Posted on Feb 25, 2014
Do you think the Army height and weight standards are too strict, too lenient or not accurate?
34.5K
109
76
6
6
0
I have heard of Soldiers who always have to be taped, even though they are fit. Many say that they don't think the standards are very accurate. Do you think the standards are too strict, too leniant or not accurate?
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 36
They are bull shit and not based on medical or physiological standards of any kind. Not one Sports Medicine doctor of any team in any professional sport uses the Tape test the way the Army does. Its ridicules cookie cutter and lazy. The Army need to take a look at itself and ask is this being honest? Does using something that based on shoddy science reflect the integrity we expect from out troops.
(13)
(0)
SFC Ian Lumgair
Here is a completely out of the box response. Get rid of any and all height weight standards all together. Make the Army a true meritocracy stickily base the troops fitness, event based with real rewards for those who excel. real rewards for belonging to intramural teams, participation in events real consequences for those who do not find a manner to stay fit. This would require commanders to give up on "Commanders must evaluate the effectiveness of physical fitness training and ensure that it is focused on the unit’s missions. " and adopt Commanders must enhance the combat readiness of there troops and improve there fitness. commander are responsible to provide the training time necessary to accomplish improve to combat capabilities of there soldiers ". there are lots of great options out there for troop to develop a idea of readiness through fitness. when was the last time you saw a command team support the sports that invoke mental and physical toughness, power lifting, boxing, rugby, tackle football, wrestling, hockey, MMA, karate, contact fencing, believe it or not all of these sports where at one time or another played and hugely supported. where there injuries you bet. where they in much much better shape than the current army absolutely.
(2)
(0)
These are standards...Soldiers can either conform to the standards or leave the service.
Soldiers (even society in general) will say everything is not fair if it's hard or they cannot achieve a certain standard...Soldiers need to grow up, realize military service is BIGGER than the individual or take their self-serving attitudes away from the military.
Soldiers (even society in general) will say everything is not fair if it's hard or they cannot achieve a certain standard...Soldiers need to grow up, realize military service is BIGGER than the individual or take their self-serving attitudes away from the military.
(7)
(0)
SFC Ian Lumgair
I have not head one person say that. its not based on any known science in fact its own data accumulated say that its grossly inaccurate. that lack courage that lacks effort. That is the height of "Every time something is difficult we just want to change it to suit our needs (or laziness)." again this just show we are willing to let troops get screwed because we are not doing our due diligence. How does that make sense
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Yeah, duh, someone made it a standard so it must be good!! The correct answer is, if something is wrong, you work to make it right, not run away, or hide your head in the sand. Positive and effective changes in our military have been made based on suggestions made and promoted by low ranking individuals that saw a shortfall and were not afraid to say something. The weight standards were originally intended to ensure Soldiers presented a professional appearance in uniform. Look at how poorly these standards accomplish that. I have seen fat, out of shape slobs with fat necks, manage to pass tape, while Soldiers in excellent physical condition failed. If appearance is important, than we have plenty of just plain “uglies” that need to be put out, and plenty of others that just seem to always have a dumb look on their face.
What we need are physical standards directly related to the mission that Soldier is expected to perform and tests that actually demonstrate those abilities. These standards should not be modified due to age, sex or size. If you need to be able to carry a certain amount, certain distance, in a certain time, in a certain range of conditions, and be able to perform certain tasks within determined parameters after you have done that, how old, or what sex you are is not a factor (did I say “certain” enough times). Army leadership needs to get their head out of this fantasy world they seem to be living in, and face reality. The point of physical conditioning and physical standards is to effectively accomplish the mission, not putting on a show, lives are at risk. [The Army leaders still won’t give up formation runs even though these are well documented to have no value to physical conditioning or unit moral except for the arrogant ass that is setting the pace. For anyone who does not naturally run at that pace, it is damaging to bones, knees, muscle tone, and spines; anything else I am forgetting? The medical core has long fought to eliminate these events.]
What we need are physical standards directly related to the mission that Soldier is expected to perform and tests that actually demonstrate those abilities. These standards should not be modified due to age, sex or size. If you need to be able to carry a certain amount, certain distance, in a certain time, in a certain range of conditions, and be able to perform certain tasks within determined parameters after you have done that, how old, or what sex you are is not a factor (did I say “certain” enough times). Army leadership needs to get their head out of this fantasy world they seem to be living in, and face reality. The point of physical conditioning and physical standards is to effectively accomplish the mission, not putting on a show, lives are at risk. [The Army leaders still won’t give up formation runs even though these are well documented to have no value to physical conditioning or unit moral except for the arrogant ass that is setting the pace. For anyone who does not naturally run at that pace, it is damaging to bones, knees, muscle tone, and spines; anything else I am forgetting? The medical core has long fought to eliminate these events.]
(0)
(0)
Sgt Luke Charles
Body Mass Index certainly has some scientific validity although not everyone who is fit will meet it. Waist size and health have a very strong correlation, if you have a waist size over 40 for a man and 35 for a woman its is HIGHLY likely that you are in poor health. Using steroid abusing bodybuilders and NFL players as examples of health is ridiculous and those of them that are healthy would still pass the tape measure.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
i just listened to a pod cast that stated BMI is based on research funded by big phrama.
(0)
(0)
I think the tape is a one size fits all approach, however, different body types are going to be taped differently. If someone has a tiny neck their % will go up as opposed to a larger person with a larger neck. The tape needs an overhaul to something more accurate. If we are going to start throwing people out we better do it with something on point.
(6)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
Exactly some people pass the pt test by a few seconds and pass height and weight. Women who are busy can score in the 80% and fail height and weight because of there hips and small neck
(0)
(0)
Read This Next