Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Ya know... people were a lot thinner in general when there was plenty of hard labor and not enough to eat. --Captain Obvious
True. Being fat is a sign of the general wealth of our nation. But, it's not about being fat, it's about being semi fit enough to go into basic and pass it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/31/us/31soldier.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1 said: Another study found that at one training center in 2002, 3 recruits suffered stress fractures of the pubic bone, but last year the number rose to 39. The reason, General Hertling said: not enough weight-bearing exercise and a diet heavy on sugared sodas and energy drinks but light in calcium and iron.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/31/us/31soldier.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1
Otto Maddox wrote: Yet there is this. I don't get it.
ITL: fat whiners.
"Oooh, I have fat thighs. That means I can't pass a bodyfat test!"
Spoiler alert, you fat everywhere.
In reply to Ignorant:
When I went through Basic there were plenty of people who were in the fat program. Granted, that was over 20 years ago, and it seems like the problem may be much larger now, but fat people have entered the military for a long time now.
I also agree that due to staffing and retention problems that the standards for entry into the military have been relaxed from where they were 20 years ago.
It also just so happens that we're engaged in war, too. I'm sure that has something to do with the recruitment and readiness issues that the different branches of service are having at the moment.
I'm not trying to downplay the fact that as a nation, we're tend to trend a bit on the large side. I'm proof of the issue myself. I've dropped from close to 230 down to just under 200 over the past few years. Now, even though my bodyfat % is in the normal range, it is on the high end and the love handles show that I can be thinner. So, I'm still trying to shed about 10 more pounds.
I'm also trying to instill a sense of fitness into my kids. It's harder than you think for a lot of reasons. I'm lucky that my school district hasn't cut Health and Phys Ed programs yet, but it won't surprise me when they go... and they will go.
Osterkraut wrote:Otto Maddox wrote: Yet there is this. I don't get it.ITL: fat whiners. "Oooh, I have fat thighs. That means I can't pass a bodyfat test!" Spoiler alert, you fat everywhere.
Whiners yes..
But. Thats our tax dollars being spent on liposuction.
Ignorant wrote: But, it's not about being fat, it's about being semi fit enough to go into basic and pass it.
I see so many people waddling around, all red-faced, huffing for air just trying to get across flat ground and into 7/11 for a Big Gulp, a pack of smokes and some Cheez Whiz soaked nachos that I can believe that it is beyond pandemic.
I think it is a self correcting problem though. Sooner or later - they will die off. Younger and fatter until they are dropping before they can mate with other sloth-like soft boned couch dwellers.
Brett_Murphy wrote: I'm also trying to instill a sense of fitness into my kids. It's harder than you think for a lot of reasons. I'm lucky that my school district hasn't cut Health and Phys Ed programs yet, but it won't surprise me when they go... and they will go.
I know it's hard. I'm trying to figure this out as well. I have two small kids at home.
A friend of a friend story alert, but...
Apparently there was a guy in the Navy who was in outstanding shape, regularly did marathons, but even with liposuction couldn't pass the measurement test due to a pencil neck and some genetic waist flab, and was dismissed from the military.
Otto Maddox wrote: A friend of a friend story alert, but... Apparently there was a guy in the Navy who was in outstanding shape, regularly did marathons, but even with liposuction couldn't pass the measurement test due to a pencil neck and some genetic waist flab, and was dismissed from the military.
How did he get in with the pencil neck?
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
I guess when he was a younger man, he was scrawny in the waist too so the ratios worked out ok.
Ignorant wrote:Brett_Murphy wrote: I'm also trying to instill a sense of fitness into my kids. It's harder than you think for a lot of reasons. I'm lucky that my school district hasn't cut Health and Phys Ed programs yet, but it won't surprise me when they go... and they will go.I know it's hard. I'm trying to figure this out as well. I have two small kids at home.
I try to lead by example - we don't stock the fridge with garbage and they see me go running, workout and so on. We hike/bike, etc for fun. It rubs off.
