I am trying to figure out if you can overweight and still serve in the CG. I have a friend who was trying to join but was denied entry on weight. This week I was on CG Alameda Island and I happened to be in the ID office with a friend when I saw this Chief who looked like he was about to burst out of his Tropical uniform, think name read EDITED. But WoW is this the norm when I served which was some time ago you saw some of that but I heard this was being weed out or is this something with rank and looking the other way. If this is the case not a very good representation of the CG in my opion especially in that office...

Ashley: Just like you posting the Chief's name here, I could post your E-mail address here for everyone to read and possibly send private hate mail to you...but I won't. There are some things you just don't do; show some respect next time. "Praise in public, chastise in private." That's something a Chief would know...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: JerryG,

Well Ashley I must say good work on calling out our shipmates
Here's the nitty gritty basics on the weight issue. Your "friend" will NOT get in if he/she is over their weight/body fat%. We dont need to start fresh with imperfections... and the recruiters have enough people in their office that they don't need the big ones to join.

As for members that are already in the CG and happened to fall behind on their weight management they are given a number of opportunities to get back in compliance, various figures go in to this such as the amount of weight or body fat % that needs to be lost along with the time that this is expected to be accomplished. If a member is exceeds the time line given and is proven unable or unwilling to become compliant they are then processed for discharge.

If someone wants it bad enough they can do it. I know of a guy that recently graduated boot camp that lost over 110 lbs just to join the coast guard!! He did it, he's in and serving proudly. But not everyone is cut out for it.

Interesting post Ashley99, hopefully you read between the lines and realized how unprofessional it was to call out another member by name? Really, what good comes from that?

Maybe the following will provide a better understanding to our current program and new standards taking place 1 October, 2009. Currently, we have members in the CG that are 50, 60, or even 70 lbs over their Maximum Allowable Weights. A member’s height and wrist size (determining frame) play a key role in this calculation. As long as that member does not reach 9% over their maximum allowed body fat % (given for their age group and gender) they are placed on probation to lose the weight. The maximum amount of time given will not exceed eight months and a member cannot be on a program three times in a 14 month window or on the program three consecutive semi-annual weigh in periods which take place in April and October.

If a member simultaneously reaches 36 lbs over their maximum allowed weight and 9% over their maximum body fat % they will be processed for separation. Once that member keeps their weight in compliance they can see a recruiter and given an opportunity to come back into the CG without penalty.

The new standards will make it even more difficult for some to meet the requirements as they do away with the wrist measurements and set a flat weight to that member’s height, regardless of gender. The body fat percentage also dropped by 1% in each age group for both genders. Of course, every member has the opportunity for a waiver if they feel their physique warrants special consideration, the old and new weight instruction provides specific guidance to request one.

This service is far behind other branches with putting a physical fitness program into place. We must have members fit for worldwide assignment and more importantly healthy, which is a reason for all the changes to date. Weight has become a condition of employment and we need to accept it. As Brechty commented above, some unfortunately will not be cut out for these standards. Do I agree with this, absolutely not! I know tons (no pun intended) of people in the Guard whose talents far exceed their waistlines and in the end, I see the CG paying a price for losing these members. Unfortunately, these are the rules we live by until further notice.

On an ending note, your name sparked my curiosity… what was the reason for your separation if I might ask?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 17839122,

Ashley 99, I have got to say that what you just posted was one of the most disrespectful things I have seen on Freds Place. Not only did you list a name, but it was a Chief. For someone that served I would have figured that you would have a little more respect for the anchor than that . You do not know this Chief's history. There could be underlying medical, mental, or physical issues that your little mind cannot begin to comprehend. Just because you were board one night and wanted to post something, does not mean you can label a person like that. The Chief mentioned has peers and subordinates that he must face day to day and if you think they do not look at these postings you are greatly mistaken. Think about what you are doing before you post please.

While serving overseas as a YNC at PATFOR SWA, we had a guy that was exposed to some stuff in Saudi. They put him on meds that definitely caused the weight gain. Of course, as soon as he finished with the meds, everything returned to normal.

I realize that you probably felt a great deal of satisfaction by posting this and calling people out, but maybe, just maybe, there could be parts of the story which you don't fully appreciate or understand.

Way to go...

[anonymous] Ashley99:

I re-read your post and consider it self-serving. I gather you know the answer to your question already. Using the internet to publicly point out that a good acquaintance of mine, as you write, is "about to burst out of his Tropical uniform" is in poor enough taste. Using your question as a method of subterfuge to mask your desire to humiliate a fellow Coast Guardsman is beyond what I consider a minimal level of decency: malicious is a word I might use to describe your post.

You, like most people including me, saw what you wanted to see. I guess you failed to notice this person's Cutterman Insignia. That apparently did not "burst out" and grab your attention.

