Active Duty Obesity Statistics

[winterg]

I have never advocated a mandatory Physical Fitness program for senior members.  Please do not accuse me of things I have not done, sir. I have, however, frequently said a voluntary fitness program for senior members, not tied to any promotions, would be beneficial.  Please tell me how that makes me the bad guy with the evil agenda please. 

As for the source, please provide evidence that Military Times is not a trustworthy source for information and I will be happy to amend my OP with that caveat.

Transmitted via my R5 astromech.

The Military times had never been a trustworthy source of information just like Military.com or any other social media or media outlet claiming ties to the military.  They report a skewed version of things that occur and rarely provide anything else outside of entertainment.  So provide something with a little more to it than the  Military times.

Sorry. That sounds like opinion. 

Transmitted via my R5 astromech.

Sorry that's fact.  Neither the "Military Times" or "Military.com" are credible sources of information in regards to anything having to deal with the DoD.  Sorry but you need something better than them.

I posted this article for discussion. If you have a study or proof that the information contained in it is incorrect, by all means, please post it.  It will add to the discussion. 

Transmitted via my R5 astromech.

[abdsp51]

I posted this article for discussion. If you have a study or proof that the information contained in it is incorrect, by all means, please post it.  It will add to the discussion. 

Transmitted via my R5 astromech.

And that is what you are getting,  you just don't like it.

[winterg]

I posted this article for discussion. If you have a study or proof that the information contained in it is incorrect, by all means, please post it.  It will add to the discussion. 
Transmitted via my R5 astromech.

And that is what you are getting,  you just don't like it.

I've been following the thread on my phone so it is entirely possible that I missed something.  Please point out to me where anything in my original post was proven wrong?  While there was some excellent anecdotal evidence that not every person has the same physical fitness ability regards to weight, which I agree with, I do not see anything that says the information in the posted article is inaccurate or untrustworthy.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Quote from my message where I am criticizing overweight people.

Quite the contrary.

I am stating that it does not matter if you are overweight, you can still do the mission.

So in effect, I did say something nice.

[Eclipse]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE0u1Ph3KDk

[SarDragon]

sarster's post was removed as inappropriate. PM sent.

Let's keep this civil.

[Luis R. Ramos]

Eclipse-

I posted a message, someone answered criticizing me for the contents of my message.

Whoever he was, he misread the message completely. Basically I stated that the measurements, weight limits, etc. are not true indicators of the capabilities of people that measure more than what the limits of said tables.

This person posted info from my CAPF101, and ended stating "If ya don't have anything nice to say, don't say it."

I overreacted, and in my reply posted something not so nice but removed that last sentence as I considered it inappropriate.

Whomever it was, needs glasses or guidance on interpreting reading, as what I stated in the message, was nice!

[SarDragon]

Folks, this is NOT the fourth grade playground. Please keep it civil and relevant.

[stillamarine]

I have never advocated a mandatory Physical Fitness program for senior members.  Please do not accuse me of things I have not done, sir. I have, however, frequently said a voluntary fitness program for senior members, not tied to any promotions, would be beneficial.  Please tell me how that makes me the bad guy with the evil agenda please. 

As for the source, please provide evidence that Military Times is not a trustworthy source for information and I will be happy to amend my OP with that caveat.

Transmitted via my R5 astromech.

The Military times had never been a trustworthy source of information just like Military.com or any other social media or media outlet claiming ties to the military.  They report a skewed version of things that occur and rarely provide anything else outside of entertainment.  So provide something with a little more to it than the  Military times.

Sorry. That sounds like opinion. 

Transmitted via my R5 astromech.

Sorry that's fact.  Neither the "Military Times" or "Military.com" are credible sources of information in regards to anything having to deal with the DoD.  Sorry but you need something better than them.

Funny. When I was on AD everyone read the Military Times and pretty much accepted what it said......of course that was before google and internet tough guys.

[etodd]

Ground Team members who may need to hike up and down steep rocky hills in very hot or cold and rainy conditions ... high physical fitness requirements.

You might be surprised. At the end of the day it's just walking. Most people can put one foot in front of the other. Not all areas have these conditions either.

In my experience, most adults will know their limits and know when to call it quits. No reason to draw a line where none is needed.

