Is CAP Really Worse than the Air Force in Enforcing Weight Regs?

[Eagle400]

I received this week of Air Force Times, and found an article that caught my attention immediately. 





So... is CAP really worse than the Air Force when it comes to overweight personnel in uniform?  55% overweight is not a small number. 

For the purposes of this thread, I am referring to overweight airmen and those overweight CAP members who wear the AF uniform.

I could say a lot more about this, but the statistics pretty much speak for themselves.  Hard to argue with good, solid, empirical evidence.   

[mikeylikey]

Didn't the AF just recently (last 5 years) add the weight factor to it's PT Test?? 

STONEWALL.......we need your help here. 

Since we don't weigh CAP members....there can be no comparison. 

[RiverAux]

Well, at least under the old AF weight standards (in the chart in 39-1), you could meet the AF uniform wearing requirement while still being classified as overweight under the BMI.  Using current CAP standards you can slightly break into the "Obese" category and still be ok to wear the AF uniform (if you run the CAP weight requirements through a BMI calculator). 

So, I'm not surprised if the AF personnel don't look good.  However, keep in mind that BMI is just a fancy variation of the old height/weight chart and doesn't take into account physical fitness or muscle mass.  So, you can be a real buff, healthy person and look overweight according to BMI.

That being said, I don't think you're going to find many BMI-rated Obese people who are going to pass the other AF physical fitness standards and the percentage of AF personnel who fall in that category should be a worry.  However, I think it is safe to say that any actual comparison between CAP and AF on this factor would probably come out in the AF's favor despite these stats. 

[mikeylikey]

That is a tasty looking donut in the article though!   RIGHT?!?!

I looooooooove SPRINKLES!

[shorning]

Didn't the AF just recently (last 5 years) add the weight factor to it's PT Test??   

No.

[Major Carrales]

I was thinking the other day when I was listening to the radio, in another one of those "is CAP really worse?" threads, that the Army and Marines were letting in Criminals/felons.  It was a significant number.  So, is CAP better than these services in terms of that?

I don't think such comparisons are fair, they are two different animals.

[Fifinella]

What the AF has added is a waist measurement, based on the current theory that people who carry a lot of weight around the midsection are more prone to heart attack, diabetes, etc.  You get points based on your waist measurement.  I think you max out in that category if it is less than 35 inches.

[Gunner C]

What the AF has added is a waist measurement, based on the current theory that people who carry a lot of weight around the midsection are more prone to heart attack, diabetes, etc.  You get points based on your waist measurement.  I think you max out in that category if it is less than 35 inches.

At 24 years old, after SF School, my waist was 36".  Since my body (at that time) was like a missile, they must be expecting either pencil necks or refugees.  Sheesh.  36" ain't exactly a blubbo.  AAMOF, I'd LOVE to have a 36" waist again (8 more inches to go - should be there in about a year). 

GC

[Stonewall]

I think when people consider folks overweight or obese, it is more of a medical statement than an appearance thing.  For instance, see my PT score card below.  I had a 36" waist which only gave me 22.2 points out of 30, with a "body age" of 37 (I'm 35).  However, I ran 1 1/2 miles in 10:36.  By the chart below, I'm "moderately overweight.  I don't think I appear overweight, except maybe for my love handles, but by medical standards, I am; albeit moderately.  I think by these types of government standards, more people would be overweight than not.

BTW, in order to get the maximum points for the waist portion of the AF PFT, you have a 32.5 inch waist.  Keep in mind, that's regardless if you're 5' 5" or 6' 5".

So when the AF Times says that lots of airmen are overweight, of course they are, based on these standards.  I don't think that means a majority or even a large portion of the Force appears fat and sloppy, or even unfit.  I think it seems worse than it is based on such standards.

US Government Weight Chart:


My April 2008 PT Test Results:


Here's a link to the AF PT standards.

[lordmonar]

The difference between CAP and the USAF....is that in the USAF if you bust standards they put you on the program, give you a bad evaluation and threaten to kick you out.  In CAP they make you wear a different uniform.

[jimmydeanno]

BTW, in order to get the maximum points for the waist portion of the AF PFT, you have a 32.5 inch waist.  Keep in mind, that's regardless if you're 5' 5" or 6' 5".

That is a hard number to hit.  I'm 6'1" and 150 lbs.  I don't have love handles or a gut of any kind.  That chart says I'm barely in the healthy weight range on the low end.  10 pounds lighter and I'm not on the measured portion anymore.  I have a 33 inch waist.  If I lost weight to bring it down 1 inch, I'd probably be told to put on more weight.

I think the other events are fine because it is something that you can affect, with the waist measurement, eventually there will come a time when you can't lose more weight for health reasons.

