Too Fat for the Boy Scouts?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

deep

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Messages
28,598
Location
A far distance down.
Too Fat for the Boy Scouts? New Weight Requirement Angers Some
New Requirements Ban Longtime Volunteers From Scouting Events

ht_larry_armstrong_090505_mn.jpg


By SARAH NETTER
May 6, 2009—


Larry Armstrong has been volunteering with his local Boy Scout branch for years, chaperoning trips, serving on the council committee, even becoming certified in archery instruction for a day camp.

But Armstrong, at 6-foot, 2-inches tall and about 370 pounds, may no longer qualify for some scout outings because he's overweight, part of a new push by the national organization to ensure the scouts and their volunteers are healthy.

A new mandatory weight requirement by the national Boy Scouts of America that will take effect next January has some longtime volunteers concerned they will be left out of trips they've enjoyed with their sons for years.

According to the chart outlined in the national health and medical record form, Armstrong's weight must come down to a minimum of 239 pounds before he'll be allowed on certain "high adventure" trips that take him more than 30 minutes away from emergency care by ground transportation.

"It looks like they're trying to get the perfect person," said Armstrong, who volunteers with Troop 458 out of Chapmansboro, Tenn. "And that's not going to happen."

Is fat a life style chioce or did God make them that way?

Too Fat for the Boy Scouts? New Weight Requirement Angers Some - ABC News
 
Well it seems like they are placing reasonable restrictions on only a certain (probably small) number of activities where health issues may arise so I'm not sure that they're not justified in doing so.
 
Sounds like a good plan! Sets a good example for the kids.


By telling a boy it puts people at risk to include his father :huh:


Do they let the fat father drive a car load of scouts to meetings and other events?
Driving while under the influence great risk of heart attack?
 
I don't get how they're going to implement this without upsetting a lot of people. How fat is too fat? And will there be something at the other end of the scale saying some people are too thin? What about people with health problems that cause them to be overweight?

I don't think this is the best way to go about things.
 
I think they have managed just fine all these years with self regulation


i think 380 pound fathers don't volunteer to go on 15 mile hikes, kayaking and water skiing trips

what about the fathers or step-fathers that are 70 years old.

we can't regulate everything

sometimes common sense should be enough
it does seem a bit wrong to label some of the kid's fathers defective?


kids aren't stupid, they know who is fat, who has asthma, who is a hemophiliac

I think these people with conditions that limit what they can participate in are best left to decide for themselves
 
Fat is a choice. It's too bad if fat people are offended by safety and health requirements; the rest of us are tired of making adjustments for their gluttony.

But what about those who see obesity as an illness? People such as Carnie Wilson have said to eat excessively, especially for emotional reasons, is an illness that needs to be taken care of.

If obesity is an illness, then I see it as no different as being an alcoholic or drug addict. Some people have unhealthy, addictive ways to combating their emotional pain. It also may be hereditary.
 
But what about those who see obesity as an illness? People such as Carnie Wilson have said to eat excessively, especially for emotional reasons, is an illness that needs to be taken care of.


Then take care of it. I've read a few of her things, but no one can tell me all these fat people have all these excuses. Stop eating. Just stop. Very few other countries have as many fat people as the US does, so I guess just the US is full of emotional damaged people who need to be gluttons?

And the countries that are getting fatter aren't doing it because they're fucked up, they're getting fatter because they eat too much food.
 
Then take care of it. I've read a few of her things, but no one can tell me all these fat people have all these excuses. Stop eating. Just stop. Very few other countries have as many fat people as the US does, so I guess just the US is full of emotional damaged people who need to be gluttons?

And the countries that are getting fatter aren't doing it because they're fucked up, they're getting fatter because they eat too much food.

I can't tell if you're being ironic here or not...? :lol:

Obesity is an eating disorder - would you talk so flippantly of someone with anorexia? :confused:
 
Obesity is an eating disorder - would you talk so flippantly of someone with anorexia? :confused:

True, but would you want an anorexic in a position where physical stamina was needed? I think you would want an anorexic to get treatment before playing any kind of role like this...

Anorexia is an eating disorder, no question. But I do think obesity is different, and I agree it's a difficult call, there are some where obesity may be caused by disease and there are others where it's caused by ignorance, laziness, or just pure gluttony.

But, I think the "fat is a choice" was definately a flippant remark addressing the BSA stance on homosexuals.
 
Partially, but I meant that overeating is a choice people make.

To be honest, I don't know for certainty...

I don't think it's always OVEReating, but just ignorant of what they are eating.

But like I said before, I think there are several reasons for being obese, and many are voluntary.
 
Bad, overprocessed food and too much of it, no physical activity, cities organized into sprawling subdivisions so nobody can walk anywhere, snacking on high calorie foods all day long, kids having TVs in bedrooms with video games at the age of 5 instead of being outside, etc, etc.

I grew up in Europe and I can honestly remember 2 "fat" kids in my class at school, and both of them had one parent who was not obese, but was probably close to it. I think that genetics likely did play a significant role there. My brother is a teacher now and he says half the kids are fat, that's certainly a stunning difference, and one that can be attributed largely to personal choices.
 
I'm not being ironic at all. Not everyone who is fat has an eating disorder. Most of them are just fat because they eat too much food.