I hope you take a moment to reflect on your behavior and to re-write your post and remove that person's name.

Sincerely,

Lloyd Tuchman

The initial post makes me almost ashamed that my granddaughter is named Ashley.

Luckily she is being raised to know that such a post or statement is unacceptable.

I think we should celebrate Ashley's accomplishment here... I think we are overlooking something of worth note.

Could it be that we have reached a point here on these boards where something is unacceptable? Some speech, some behavior is over the line?? I never thought I'd see the day! That's like getting kicked out of the Klan for being racist! To have these folks come down on you for being insensitive or over the line is NOT something that happens every day around here.

Congratulations!

I am not a Chief, nor have i ever met the Chief you refer too.

As mbarnes24 stated, maybe the member has an underlying medical condition that you over looked.

I can tell you from expierence, I quit smoking on 09NOV08. I had every intention of working out, it was going to be the new me. On 11NOV08 I ended up in the ER, with a digestive ailment. Over the course of the following four months, I endured 3 surgeries, spent the time as NFFD, was only allowed to work 3 days a week, and as a result of my surgeries had to urinate once an hour until (try getting a full nights sleep when you awake every hour to go urinate). As a result of my lack of physical activity, I gained 30 pounds during that period. Now that I've been back to full duty for 6 months, I've lost all the weight that I gained. That Chief you speak of could have any number of medical conditions that you overlooked and called out. Absolutly inappropriate.

quote:

Originally posted by 2494906:
I think we should celebrate Ashley's accomplishment here... I think we are overlooking something of worth note.

Could it be that we have reached a point here on these boards where something is unacceptable? Some speech, some behavior is over the line?? I never thought I'd see the day! That's like getting kicked out of the Klan for being racist! To have these folks come down on you for being insensitive or over the line is NOT something that happens every day around here.

Congratulations!

The post was completely inappropriate and you shouldn't be supporting her comments. You should never use someone's name in a forum like this. I sincerely hope you were joking.

There are plenty of ways to bring up a discussion...

Absolutely inappropriate!!

quote:

Your "friend" will NOT get in if he/she is over their weight/body fat%.

Dave - BF is irrelevant for accessions.

quote:

Originally posted by Jake69:

quote:

Originally posted by 2494906:
I think we should celebrate Ashley's accomplishment here... I think we are overlooking something of worth note.

Could it be that we have reached a point here on these boards where something is unacceptable? Some speech, some behavior is over the line?? I never thought I'd see the day! That's like getting kicked out of the Klan for being racist! To have these folks come down on you for being insensitive or over the line is NOT something that happens every day around here.

Congratulations!

The post was completely inappropriate and you shouldn't be supporting her comments. You should never use someone's name in a forum like this. I sincerely hope you were joking.

There are plenty of ways to bring up a discussion...

Absolutely inappropriate!!

Note to self: Work on sarcasm.

Of course, I'm not supporting such an idiotic statement. I either over estimated my ability use sarcasm or I underestimated folks ability to recognize it!

Sarcasm is a hard thing to type... use some emoticons

I think you all scared her off since she is not responding.

[Anonymous] Ashley99:

You failed to display moral courage . . . 1) by making an anonymous post with malicious intent and more importantly 2) by failing to correct your mistake after it was explained to you by many credible people. Under some ethical guidelines, your post is akin to murder - i.e. character assassination.

I can only conclude (a la a-fortiori) that due to your current lack of moral courage that you also lack the physical courage requisite to serve alongside me and my fellow Coast Guardsmen.

Sincerely,

Lloyd Tuchman

quote:

...Under some ethical guidelines, your post is akin to murder - i.e. character assassination...

..ok, the post was maybe in poor taste, but now we are stretching it a little folks. As a matter of fact if the OP had identified themselves fully, I don't know if I would have had a problem with anything they said. I don't know the person mentioned from Adam. BUT I do know that there are plenty of folks that do look like a disgrace in uniform becuase EITHER their uniform is too small for their size or their size is too big for being in uniform. Some of them even wear anchors! If their fellow Chief's don't correct them, shame on their shipmates. If they get called out, well they should of thought about that when they passed by their hallway mirror two weeks ago and should have ordered an appropriate sized uniform.........


Edit - Happy now Lloyd? Doesn't make that sentence/fragment any less absurd. Saying JOE IS FAT has the same ethical implications as the unlawful and intentional taking of a life of an important or noteable person based upon their position? Come on!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Mightyz90_93,

MightyZ:

Next time, I would really appreciate having 100 per cent of my sentence quoted.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Lloyd Tuchman

quote:

Originally posted by LloydTuchman:
MightyZ:

Next time, I would really appreciate having 100 per cent of my sentence quoted.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Lloyd Tuchman

Edited as request