[Stonewall]

Got this from a Senior AF NCO and this does put the AF PFT into light:

Fit-to-Fight - A Different Perspective
by SMSgt Dan Lucero

There's a Reebok commercial that aired a few years ago showing a guy in a dark room lying on his sofa watching TV. He gets up and walks across the room to grab his duffle bag and head off to the gym. Just then, the sofa comes to life, blocks the door and commences to pummel the guy with various wrestling moves as he tries to get out of the house and on to his workout. The scene, although far fetched, is a hilarious and metaphoric depiction of the daily conflict we face within ourselves as we try to maintain our readiness and healthy lifestyle.

For many of us the sofa represents ops tempo, self-discipline, or family commitments. In an effort to reduce these barriers, the Air Force established the Fit-to-Fight (FTF) program, which has met significant resistance primarily due to the emphasis placed on the waist measurement and its impact on the score. For this reason, I believe we should move to a "Go, No Go" type rating to help promote what the program is designed to instill – a healthy lifestyle. This mindset will provide benefits well past our active duty commitment. Now that our level of fitness is included in our EPRs, I would like you to consider the following concerning the score of the FTF test.

In an effort to live up to our core value Excellence in all we do, a "satisfactory" or "good" rating just isn't good enough and we have adopted the same philosophy with the FTF program. The goal of the program is to foster a mindset of health and readiness, not to focus on a score. So, why is the waist measurement so heavily weighed? Here is your answer; according to the Department of Health and Human Services, the larger your waist, the greater your risk of high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart related illnesses.

In terms of score, this may appear to give an unfair advantage to people with smaller frames, but that is irrelevant. Adopting habits that support a slimmer waistline is the overall objective and ultimately benefits the Air Force and its Airmen. That being said, some of us just aren't cut out to score in the 90s, in fact even some professional athletes would struggle to merely pass our PT test. According to CBS Sportsline.com, Shaquille O'Neal, at age 34 stood 7'1" tall, had a waist measurement of 46", and weighed in at 325lbs. If he were to max out all areas of our PT test minus the waist measurement, he would struggle to score a 70. That's right, a 70! That makes me somewhat satisfied with my humble score of 82.

As I wrap this up, I want to make this point clear. The FTF program was designed to promote a lifestyle change that will benefit the Air Force and its members for years after the shine on our medals has faded. The newest version of the EPR states "meets" or "does not meet" fitness standards and I suggest we view our performance in the PT test the in the same fashion. We need to concentrate on the benefits of following the guidance provided for us and practice humility when it comes to the score. Last, we should exemplify the fact that by being fit we are equipped to fulfill our responsibilities to our families, our subordinates, and our Air Force.

[ColonelJack]

I had a 36" waist

I have a 33 inch waist.

I hate both of you.   

Jack

[capchiro]

I think about 10 years ago, my brother was discharged from the Air Force because he was 15 pounds too heavy.  He was placed on the fat boy program and sent to a psychologist.  The psychologist asked him if he was happy with his body and he answered yes, so the psychologist told him not to worry about it, so he didn't and he didn't lose the 15 pounds and he got discharged with a general discharge.. he worked in the dental clinic and was an NCO.  I tried to convince him to do the Adkins diet for a month and he would lose the weight, but he refused.  If you look at the original article, it looks like the Air Force is doing just as good as all of the military in the comparison.  I do think anyone under the age of 40 should be able to meet the standards, with that said, I will quietly depart with my pudgy 61 year old body and find my golf shirt for tonights meeting..   

[LittleIronPilot]

Wow...I am 5'7" tall, work out one, to two, times a day (lifting in one session and running in another) and weigh in at 165lbs.

According the the chart I am moderately overweight, what a crock!

[Stonewall]

According the the chart I am moderately overweight, what a crock!

Hahahaha....FATTY!

Now you know how I feel.  I work out regularly, mostly cardio, and with multiple past and present injuries and surgery, I consider myself in pretty good shape.  But nothing is as demoralizing than being told that your body is older than I actually am, by 2 years.  I guess I could stop eating.

[Duke Dillio]

According to your chart, I'm like obese or something.

*picks up a Twinkie and chomps it down*

I take offense to that.

*drinks a Mountain Dew*

I'm 5'10" and 210 pounds and I don't think I'm all that fat.

*eats a Ding Dong*

I mean where do they get their numbers from.

*drinks another Mountain Dew*

I mean I can still do 50 push ups and 70 sit ups in four hours.

This is a crock.

[ColonelJack]

I mean I can still do 50 push ups and 70 sit ups in four hours.

Wow, that is impressive!  It takes me four days.

