Thread by @GStrategerist

Dear MilTwitter,

I apologize that I am not a kinesiologist but lets not let that stop me!

The #ACFT is the talk of the town!
Even the @16thSMA wants you to run it in order to build the data set for analysis.

Let's call this the LitReview for the EverySoldier (TM)

First, let me thank/hate @rmannina86 for making me do this. Your incessant prodding is a credit to yourself, the 2 Cavalry Regt and the US Army.

The most important read to understand the ACFT is "Baseline Soldier Physical Readiness Requirements Study" published in NOV 2019
iadlest.org/Portals/0/AD10…

TL;DR version:
-There are soldier tasks that are commonly occurring, physically demanding, and critical to all Warrior Tasks and Drills.
-The APFT doesn't provide a valid basis to assess fitness as it relates to👆
-The ACFT was selected from a battery of common fitness tests

Bottom line, the study suggests that performance on the ACFT events means that you will be fit enough to perform the WT&Ds satisfactorily and without injury.

This is not the first time the Army has proposed a change in the APFT. In fact, I earned my spurs in 1-71 CAV where the event began with the "Army Physical Readiness Test" made notable by a minute of the awkward exercise called the "rower" on wet, cold Fort Drum mud.

Some have lauded the incoming ACFT including a recent op-ed in the @WarInstitute.
But there are have been loud detractors, including (and most consequentially) members of Congress.

Not being an expert, let me list some concerns and support them with outside experts.

1- from several members of @NatSecGirlSquad and other DEI-focused organizations, people are concerned that the equipment used is standardized for men. Particularly, the pull up bar and hex bar.

One study shows that men of all sizes have a generally fixed optimal grip span

Women, however, show a range of optimal grip strength based on hand size.

No matter how strong you are, if you cannot translate that strength to the weight, it isn't moving.

doi.org/10.1053/jhsu.2…

This is the same reason that dead lifting with a "fat bar" is more difficult.
Other studies show that women with smaller hands have significantly lower measured grip strength.
content.iospress.com/articles/journ…

The smaller muscled required for grip fatigue or fail earlier or at lower resistance. Studies done on women athletes concluded that "smaller muscle groups may be a limiting component when performing pulling exercises" and validated a grip-aide.
medicinasportiva.ro/SRoMS/RMS/48/e…

Anecdotally, this seems to check out because the leg tuck and the sit-up both purport to measure abdominal strength/endurance. But women generally performed well at the sit-up event (as demonstrated by the scoring tables) but now have a >50% failure rate in the ACFT diagnostics

Studies of hand and body anthropometric parameters in athletes (basketball and handball student athletes) demonstrated that hand size (and height) impacted the "non-specific medicine ball throw"... though admittedly the subjects were in middle and hs.
jstor.org/stable/29542948

Which bring us to Concern 2-
The medicine call toss (referred to as the BOMB or backwards overhead medicine ball throw, +1 for sweet acronym) favors taller Soldiers and men as a group are generally taller

Mechanically speaking, taller Soldiers have more distance (from crouch to full extension) with which to accelerate the medicine ball and the release height is higher.

If all other factors are equal, a higher release point means a farther throw.

There are studies that dispute the BOMB test as a valid measure of power output. (study done on firefighter candidates, with similar performance expectations as Soldiers)
doi.org/10.17338/train…

But there are studies that support the BOMB test as a valid test which show a strong correlation between BOMB testing and a vertical jump test as @rmannina86 has posted.

But the most troubling part of the criticism of this data driven enterprise, is the lack of diverse data, particularly for women. The ACFT is a composite of "generally accepted" test used in physical assessments across other organizations.

The data used to build these tests and a LOT of medical science is dominated by men. Particularly, white men. Everything from the body size (which drive Ht/Wt standards) to other physical indicators are evaluated based on white males. Paging @alyson1drlnd
forbes.com/sites/grrlscie…

For example, Athletic tests like a variation of the medicine ball toss show strong correlation around male subjects, but have "have a limited potential as a predictor of trunk rotation power for female athletes"
link.springer.com/article/10.100…

So picking from a large grouping of athletic tests designed and optimized for male athletes may to biased results even if the ACFT events are the most predictive of the 23+ athletic tests studied.

Why does it matter? And why do I (non-kinesiologist, male, leg-tuck qualified) care?

Well it's simple really, having a diverse military is vital to military effectiveness.

If the ideal warrior were a 6'5" All-Pro linebacker, designing a fitness test that removed all non-linebackers would be a "win"... I would be out of a job, though I suspect @rmannina86 would likely keep his (maybe even get a promotion)

But studies like @jaylyall_red5's Project Mars have demonstrated that overall military effectiveness is a much more complex equation than
effectiveness=f(PT)

After creating and studying 250 wars, Dr Jason Lyall's conclusion starts:

"Successful Armies are inclusive."

A PT test that hurts diversity and inclusion hurts the Army.

But I am convinced that we can, with data, remedy these problems, create a culture of fitness, and limit Soldier injuries while building a more inclusive (and therefore more effective) Army

I will add, that none of the studies above are definitive. They’re all looking at different aspects in varied ways.
Gathering data to evaluate the ACFT and thinking through policy decisions like “do we report scores on NCOERs or just Pass/fail” is still required.
#TaketheTest

Also, to add. This is not an indictment of @Kris_Griest's piece in @WarInstitute.
Her assessment that gender-specific scoring scales would be a tool for lazy misogynists to question the value of women in combat arms, is spot on.

We were company commanders together in @PantherBrigade and the peer evals were easy.

Would go to war with this Ranger?
✅YES

We're all just trying to make our Army better.