Yep. That was my point I was getting to.  As volunteer CAP members, we are not swimming miles to shore, climbing cliffs and going into battle.

People that are out of shape, already know it. They don't need CAP 'brass' telling them so. They already know. If they want to look good in their blues, they lose weight. If they don't care or are unable, they won't.

Physical condition is rarely related to our missions. And when it is, as others have stated here, its up to the IC to assign folks to particular jobs that can perform them safely.

Just my two cents.

[CAPAPRN]

The gold standard for a credible source is peer reviewed articles. All scientific journals that claim to publish factual material take submitted articles and subject them to expert peer review. While I like Military Times and read it's online portion, I do not use it for research purposes. In fact, a lot of us stopped believing it as a credible source when they started telling us how much money we made in comparison to civilians (this is back in the 70's and 80's) when they would compare living in an open bay barracks with the expense of a standard apartment, and then "credit" our income by the amount of the rent, while conveniently forgetting to credit us with overtime and a myriad of other pays we did not enjoy in those days. Military Times serves a journalistic purpose, not a research one.

[Fubar]

In my experience, most adults will know their limits and know when to call it quits. No reason to draw a line where none is needed.

We have different experiences. The only three times I've ever seen an EMS response (two ground ambulances, one air ambulance) to CAP missions were for CAP members who failed to know their limits. Frustratingly, everyone else knew they were exceeding their limits but didn't say anything because they didn't want to hurt the feelings of the individual. Two cases were for guys who were simply out of shape, one was for a guy who probably flew with the Wright Brothers at some point.

[LSThiker]

The gold standard for a credible source is peer reviewed articles. All scientific journals that claim to publish factual material take submitted articles and subject them to expert peer review.

While we would like to believe that is true, it is not.  Not all scientific journals use a peer-reviewed process.  Even those that do, it is varied process.  Not all reviewers are experts in that field.  I know some of my articles were reviewed by people that did not any experience in my field or even a tangent field.  I have been asked to review articles that I have no experience in that field as well.  Normally, I turn those down (more because of laziness than anything else), but I know others do not.  I have seen PhD students reviewing articles as well as MS-level researchers.

This is why impact factors are important.  However, not even that is completely reliable after you just browse "Retraction Watch" and see how many high impact journal articles are retracted.  Case in point is the Wakefield article which should have been shot down in the peer review process due to poor statistics.  Unfortunately, it was not. 

As Carl Sagan would say "science is more than a body of knowledge.  it is a way to skeptically interrogate the universe".   I have mentioned on here several times that what separates scientists from people that have studied science is the amount of critical thinking and analysis one does.     

[Майор Хаткевич]

In my experience, most adults will know their limits and know when to call it quits. No reason to draw a line where none is needed.

We have different experiences. The only three times I've ever seen an EMS response (two ground ambulances, one air ambulance) to CAP missions were for CAP members who failed to know their limits. Frustratingly, everyone else knew they were exceeding their limits but didn't say anything because they didn't want to hurt the feelings of the individual. Two cases were for guys who were simply out of shape, one was for a guy who probably flew with the Wright Brothers at some point.

Yea, people are prone to overestimating their own abilities. That's how we get "I know I'm over the limit for AF uniforms, but I can pull off the look". They don't however, and others can see it.

[RogueLeader]

In my experience, most adults will know their limits and know when to call it quits. No reason to draw a line where none is needed.

We have different experiences. The only three times I've ever seen an EMS response (two ground ambulances, one air ambulance) to CAP missions were for CAP members who failed to know their limits. Frustratingly, everyone else knew they were exceeding their limits but didn't say anything because they didn't want to hurt the feelings of the individual. Two cases were for guys who were simply out of shape, one was for a guy who probably flew with the Wright Brothers at some point.

Yea, people are prone to overestimating their own abilities. That's how we get "I know I'm over the limit for AF uniforms, but I can pull off the look". They don't however, and others can see it.

That's also where a good GTL stands up and says: No, you are not fit for this mission, and you are not coming with me.

I always evaluate who I call for a ground action, depending on the specifics to the mission. 

[etodd]

I always evaluate who I call for a ground action, depending on the specifics to the mission.