Jack

[SarDragon]

Age - 59
Weight - 172
Height - 5'10"
Situps/Crunches - 50 or so in 2 min
Pushups - 10?
Sit/Reach - fuggedaboudit, couldn't pass at 25.

[RogueLeader]

Gee,

I'm 6'1", 145 lbs, 31" waist, and I can not seem to put on weight.  The more I eat, the less I weigh. I don't know how it works but how can I add some meat to my bones?

[CadetProgramGuy]

According to your chart, I'm like obese or something.

*picks up a Twinkie and chomps it down*

I take offense to that.

*drinks a Mountain Dew*

I'm 5'10" and 210 pounds and I don't think I'm all that fat.

*eats a Ding Dong*

I mean where do they get their numbers from.

*drinks another Mountain Dew*

I mean I can still do 50 push ups and 70 sit ups in four hours.

This is a crock.

All I can do is excercise by watching the Computer awaiting for more posts from CAPTalk, throwing the monitor across the room when someone posts somthing about uniforms, policy, or brain dead comments......

BTW, 5-10, 250, BMI of 35.9 (severly Obeste)  Ummm... Bull Hockey.....

[Gunner C]

At 6'1" and 202 lbs (fresh out of SF School) I would have been moderately over weight.  Heck, I was nearly in the best shape of my life.  Those tables are a crock.

When I went to HALO J/M, there was a Marine SSgt who was slated for the same class.  He had a tiny waist and huge shoulders, about 8% body fat, and almost got thrown out of the class because he was over the weight screening tables.  The marine liaison had to come to his rescue - at that time, they didn't have a pinch test, tape test, or submersion tank.  I'm sure that he'd be considered obese by the table we're looking at.  Never mind that he could crush you with his forearm and bicep. 

I'm not a big fan of those tables.  I had a junior medic on my team in Panama.  If you looked at him, you'd swear he was a fat slob.  But if you got him out on a run or a ruck march, he'd smoke you like a cheap cigar.  He was balding, kinda round, but strong as an ox and had the stamina of a mule team.

What's the point?  As you've heard me joke before: "It's not how you play, it's how you look."  I never had a problem with a fat mess sergeant.  It didn't interfere with his job.  A fat clerk?  As long as he didn't "fat finger" the type writer, it was fine.  If they could pass the PT test, what's the rub?  The Eskimo scouts in the Alaska NG had a heck of a time with the Army - they weren't over weight, they were just under tall.  But if you ever went out with them patrolling on the polar ice cap, you'd know that they were some of the best soldiers in the army.  They looked like crap in uniform, but they showed this (then) young Green Beret quite a bit (and smoked me).

GC

[Cecil DP]

I remember a Staff Sergeant I was stationed with at Quantico, many years ago. During a Command Inspection by the IG, he was singled out for being too fat. He immediately produced a letter from the Commandant of the Marine Corps stating that he was exempt from the Height/ Weight requirements as long as he maintained his membership on the US Olympic weightlifting team.

[CadetProgramGuy]

Classic Example of how wrong BMI is:

Mr. Olympia, Jay Cutler.  His Website:

http://www.jaycutler.com/index.html

Height:  5-9
Weight: 274 (contest weight), 310 (off season)

BMI:  40.5 or 45.8

He is considered MORBIDLY OBESTE, and he needs to make drastic changes to his lifestyle to continue to live.........

[ColonelJack]

And yet, there's something to be learned from BMI and charts and tables and all that stuff like that there.

Me:  49 years old ... 5' 8" tall ... 265 lbs. ... and the most exercise I get is Scottish Country Dancing once a week and walking across a middle-school campus three times a day.

Now I do qualify as morbidly obese. 

I'm told I should watch my waistline.  I can't miss it.  All I have to do is look down.  (When was the last time I saw my toes, anyway?)

Jack

[Duke Dillio]

And yet, there's something to be learned from BMI and charts and tables and all that stuff like that there.

Me:  49 years old ... 5' 8" tall ... 265 lbs. ... and the most exercise I get is Scottish Country Dancing once a week and walking across a middle-school campus three times a day.

Now I do qualify as morbidly obese. 

I'm told I should watch my waistline.  I can't miss it.  All I have to do is look down.  (When was the last time I saw my toes, anyway?)

Jack

What would you need to see your toes for anyways?  They are all the same.  Pretty boring looking if you ask me.

[Al Sayre]

Gee,

I'm 6'1", 145 lbs, 31" waist, and I can not seem to put on weight.  The more I eat, the less I weigh. I don't know how it works but how can I add some meat to my bones?

I hate you!   

[Duke Dillio]

Gee,

I'm 6'1", 145 lbs, 31" waist, and I can not seem to put on weight.  The more I eat, the less I weigh. I don't know how it works but how can I add some meat to my bones?

