![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/pulling-a-train-300x233.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The Navy is changing its standards again, this time from the old height and weight tables to a simple ratio of waist circumference to overall body height. The Marines will follow, expect the Army and Air Force to do so soon.<\/p>\n
For decades, each branch of the U.S. military used height and weight screening followed by an abdominal circumference \u201ctape test\u201d when individuals exceeded weight limits. That two-step approach frequently drew criticism because it often failed to distinguish between lean muscle and excess body fat, creating situations in which physically fit servicemembers were flagged simply because of their size.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Knew a guy flagged for being fat who explained to the doc that he was simply a bodybuilder. When the doc challenged that, he casually flexed his biceps and split the sleeve on his khakis. The doc passed him.<\/p>\n
Rather than comparing a servicemember\u2019s weight to a height-based chart, the new method divides waist circumference by height, using the same unit of measurement for both. DoD policy permits multiple body-composition methods, including waist-to-height ratio, but the services implement their own standards; the Navy\u2019s newly released guidance sets a 0.55 WHtR screening cutoff, while the Marine Corps has announced a shift to WHtR and says it will publish its numeric thresholds after additional higher-level guidance.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Like the older standards, this isn’t kind to some of the endomorphs who tend to gain around the midsection. I recall a platoon sergeant I had once who couldn’t do a good Ranger pushup – his chest hit the ground before he broke the plane with his elbows. But he could do over 100 of them inside the 2 minutes and his two miles runs times were in the 11 minute range – the man was fit, he just didn’t look like it.<\/p>\n
Under the previous system, failing height-and-weight screening could trigger multiple follow-on steps, including taping, administrative flags, and potential impacts on promotion, reenlistment, or assignment eligibility. Measurement disputes were common, and outcomes often depended on who conducted the taping and how it was performed.<\/p>\n
The updated guidance simplifies enforcement by establishing a single pass-fail metric. The waist-to-height ratio now serves as the controlling standard, reducing subjectivity and administrative friction.\u00a0\u00a0Military.com<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
A single pass-fail metric? Some otherwise good folks may going to get hurt on that. There are too many body types, and not everyone looks like a greyhound. But IN GENERAL a non-subjective standard should be a good thing, and running a few numbers of what that 55% number works out to, only the short stocky folks may have to sweat it a bit.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"