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
Yeah, that is exactly what people need to do. That is my approach anyway.
Ignorant wrote:Osterkraut wrote:Whiners yes.. But. Thats our tax dollars being spent on liposuction.Otto Maddox wrote: Yet there is this. I don't get it.ITL: fat whiners. "Oooh, I have fat thighs. That means I can't pass a bodyfat test!" Spoiler alert, you fat everywhere.
Not in that article it's not. Unless you say that their wages are our tax dollars.
Imo there are various factors contributing to this. I'll list some that I believe have an affect but these statements are not based in any hard data.
Osterkraut wrote:Ignorant wrote:Not in that article it's not. Unless you say that their wages are our tax dollars.Osterkraut wrote:Whiners yes.. But. Thats our tax dollars being spent on liposuction.Otto Maddox wrote: Yet there is this. I don't get it.ITL: fat whiners. "Oooh, I have fat thighs. That means I can't pass a bodyfat test!" Spoiler alert, you fat everywhere.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/12/army-tummy-tuck-120810w/
yeah different article.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:Ignorant wrote:I try to lead by example - we don't stock the fridge with garbage and they see me go running, workout and so on. We hike/bike, etc for fun. It rubs off.Brett_Murphy wrote: I'm also trying to instill a sense of fitness into my kids. It's harder than you think for a lot of reasons. I'm lucky that my school district hasn't cut Health and Phys Ed programs yet, but it won't surprise me when they go... and they will go.I know it's hard. I'm trying to figure this out as well. I have two small kids at home.
I am sure trying. We don't have anything in the house with HCFS, most of our food is good. We rarely do fast food.
I think one big thing that helps, is our location. We moved into the middle of a town a few years ago and it helps that you can walk to someplace interesting, go for a jog, or go to a park without using a car. In the summer we go grocery shopping sans car.
Xceler8x wrote: Imo there are various factors contributing to this. I'll list some that I believe have an affect but these statements are not based in any hard data. * - The availability of cheap high sugar and high fat foods. If you can't afford to eat well, you're still going to eat. You won't starve but your options will most likely be in the categories I've already stated. Quick! What are the cheapest food options you can think of? Now consider their ability to add weight to your body. Those are the foods that the poor or middle class eat most often. Rich guys don't often join the military.
I'll buy this one in it's entirety.
* - The most popular hobbies these days are more sedentary than in the past. This coming from a guy arguing on the internet while sitting on his azz. My job? 8+ hours of more azz sitting. That will definitely put weight on you.
I think kids are allowed to eat crap and have lazy, sedentary parents. Fat people have fat kids. Fit people have fit kids. 2nd and 3rd generation fat kids have no bone density because they have never in their lives done anything like real physical exercise.
* - Dental care and Dr's visits are an expensive luxury that most can't afford.
You can buy a toothbrush, paste and floss for under $5. I never met a kid that wanted to brush his teeth. Again, lazy parents. You gotta make the berkeleyers go in there and clean themselves.
* - A lack of funding in schools and a higher standard of testing that schools are held to ensure that physical education, and the arts, will be cut first. The fed gov't spend $5 on the elderly for every $1 it spends on kids. Stop that. At least make the split even. Then we might see a new focus on physical education as funds for education become more available.
Even worse - my kid's cafeteria at school used to look like a berkeleying poster for how not to eat. Soda machines, nachos, chips, crap pre-processed microwave food from a freezer... no big bowl of fruit or bucket of green beans in sight. This started to change just recently due to a lot of complaints from er... well not just me. Seriously - how the hell did it ever get that way? We are brown baggers but in a serious minority. My kids constantly complain about being embarrassed but they eat what they bring. Nobody really wants greasy fish sticks do they?
Ignorant wrote: I am sure trying. We don't have anything in the house with HCFS, most of our food is good. We rarely do fast food. I think one big thing that helps, is our location. We moved into the middle of a town a few years ago and it helps that you can walk to someplace interesting, go for a jog, or go to a park without using a car. In the summer we go grocery shopping sans car.