Sounds like you are lucky to be in a very large squadron, where you have multiple folks ready to go on notice and so you can pick and choose, and not just get whoever happens to be available..

[PHall]

I always evaluate who I call for a ground action, depending on the specifics to the mission.

Sounds like you are lucky to be in a very large squadron, where you have multiple folks ready to go on notice and so you can pick and choose, and not just get whoever happens to be available..

If whoever happens to be available can't do the mission then you still don't take them.  We don't need to "rescue the rescuer'.

[RogueLeader]

I always evaluate who I call for a ground action, depending on the specifics to the mission.

Sounds like you are lucky to be in a very large squadron, where you have multiple folks ready to go on notice and so you can pick and choose, and not just get whoever happens to be available..

Here's the thing.  I don't.  In our unit, I have a total of 4 GTM's.  On an actual mission, I have to pull from other units.  That being said, I use the authority I have to make the calls as to who trains for what in my squadron.  If a member doesn't have what it takes- mental, emotional, or physical ability to train for a particular task, I don't allow them to train, and my Squadron Commander backs me up. 

If whoever happens to be available can't do the mission then you still don't take them.  We don't need to "rescue the rescuer'.

That's just it.  There are members that are qualified that I will take on certain missions but not on others.  There are certain members that I don't ever foresee calling for a ground action.  For example, if I have to hike Laramie Peak (East Central Wyoming) again, I'm going to pick the more physically fit members.  As some background, the areas around Laramie Peak is around 4,300' AGL.  The highest trail head is Friendship Park, Elevation 7,300'  The top of the trail is about 10'500 AGL, and the trail is about 5 miles to the top. The trails go from nice and easy, to rough as you go up.  The terrain is rough: boulders 6-8'+ in diameter, and challanging to  cross and search.

I can easily put a lot of members on a search area in Wheatland WY (28 miles from Laramie Peak, Elevation 4'770ish) for a missing person and be ok.  That is not the same for Laramie Peak.

What would it do if I took members that were not capable to handling the assigned mission?
1) Get members hurt
2) Take us out of the mission
3) Expend other resources
4) Damage our reputation with the controlling authority (the County Sheriff controls all SAR in WY)
5) Extra paperwork to deal with the incident

Call me crazy, but if a member can't walk 1.5 miles in 30 minutes with their gear on level, improved surfaces, you don't have what it takes to do SAR here in Wyoming.  Typically, here in Wyoming, people don't get lost in easily accessible places.  You have to know your people, you have to know the area your are operating in.  Otherwise, you are begging for trouble. Telling someone that they are good to go for a mission when you know they aren't is not a courtesy.  It is a violation of respect, integrity, and excellence.  That does not mean that you are rude about it, I know I've had my issues, but it does mean that you step up and make those decisions and you be honest about it with them.  I respect that they want to go and serve, I also show them respect by being honest about why my decisions are what they are.  I show integrity by not lying to them- it can be easy to tell them that they're GTG and cross your fingers (and pray that nothing bad will happen.)  I demonstrate Excellence by selecting the Team using good ORM decisions based on the specifics at hand.

I would much rather be honest and tell the customer that we aren't capable of taking that particular assignment.  I would also like to do my level best to not put members in a situation that they are very likely to end up in the hospital, or worse- the morgue.

[USACAP]

I am not sure we can do that - have an adult conversation about anything in #America2016.
Everything is political now. 
The US military is presently obsessed with denying the sexual dimorphism inherent in the human race.
Standards can only be lowered now, never raised nor improved.

...how we can revive a more health concious culture in today's society. 

[Live2Learn]

As for the source, please provide evidence that Military Times is not a trustworthy source for information and I will be happy to amend my OP with that caveat.

...

The Military times had never been a trustworthy source of information just like Military.com or any other social media or media outlet claiming ties to the military.  They report a skewed version of things that occur and rarely provide anything else outside of entertainment.  So provide something with a little more to it than the  Military times.

...
Sorry. That sounds like opinion. 

Times 3. 

It doesn't take much effort researching medical journals to discover higher rates of diabetes, heart disease, stroke, etc., etc., associated with obesity.  I suppose one could also argue that smoking is "good" or at least "harmless" - and be on equally tenuous ground based on a very large volume of  medical research.