Agreed. I watched Supersize me, and heard stories from many many people who went to the US. It shocked me how HUGE your portions are, the sodas(our large isn't even close to the US small!) and that kind of stuff. It's one part of the problem how BIG the portions are, another is the kind of food. I'm not saying we don't eat fast food over here, but I am saying that people don't eat it every day or even every week here.


And Deep, I more meant that it's a good example to kids that if you are that fat, you can't go on hikes and such because it's a health risk. That way it's more a reminder for kids that 'If I want to do this at later age, I must not get fat'. That kinda thing.
Ofcourse these fat people can drive their kids and whatnot, it's just that they don't do the stuff that's dangerous for them. What an impact would it have on a child to see a parent of either themselves or their friends get a heart attack in front of them while they're doing some heavy physical stuff?
 
That someone is overeating to the extent of reaching obesity surely has some grounding in a psychological problem? I realise that American portions are MASSIVE and yes, there is a lot of crap food about, but I think anyone who's that large, whether they want to be or not, has a problem.
 
Some obese people are compulsive overeaters with binge-eating problems, sure, and some have simply been taking in considerably more calories than they need since childhood, which over the course of several decades (particularly when combined with a sedentary lifestyle) can result in obesity by middle age. But if it's medically and legally risky for the Boy Scouts to allow obese people along on excursions (long backpacking trips etc.) to remote areas far from medical assistance, then it's legitimate for them to have these rules, regardless of whether a given obese individual has a bona fide psychological problem or not. I'm not sure this is really a better route than simply leaving it up to the indivduals' doctors to certify them fit (or unfit) for such trips, rather than giving the last word to a number. But at the same time, it doesn't seem in principle outrageous to me for the Scouts to uphold a somewhat higher standard of fitness for people who're going to go on long-distance excursions. (I believe they similarly have a no-smoking policy, for example.) And unlike with an actual disability, those affected by this policy have it within their power to healthfully lose the weight, so as to be able to resume going along on these trips.

I understand deep's objection to a point, though not because I think it likely that children of obese volunteers will see this as their fathers being labeled "defective"--kids are also smart enough to know that being obese isn't good for you and that the weight can be lost, so this isn't like saying, "We think your dad is ugly, so he can't come along." What I could perhaps see being problematic is that this policy might have the effect of pressuring children of obese volunteers into the role of unsolicited 'fitness monitors' for their fathers, in response to some third party's threatened witholding of a desired shared experience. I'm just not sure that's ultimately the Scouts' problem.
 
Last edited:
i think obesity is a complex thing.

we live in a world where you can get gigantic, supersized buckets of Twizzlers at the checkout line in freaking Best Buy. food is everywhere, and it's designed by massive corporations to be addictive, and profit goes up with super-sized portions. there are clear reasons that contribute to why people are more obese today than they were 30 years ago, and as for culpability, it's a complicated thing, imho. yes, we know that bad food makes you fat, we know that it's a matter of calories. but we also live in a world where the food itself is designed to give you the maximum "hit" from fat and sugar and to keep you coming back for more and more and more. we also live in a world where people don't have the time to cook at home, and it's quite easy to pack the kids into the minivan and take them to TGI Fridays than it is to spend an hour preparing a meal when you've just gotten home from work and have been shuttling them around from soccer practice to piano.

so i'm sympathetic, to a degree. it's like we know what we need to do, but i think it's far harder for people to do what it is they need to do when the world has been designed to eek out profit from every last drop of food. add that to the fact that most of human history has been a relentless search for food and shelter. those problems, at least in the West, have been pretty much solved. the result is that we're now surrounded by food, and instinct tells us to eat as much of it as we can because who knows when the next meal was going to be when you were a hunter/gatherer during the last Ice Age.

now, could many people drop weight if they made preparing and eating nutritious food a priority? yes. do i think it would be great for most parents to know something about nutrition? yes. do i think it would be great if cooking at home became more a part of our collective lifestyle? yes.

so, it's like it is our fault that we're so fat, but i blame agribusiness and the food corporations for turning something as basic as food into yet another commodity ruled by the bottom line.

as for the issue -- it seems like leading hikes at that weight is a health issue.
 
I don't know, I feel like the "supersized" excuse sort of undermines the millions of people that are healthy and can eat fast food without becoming morbidly obese. Are healthy people just lucky? Phil and I do eat out quite a bit but we're not blimping out and in fact have both lost a lot of weight without having to crash diet or never being able to enjoy going out. We went to a greasy TexMex chain this weekend but we got a healthy appetizer and shared a meal, I still felt stuffed.

Also I don't like how much emphasis is always placed on food and food choices. What about physical activity?
 
Also I don't like how much emphasis is always placed on food and food choices. What about physical activity?



i was told that weight loss is 70% diet, 30% exercise.

what i find fascinating is going to stay with Memphis's family. these are people who just a generation ago were spending most of their days farming. their food was traditional (and delicious) fried southern fare. and they have home movies that were shot in the 1960s that are amazing to watch today for a variety of reasons, but one of the reasons is that back then everyone was rail thin, despite the fact that they eat the same foods today that they did back then. the difference, i think, is that there's been a movement away from the fresh vegetables grown on your own farm to supermarket vegetables, the ease of fast food, and the fact that today the generation that grew up in those home movies aren't plowing the fields, they are bank tellers and spend 45 minutes commuting to their office jobs each way.
 
Back
Top Bottom