Too Fat to Graduate?

Remove all ads!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091120/ap_on_re_us/us_college_graduation_fitness

I’m not sure where I stand on this. On the one hand, Universities are free to set whatever criteria they want in order to be able to graduate, and certainly health issues, including obesity, can play a role in a person’s ability to do the job they have trained for. On the other hand, I’m not really comfortable with requiring only a certain segment of the student population to take a particular course.

 

I think it's obvious the University wants to help obese students. They probably could've come up with a better gameplan though. Singling out overweight students is not the way to go. Offer the class as an extra option, but don't make it mandatory. That would stop any issues from arising. Or make everyone take it and don't mention an individual's BMI. It is very embarressing for some.

 

I like it. I remember watching on television that MIT has (or had) a requirement that you had to pass a swim test to graduate.

 

I attended Cornell and they also made you pass a swim test to graduate. They had a 50-meter pool, and you had to do 4 lengths without quitting, so basically you had to show that you were capable of swimming 200 meters without assistance, which is actually a bit more physically taxing than it initially sounds, and I consider myself a pretty good swimmer - I guess I just never had to swim 200 meters straight before.

 

Nice idea, piss poor implementation. They could be open to a discrimination suit (they WOULD be in Canada, anyhow) If they want to have a PhysEd requirement, they would need to make it across the board.

 

I guess that's my biggest problem. How is it fair to single out one group of people?

Now that's a bit more reasonable. The only issue I have is, what if you can't swim? Is there an alternative test you can take?

 

And here I thought I had it tough doing pull-ups, sit-ups and running three-miles twice a year.

 

It's not the idea itself - coercing obese people to do something about their present state in the interest of the society at large (?) - that I'm against, but I fail to see what being obese has to do with one's studies, much less at university level.

What next? You need to quit smoking to be able to get a driver's lisence? :-o

 

Shouldn't there be courses likes "Food - just eat it" or "Stop being a pencil neck" for students who have under 18 BMI ?

I agree with Blades that the course in question should be optional or mandatory for everyone. IMO the Body Mass Index isn't the best possible indicator of persons physical health, although most people with BMI 30 and above are obese.

 

I find this highly offensive. I am obese, I am well aware of the fact, I am well aware of why I am obese and what I would need to do to not be obese. I have personally decided that at the moment the cure is worse than the "disease". This might change but that is my decision.

Indeed what is next? A mandatory course in the dangers of smoking for smokers? The dangers of sports for the very active? Until it is illegal to be overweight a thing like this can not stand. What are they thinking? Do they want to scare off overweight students? Educating young children in basic health should indeed be done but at university level? If they are not aware of such things then I doubt they are capable of finishing any kind of advanced education. If they want to help people with health problems then offer them help, do not single them out and force them to attend special classes it reeks of something truly vile. I would have raised hell if I had gone on that school.

As for a swimming test, it is a swimming test I am horrendously out of shape and as I said obese and I have absolutely no problem with swimming 200 metres. Are you sure you got the length right Aldeth? Swimming is a quite vital skill and as far as I know mandatory to learn in the second or third grade around here. Seems silly to have it as a requirement at a university but it has nothing to do with a person's physical fitness if it is such a short length. Heck, I swam a kilometre when I was nine.

 

You would not believe the number of butts thrown out the window of cars. They cause fires (a major one in California a while back -- even killed some people) and really litter the roadways. I'd be for that one.

 

Otherwise known as "Mooning".

 

It's the right length, it's a standard swim test. IIRC it's some kind of official definition of the swimming skill: Person has to be able to swim unassisted for 200m. I guess style or speed doesn't matter. Did it myself in the army, when I was in really bad shape.

 

I agree, I was looking up the MIT standard and it was 200m untimed. I guess there is nothing stopping someone from backfloating the entire thing if they want (and are a good floater)

 

Kullervo is right. 200 meters is the usual number thrown around by most swim safety groups (I've worked as a swim coach for four or so years now, so hear these numbers often). The general argument is that when you can comfortably swim 200 meters you are a competent enough swimmer to safely enjoy water activities. It doesn't matter how well you can (you'd be amazed the number of people who can't even float that long - I know I couldn't, at least not stationary), so long as you can do it it'll help you survive. To give an idea of how many can swim such a distance, our local swim thing claim that less than 25% of kids under 12, in New Zealand (an island! we all live near the coast), can swim 200 meters.

As for the matter at hand, it's hardly discrimination - it's merely another requirement to pass the course. If I couldn't pass some calculus paper that my course required, I could hardly argue that the course is discriminating against non-academically inclined people. The university is well within their rights to add health fitness requirements. It's really something that should be done earlier though - the kids are the ones who we need to focus on. Get them to enjoy been fit and living healthy and the problem is solved. When they're at college, most people are already too set in their ways to change their views on things like things like this. Sure, they may do it, but it won't last once they've got their degree.

 

I think we had a time limit of five minutes in the military for good swimming ability and no time limit for proving that you can swim at all. The five minutes was not really all that hard to pass, many who had trouble in passing the cooper test with over the 2,3km limit managed to complete the swim test. On the other hand I suppose swimming requires more technique and if you can't swim then no amount of physical endurance can get you through. Those who could not swim had to take extra swimming lessons during the evenings.

Personally I think this is great initiative and hope more colleges in the US (and in other countries for that matter) follow suit.

 

This sounds really outlandish... granted, to someone living in the country of a thousand lakes.

I mean, back when I could swim I could swim a mile easily, and even now I could float that.

Also, I'd be fuming with rage if someone forced me to attend a class like that - and I'm obese. The problem is that no amount of healthy living can make me even somewhat fit.

Like the confused jerk, I know exactly what I'd have to do to lose weight - and the thing is, I'm much healthier and much less a danger to those around me when I'm not trying to lose weight.

Then again, I've got a serious problem causing any exertion on my part to result in tears.

 

I do think that number is just an advertising sort of claim thing - scare parents into sending their children into classes. But do keep in mind the massive difference between an adult (or even a teen) and an under 12 - physically the differences are massive.

This seems a real similar line from both Taza and joacqin. Would either of you two be able to explain where you are coming from? I am curious here.

 

I think it's unfair to single out people like that. If nothing else than there are more often than not more factors than just "you're fat - and don't try to sugarcoat it because you'll eat that too"

My doctors used to make me feel terrible about my weight when I was younger, but it turned out that I just retained my 'puppy fat' for longer than expected, I dropped from thirteen stone to seven in under six months.

One of my friends has a condition (I forget the name, some double-barrelled doctors name) Where they constantly feel hungry, their body cannot tell it has eaten and not eating becomes increasingly physically painful as the body believes it is starving.

There are also thyroid conditions which are hard or expensive to treat that affect weight gain and loss that could render the course obsolete in many instances of its occurance.

If the admission is purely based on BMI there is also another level of problem: Many experts are contending that BMI should NOT hold so much sway over the view of what is over or underweight. A body bulider, a fitness freak, a skinny ex-footballer - all can pass as obese or overweight because of muscle mass weighing more than fat itself. Unless they are going to assess people student by student, one at a time, thoroughly going through medical history and appropriateness, many people could be 'failed' due to an ill-interpreted statistic.

Overall I can see the benefit of such a course but the execution is pretty lacking. A perhaps neccessary 'bold move' that will at least get people discussing the notion, but needs a lot of carving and polishing.