I do, however, think that ensuring whatever the BCA standards we enforce are an accurate metric of what a healthy human looks like. For example, being able to hypothetically look at the 6’3” 250 pound USNA linebacker who can still crush the PRT as being within standards in the same way we look at the naturally skinny person who (seems to) effortlessly maintain their height and weight. BMI is not always black and white. Which is why I love the recent policy of allowing sailors who score high enough to be exempt from BCA standards (hoping that policy didn’t get tossed out in this recent NAVADMIN).
The BCA height / weight standards
are what a healthy human looks like. People like to hate on BMI because it gets confused with bodyfat %, but it is a strong indicator of heart condition risk, especially as you get over 40 years old. Doctors still use and record your BMI today as part of a holistic health assessment. I can point to tons of former athletes who have had early heart problems in their 50s due to carrying a lot of extra weight in their 20s and 30s. Our society has moved so far into the chronically overweight / obese category that 'normal and healthy' seems absurd.
Even still, the height / weight chart is set at the 'overweight' BMI and a tripwire to conduct the tape test, which works in theory. But that's where our tape tests are far too generous - an actually fit and muscular individual will tape at or under the NHA's recommendation of 37" men / 32" women. Then, if you go over the 40" / 35.5" allowance, you get to go to the bodyfat assessment where you get up to 26% bodyfat men / 36% bodyfat women, which is very far away from a fit bodyfat percentage of < 20% men / 26% women.
I'd be willing to bet that if we collected data that in practice, the vast majority of people getting to the rope and choke portion of the BCA (meaning, they have > 40" / 35.5" waist) are
not getting outstanding low or better overall on the PRT.
That's why we have so many 'thiccbois' in uniform. They are passing the standards. Then 50 magic pushups, grit your teeth for a minute and a half plank, and huff on a bike set to 12 resistance at 90rpm for 12 minutes and you've got yourself a good low overall.
The goal here is to ensure people remain medically ready and don't become walking VA disability claims while in active service. The Navy doesn't need people to deadlift 500 lbs... it's great that people have such a hobby, but it shouldn't absolve them from physical standards that have a scientific basis for increased health risk that taxpayers are on the hook to pay for. And also, we do have an obligation to present a professional and healthy appearance to the general public.
The two-year test may bring the Navy — and perhaps the other services — closer to scientific consensus on the best way to measure body fat.
www.navytimes.com
Somewhat timely and hopefully leads to better measurements. On a side note did not remember that it had been since 2017 that we stopped the discharges for failures. For some reason I thought that was only a COVID thing.
Getting a gnats ass accurate bodyfat % number is relatively unimportant, and a big contributor to that is that studies show that people who genetically store more fat around the gut (usually men) still have higher health risks at slightly lower bodyfat percentages than people who genetically distribute the weight more evenly (usually women). The tape measure test is good enough in terms of cost vs. speed vs. accuracy.
I 100% agree that keeping alternate cardio is a good thing.
My issue with alternate cardio is the scale at implementation. Coming up with a time / distance table rather than calorie standard for the bike would go a long way.