I hate you!   

X2   

Maybe you should go start hitting the Texas Roadhouse Grill.  Order a 48 oz. ribeye and repeat for like 2 weeks.

[aveighter]

And yet, there's something to be learned from BMI and charts and tables and all that stuff like that there.

Me:  49 years old ... 5' 8" tall ... 265 lbs. ... and the most exercise I get is Scottish Country Dancing once a week and walking across a middle-school campus three times a day.

Now I do qualify as morbidly obese. 

I'm told I should watch my waistline.  I can't miss it.  All I have to do is look down.  (When was the last time I saw my toes, anyway?)

Jack

Jeez Jack,  I'm going to see you on my table sooner than later.

[Chappie]

According to that chart, I am not overweight...I am 5 inches shorter than I should be for my weight!!

[RickFranz]

I think this whole weight thing is just a way to get rid of folks they don't need anymore.  I guess if I had to cut 40,000 jobs (I believe that's the number I read) I'd come up with some sort of hard standard and start pairing down those that don't meet it.

[shorning]

I guess if I had to cut 40,000 jobs (I believe that's the number I read)...

Most of the billets being cut aren't actually filled with a body right now...

[mikeylikey]

Most of the billets being cut aren't actually filled with a body right now...

Man.....those evil robots are taking all of our jobs. 

[Eagle400]

Most of the billets being cut aren't actually filled with a body right now...

In other words, they're being filled by civilian contractors.   

[shorning]

Most of the billets being cut aren't actually filled with a body right now...

In other words, they're being filled by civilian contractors.   

No, in other words, those billets are sitting empty.

[Eagle400]

No, in other words, those billets are sitting empty.

In other words, someone can't take a joke.

[SAR-EMT1]

Can someone give me some examples of these 40 grand jobs that don't have anyone filling them.   Why aren't they being utilized?

Are these job that no one uses anymore? - Senior Cathode Tube Inspector?

Or is it something else?

[lordmonar]

The first sergeant duty is only manned at 50% right now.

Most career fields weigh in at about 85-90% full manning.

They are out sourcing jobs as fast as they can.

They are standing up new squadrons without any blue suit personnel to man them.

They are only assigning 1/2 the necessary admin types to take commander's support staff.

[Eagle400]

The AF has a weird sense of humor.

They say "People are our greatest resource"...

and then cut thousands of airmen.

[mikeylikey]

^ well they wanted airplanes they couldn't afford.......thus they cut people. 

[SAR-EMT1]

The first sergeant duty is only manned at 50% right now.

Most career fields weigh in at about 85-90% full manning.

They are out sourcing jobs as fast as they can.

They are standing up new squadrons without any blue suit personnel to man them.

They are only assigning 1/2 the necessary admin types to take commander's support staff.

You mean:

Half of all units don't have an SNCO assigned?

All units are missing roughly 10% of their TO&E for Manpower?

We already know the USAF is King of Contracting. (Which in itself makes me hurl)


I don't see how a /CC would put up with a short staff without raising a fit.

[PHall]

Half of all units don't have an SNCO assigned?

Oh they have a SNCO assigned. But they are usually too busy with their existing workload to have any time to devote to the additional duty of being a First Sergeant.
And, IIRC, if you have more then 100 personnel assigned to the squadron, you have to have a "full time" First Sergeant instead of an "Additional Duty" First Sergeant.

[lordmonar]

Half of all units don't have an SNCO assigned?

Oh they have a SNCO assigned. But they are usually too busy with their existing workload to have any time to devote to the additional duty of being a First Sergeant.
And, IIRC, if you have more then 100 personnel assigned to the squadron, you have to have a "full time" First Sergeant instead of an "Additional Duty" First Sergeant.

If there is one available to be assinged....otherwise you got an "additional duty" shirt doing it full time while someone else has to pick up the slack.

I know that overseas they want to keep the units manned at about 95%....stateside they can slip to 80% before AFMPC starts to get worried.

Now add to that number how many people are out of pocket filling In-Lieu-Of deployments or normal AEF rotations.

[SAR-EMT1]

Are Staffing levels and TO&E this bad in the other Services?

[mikeylikey]

^ No.  The Army has SNCO's that can multi-task. 

[Duke Dillio]

In the Army, it was a little different.  There was always a 1SG.  Every once in a while, something would happen, like the 1SG getting removed from command for fighting in San Ju Ri.  The senior platoon sergeant then stepped up, someone below him stepped up, on and on.  IIRC, people almost always wanted to step up and take responsibility.  One of my ARCOM's was for being an acting fire support "NCO" during a fire support team certification.  I was a PFC at the time...  (FSNCO's are generally SSG's)