6 ms·
The Air Force has loosened its restrictions on body fat for new recruits
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- aio2 4y agoIsn't everyone (in general) just getting fat and unhealthier? Of course they'd losen their standards.
- version_five 4y agoI think it's more that they have trouble attracting people. Banking and consulting have no trouble finding fit people.
- htrp 4y agoYou start fit.... and then you start getting promoted.
- rsynnott 4y ago> Banking and consulting have no trouble finding fit people. ... I'm not sure _banking_ has particularly rigorous fitness requirements.
- Der_Einzige 4y agoLarge swaths of jobs also have an unspoken requirement of looking good. Notice how most FAANG engineers are fit? Notice how you don't see fat bankers often? Pretty privilege
- frozenlettuce 4y agoRecruinting in general is getting harder https://www.npr.org/2023/01/18/1149855912/the-navy-has-raised-its-age-limit-as-the-u-s-military-faces-a-deep-recruiting-sl https://www.npr.org/2023/01/18/1149855912/the-navy-has-raise... My guess is that in a few years there will be a foreign legion in the French model (serve some years, gain citizenship)
- the_only_law 4y agoIsn’t there already some sort of path to citizenship via military service? I suppose that you’d probably have to at least be a resident though.
- duxup 4y agoYes there is: https://www.uscis.gov/military/naturalization-through-military-service https://www.uscis.gov/military/naturalization-through-milita... It's not exactly a foreign legion style thing but you can become a citizen via military service.
- Eumenes 4y agoRome also utilized mercenaries during its downfall
- Ericson2314 4y agoForeign legion is not the same. Arguably the Roman army always had foreigners, and it failed when it stopped trying to assimilate them and just treated them as mercenaries.
- janzer 4y agoNot sure what your exactly looking for this to be, but you can already become eligible for citizenship via military service. https://www.uscis.gov/military/naturalization-through-military-service https://www.uscis.gov/military/naturalization-through-milita...
- mardifoufs 4y agoCan you do that from another country? Or do you have to be a resident first?
- johncessna 4y agoThere is already a path to citizenship by serving in the US Military.
- PM_me_your_math 4y ago[flagged]
- zabzonk 4y agodoes this mean more powerful ejector seats?
- ytyny 4y ago[flagged]
- H8crilA 4y agoHonestly it's probably not a problem at all for all the slow moving aircraft, like strategic transport or a tanker or a helicopter. It's physically easier to drive those than it is to drive an M1 Abrams tank, where you need to, for example, be able to fix the tracks if they get thrown off on a mine. The demanding stuff like fighters or even the much memed about A-10 will not accept people that do not pass the centrifuge (and a lot of people do not).
- samcheng 4y agoWell, it's nicknamed "Chair Force" for a reason. The vast majority of these recruits won't become pilots. Consider those directing drones, for example.
- KptMarchewa 4y agoActual air crew personnel are a small, single digit percentage of Air Force personnel.
- jcims 4y agoModern day Klinger is going to have it rough.
- Eumenes 4y agoGonna be bigger parachutes
- tromp 4y agoI wonder why they're using body fat percentage instead of BMI. While the two are strongly correlated [1], BMI seems more gender neutral. [1] https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-13-797/figures/1 https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1...
- johncessna 4y agoBMI among fit individuals and athletes, is a terrible indicator of overall health. There's no distinction between a 250lb 6' man whose weight is predominately muscle vs a 250lb 6' man whose weight is predominately fat.
- xwkd 4y agoHaving a high BMI and a low body fat percentage means that you are likely composed of a lot of muscle weight. I would think that this would correlate highly with physical strength, which I would also think is something we would want for our fighting forces.
- nordsieck 4y ago> Having a high BMI and a low body fat percentage means that you are likely composed of a lot of muscle weight. I would think that this would correlate highly with physical strength, which I would also think is something we would want for our fighting forces. It's complicated. I'm sure that military members are, on average, more muscular than civilians. But they're not typically very jacked compared to body builders or powerlifters. Moderate strength with high endurance (e.g. crossfit) is much more useful in combat than high strength but low endurance (e.g. powerlifting). And moderate strength with high endurance doesn't typically result in huge muscles. Having spent some time in the military, this generally aligns with my observations. Sure - there's some people who are jacked. But most people - even really elite guys - look pretty unassuming.