I think just setting some limits and shoving them out the door to play is enough. Kids, stripped of anything else to do will play tag or climb trees.
I wish I had a situation where I could get most things on foot. I am on top of a mountain and its a pretty strenuous hike to get up/down thru the woods. Biking on the roads is a little risky for the kids so we end up driving everywhere - including to go biking.
At the risk of incurring the wrath of Child Protective Services, my 7 year old boy is a lot like a Border Collie. If we don't run him every day, we have a really hard time getting him in bed and he is just pretty twitchy all day long. If we let him run around for an hour, he's easy to deal with.
I can't fathom why some schools did away with recess and PE for kids. I'd expect a huge spike in behavioral issues in school if kids can't work off all the energy they have.
Brett_Murphy wrote: At the risk of incurring the wrath of Child Protective Services, my 7 year old boy is a lot like a Border Collie. If we don't run him every day, we have a really hard time getting him in bed and he is just pretty twitchy all day long. If we let him run around for an hour, he's easy to deal with. I can't fathom why some schools did away with recess and PE for kids. I'd expect a huge spike in behavioral issues in school if kids can't work off all the energy they have.
CPS should applaud you for giving your child exercise! 
My comment on something I know nothing about....
I think schools are doing away with recess and P.E. because of a lack of cash. P.E. teachers are expensive. They also return very little "measurable" return on investment as compared to math, science, and language scores.
We are seeing the result of those choices.
Again, my opinion. I've been wrong before. Don't spit in the wind. If you're a plumber don't chew your finger nails. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Xceler8x wrote: I think schools are doing away with recess and P.E. because of a lack of cash. P.E. teachers are expensive. They also return very little "measurable" return on investment as compared to math, science, and language scores.
NCLB bases funding on test scores, not BMI.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: ..I think it is a self correcting problem though. Sooner or later - they will die off. Younger and fatter until they are dropping before they can mate with other sloth-like soft boned couch dwellers.
Not sure that will work out. Humans are amazingly resistant and don't seem to want to die most of the time and seem to like to bread at very young ages. A lot of the super sized people will end up on the couch on disability and other forms of support holding on a long as possible. Only letting go after many very expensive (and sometime logistically difficult) trips to the hospital.
The cheapest person (society wise) are the super exercising types. If everything is good, they grow old and don't need much (Jack Lalanne) if there is an "issue" they expire quite promptly at a somewhat young age (Jim Fix).
In reply to Osterkraut:
That's how I see it as well.
Also, I maintain that it's not their fitness that's in question; it's their compliance with a height/weight standard that may not be applicable. I've seen some pretty porky folks that can run like crazy and lift heavy objects.
As far as I'm concerned, if you can run far, carry a pack, communicate on a radio and shoot straight you're welcome to wear a uniform.
Then, you'll be ridiculed until you either drop pounds or become the next Private Pyle.
Xceler8x wrote: The fed gov't spend $5 on the elderly for every $1 it spends on kids.
If that's true, it pisses me off.
The fed gov't spend $5 on the elderly for every $1 it spends on kids.
Kids don't vote.
Sorry my fellow young(ish) folks. This guy says it's true. I haven't verified his claims. (Edit - Brookings institute report is where he pulls his data from.)
"The federal government's expenditures on children have shrunk as a share of the budget over the past 30 years. In 1960, about 20 percent of the federal budget went to programs dedicated to the health, development and education of Americans under the age of 18. Today it's 10 percent and falling. "
"Spending on Social Security and Medicare alone makes up close to 40 percent of the budget. In a decade, that share will rise considerably, perhaps to as much as half the federal budget. Whatever the exact percentages are - what you define as programs for children and the elderly can vary - the conclusion is clear: The federal government spends between $4 and $5 on elderly people for every dollar it spends on children. "
We need to spend money on our future. Educate some peeps.
You'll need to log in to post.
