (fitness), and COMMUNICATE (technical). If you can only Shoot and Communicate, well then you are only a 60% Solution. I would stick with the Push-ups and Sit-ups. But, I would make the fail line at the 75% line for Males 17-21. That is the standard. regardless of age and sex. the run would move to 4 miles. Are we running 4 miles in combat, nope. But, 4 miles is the edge of flat out running and tapering for endurance. And the standard for that would be 33 minutes.
That is the way I would do it. We have too many strap hangers and exceptions to Policy. If we are truly going to be a Flexible, adaptable, and expeditionary force as the upper echelon wants us to be, well we have to make standards that enable to be that way. Provide the training and enable Soldiers to succeed. However, let them decide if they really want to be in a Flexible, adaptable, and expeditionary Army.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 16 at 2015 7:38 PM

2015-12-16T19:38:58-05:00

I think the big problem is that more of the Soldiers we intake (and the Sailors, Marines, and Airmen) are less healthy...diabetes and obesity rates for high-school students have risen dramatically over the past decade, enough that the former Chairman of the JCS said this was a threat to national security.

Once they become "ours", we have to work hard through initial entry training and inside units to "fix" them. When I was enlisted, I had a VERY involved fire-team leader that worked hard to square me away. I think we (including me) fail our younger/small unit leaders in not giving them the training, resources and TIME to lead their Soldiers.

I believe getting Master Fitness Trainers certified and back out to units, getting more Army Wellness Centers (with the "Bod Pod", degreed nutritionists, and other pro-athlete caliber resources) and holding first-line leaders more accountable (whether that is a Corporal, Sergeant First Class, 2LT or higher) for their Soldiers progress would help us move forward.

Bottom line, this isn't just an Army/Military Problem, this is an "America Problem".

Response by COL Charles Williams made Dec 16 at 2015 11:14 PM

2015-12-16T23:14:23-05:00

Chapter them... I paid attention the PT and weight, and led by example in both, and still do.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 17 at 2016 9:24 AM

2016-01-17T09:24:30-05:00

I believe that soldiers who are clinically obese need to be placed on the Army Body Composition (ABC) program and also be required to do extra PT or do PT twice per day until their weight is under the maximum allowance for their age and height.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 4 at 2016 5:27 AM

2016-02-04T05:27:15-05:00

So not every unit can verify a soldier conducted PT 5 days a week right ?

You can if you set up gym/fitness centers and had to insert their CAC card before using a threadmill. Not only would it verify that soldier was there IN PERSON, but also track their distance, run time, incline, etc..

But we wouldn't budget for that, right ? Sounds expensive .. Eh not really we have an abundance of CAC card readers, just need a programmer to link it to a system that outlines stats.
From then it just becomes easy to track. "Oh your obese ? , well let me check your fitness; oh wait you didn't go to the gym for the last 3 weeks? " "mhm your leadership must not be conducting daily PT .. "

Or .. " oh it shows here you've been to the gym 5 days a week , I see your running long distances, and at a high pace , you might have a thyroid problem. Let's do some labs.."

The difference between MEB and laziness, and the ability to track .

HOOAH.

Response by CPL Derek Bryant made Mar 8 at 2016 11:59 AM

2016-03-08T11:59:56-05:00

Run more and eat less