Overweight Youth Bad for Recruiting

[unhappycamper]

Overweight Youth Bad for Recruiting
March 05, 2009
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON - Fat is bad for one's health. And as defense officials attest, it's also bad for recruiting, and for national defense.

Curtis Gilroy, the Pentagon's accessions chief, lamented during a congressional hearing that many recruitment-age youth are too overweight to qualify for military service.

And as a recent Defense Department study revealed, the number of overweight active-duty troops has more than doubled during the past 10 years.

"We have a crisis in this country," Mr. Gilroy said during a March 3 hearing before the House Armed Services Committee's military personnel subcommittee.

He cited obesity among other shortcomings such as physical fitness deficiencies and lack of a high school diploma that disqualify about three-quarters of 17-to-24-year-olds from serving.


Rest of article at: http://www.military.com/news/article/air-force-news/overweight-youth-bad-for-recruiting.html?col=1186032369229

[MADem]

1. Plumpness can, and does, serve as a force shaper.

The reason that the military has weight standards is not just because of health--it can serve as a "reason" to discharge someone once they are no longer needed. Ten years ago, fitness and girth were common force-shaping tools. Three strikes and you're OUT, with the RE code to detail the why of it. Nowadays, PT tests are gundecked, measurements fudged, and the attention to the program depends more on the CO than emphasis from DOD on down.

If we needed a massive influx of troops due to, say, WW3 or something maybe not so big but significant nonetheless, they'd simply fire up the "larger sizes" assembly lines for uniforms, and access fat people. Those regulations were made more onerous the last time we wanted to get rid of people, and they can be made less onerous with the stroke of a pen.

That talk about "boot camp for fatties" has been going round for awhile. I have yet to see anything come of it, though.

[Captain Hilts]

3. That's exactly what the navy is doing with the sub force. As if fitness counts on a sub!

[MADem]

7. I used to say that until the engine room is a mile and a half from the

bridge, there's no need for anyone to "NEED" to run a mile and a half!

I always thought that swimming should be the default activity, not the alternate--after all, swimming is a useful skill in the USN if things go wobbly at sea!

On a sub, if you can make it through the hatch, and can squeeze by a shipmate in a tight passage, you're OK!

But if they've got too many people and not enough operational platforms, that's how they play it--the "regs" must be obeyed. AND....if they don't get enough people with the draconian diet and exercise restraints, they'll make the tests harder. And "up or out" is always in play, too!

[Captain Hilts]

2. They used to take care of that in boot camp. But, hell, 40% of draftees in '41 were rejected...

for being underweight, totally out of shape, and other physical problems associated with malnutrition. It made folks smaller also.

[Crowman1979]

4. Or they could get out of Iraq & Afghanistan, then reduce the military..

...to the point in which it would be easier to win the first round of "American Idol" then being able to enlist. But that's just my opinion.

But it would be a good idea to reduce the military to the point in which the yearly defense budget would equal of just the 2'nd and 3'rd largest military spenders--rather than 20+ countries!

[Captain Hilts]

5. The constitution says you 'raise' an army but 'maintain' a navy.

Navies are expensive.

[Crowman1979]

6. Well I don't think the founding fathers has submersibles and aircraft carriers in mind.

Although the navy does need more smaller vessels such as corvettes, frigates, torpedo boats and gun boats.