- skerit 4y agoBMI doesn't distinguish between weight by fat or weight by muscle mass. Someone with a lot of muscles and not a lot of fat can still have a high BMI
- duxup 4y agoI recall reading that other branches of the military would take recruits and in boot camp when they weren't meeting the fitness standards they would get assigned to a group of other similar folks and they'd work on that ... and then later rejoin a group in boot camp after they slimmed down / were more fit. Seemed like a good / practical idea.
- zdragnar 4y agoIt's a necessary idea. The pool of people willing to join and fit enough to get through boot camp has shrunk enough that the military has been missing their recruiting goals.
- nickelpro 4y agoThe recruiting goals are inflated due to low retention, retention is low due to low morale but also because of high employment rates. When it's easy to get a civilian gig less people stay in, especially among technical rates/MOS's. The problem isn't as simple as "America too fat".
- the_only_law 4y agoAny insight into why morale is low? I have a lot of immediate family in the military with current and past experiences across all the main branches except the Navy and the “Space Force”. I talk to some of them pretty often and so I’ve developed my own theories, but I’d be curious to hear others.
- jimmygrapes 4y agoAnecdotally, I know and speak to dozens of Veterans a week and multiples more of young people in the target range, and the general consensus is "what are we fighting/training for, and why would I want to risk anything for an evil/corrupt/racist country". The idea that "America Bad" (however true or not) has permeated nearly everywhere in some form or another.
- hgsgm 4y agoFor those who olforgot the content of the article they surely read, this is for recruits. They allow 1 year of training time to get down to standard weight. It's the ultimate "boot camp" diet&exercise program.
- alistairSH 4y agoIt will be interesting to see what happens after that first year. I suspect a fair number of those clinically obese recruits will wash-out. Even with strict guidance that's a lot of weight to lose and requires significant mental/lifestyle adjustments.
- kritiko 4y agoI found it interesting that they talk about body fat % when that’s notoriously difficult to measure. AFAIK only an MRI is accurate. Then trying to Google what the actual test is, there’s a lot of advice about how to manipulate water weight to cut enough to pass. So this change is probably way better for those borderline people who were doing unsustainable stuff to pass.
- Avshalom 4y agoI assume it's just rope and choke same as the other branches.
- sircastor 4y agoI imagine that some roles that used to depend on height and weight requirements are shifting due to remote piloting. The article has this interesting note: >Whatever their body composition when they join, new airmen will be subjected to the same annual fitness tests and standards as everyone else. Which I guess means the Air Force thinks they can get folks who would otherwise not qualify into shape.
- bmelton 4y ago> Which I guess means the Air Force thinks they can get folks who would otherwise not qualify into shape Seems like a safe bet? Personal trainers would probably be a lot more effective if they had as much control over your work life, diet, and exercise routines as the military does over new recruits.
- alistairSH 4y agoWow. 26% for men. That's clinically obese.
- handwarmers 4y agoIt’s funny to see how defensive people are about their body fat %/bmi etc. It is objectively bad for you beyond a certain point and if that “personally offends” you it is more of a you problem than a problem with the person pointing it out. Yeah it is complicated etc but so are the reasons people smoke or drink but most people don’t give them a hug and a free pass. Take care of your health, and if taking care if your health is complicated, make it your main project in life.
- raverbashing 4y agoTrue And people say 'oh but BMI is not relevant' it is not if you have the physique of a (an American) Football player and even then. For most people, BMI is not too far from reality.
- alistairSH 4y agoPossibly while they're playing. But BMI impacts them as they age and retire. They need to be careful to change their diet, maintain exercise, and avoid getting fat - and after a lifetime of eating massive meals and lifting big, that's a really big lifestyle change that can be hard to make.
- raverbashing 4y agoYou're absolutely correct. It's very common to see players balloon and go overweight once they stop with the activities
- dhbradshaw 4y agoOdd to conflate body fat % with bmi though. Using the latter as a proxy for the former makes strong assumptions around how you're built (musculature, torso length to leg length, broadness of chest, arm length, etc).
- handwarmers 4y agoYeah sorry for that - I was using the terms quite colloquially
- wantsanagent 4y agoI'd be curious to know what the long term mortality effects are from joining the military vs obesity.
- abeppu 4y agoThis headline mentions body fat, and the 2nd paragraph mentions specific body fat percentage thresholds. But from what I understand, they're shifting _to_ a system which measures height and waist size with a tape measure, _from_ a prior system which measured waist and neck size with a tape measure. I.e they're throwing around "body fat percentage" as a term, but they're not measuring it with any kind of accuracy, and are favoring a very low tech (and perhaps transparent) measure over one which would be more accurate but expensive, such as hydrostatic weighing or DEXA. To me it's a little crazy that they use a tape measure given how much we spend on the military. https://www.military.com/military-fitness/fitness-test-prep/body-composition-test-prep https://www.military.com/military-fitness/fitness-test-prep/...
- vlovich123 4y agoYou think that money goes to grunts?
- throwaway173738 4y agoHydrostatic weighting would be a huge mess for MEPS stations.
- Olreich 4y agoThis system change improves accuracy without increasing cost or complexity. They already are doing these measurements, just adjusting the threshold based on height. The previous system made it so very short people could be very fat so long as they could do the other components, but very tall people had to be rail thin or else automatically fail the test.
- _8j50 4y agoIs there a problem with a 350lb drone operator? These restrictions make sense for most military enlisted roles but perhaps chunky folks can take on more "sit in your chair all day" type of roles? Not everyone is combat, I mean why would you need even the chaplain to be fit. In the army or navy I get it, you have to actually travel and become a liability but in the airforce, spaceforce and cybercommand there are many roles that never ever require the person be in the field.
- mjbeswick 4y agoSuch a person would be at a higher risk of many health issues, which the military would be responsible for providing care for and they might be a liability if a combat situation developed around them. They may also be seen as lacking in self discipline or having other negative personality traits.
- _8j50 4y agoThat's my point, a drone operator in a trailer in nevada will never be in those situations. Health risk and appearance are a different topic but body fat does not automatically mean unhealthy.
- 1-6 4y agoIn my recollection, individuals serving in the Korean Army often aspired to be part of the KATUSA due to the superior treatment and nourishment they received. It appears that there is a worldwide trend of relaxed standards for new military recruits, as evidenced by the reduction of mandatory Korean enlistment for the lower ranks from 21 to 18 months since 2021. This shift in standards may suggest that modern warfare places less emphasis on physical labor and more on intellectual prowess, such as computing skills. As a result, countries that excel in these areas may be better equipped to handle modern military operations. Furthermore, military readiness has become increasingly privatized, which may explain why current figures do not align with previous years. Despite this, it is likely that countries are more heavily armed than at any other point in history.
- vsareto 4y agoBoot camp seems like it would be one of the better places to actually lose the weight. I've never been, so might be eating a boot, but: - there's obviously a focus on PT. Maybe more so in the future if they expect more out of shape people - a lot less daily distraction, with a schedule specifically for PT - drill instructors who will make you work and push yourself vs. you needing the discipline in a gym yourself - food is controlled somewhat?
- alistairSH 4y agoI'm only familiar with USMC boot, and only through friends who served. They ALL lost massive amounts of body fat. Most looked almost emaciated afterwards. They couldn't really add more PT - that's a huge portion of what they do for the 3 month period. The initial fitness test (for males) is... 3 Pull-Ups 44 crunches 34 Push-Ups 1.5 mile run in 13:30 Any reasonably fit 18 year old should be able to pass that. Somebody at 26% BF isn't going to complete any of those exercises and be unable to start boot camp. But, the Air Force minimum fitness level required to GRADUATE from boot camp is only slightly harder than the USMC requirement to START boot camp. Is somebody who started at 26% BF going to gain enough fitness in a few months to meet those levels? I doubt it.
- undedone 4y agoI went through my country's basic and infantry training (admittedly a long time ago). Take it from me: basic is not where you want to do this. You will be struggling with culture shock and under constant psychological stress. You want to be in good shape before you start training.
- JoeAltmaier 4y agoMy son found paradoxically that going into the Army fit and slim was a problem. He couldn't exercise as much or eat properly to maintain. Some training programs involved fasting, and he had nothing to live off of but muscle. He came out of it much lighter and weaker.
- cgeier 4y agoMilitary training regimes aren't made to get the most out of every individual, but to get everyone to an acceptable level.
- garbagecoder 4y agoThere are a lot of really stupid things that you can't even waiver at MEMS, so people just lie and they change these rules enough that it's really confusing. I was a mega POG and we sat at desks. There was absolutely no reason I couldn't be a bit overweight, have asthma, or whatever. OTOH, I wouldn't want anyone operating in a forward area to be a burden on anyone, but the system is already set up for pre-deployment screening (before you ship out you go through a whole thing called SRP). tl;dr they should let more people in for POG jobs (like mine)