Decoding CAF’s Fitness Crisis: Insights from Reddit’s Frontlines

What are they saying inside the CAF

In a way, the Reddit social media platform’s bad reputation is undeserved. Sure, some parts of the ecosystem seem to attract populations of eccentric and/or nasty people (I’ll be devoting a full post to such populations later this week). And sure, some of the stuff you’ll read there doesn’t exist within the same universe as the word “reliable”. But Reddit is a big place, and a lot of what goes on there is valuable.

Take the LearnDataAnalytics reddit as an example. I created it myself around five years ago to serve some business plan, and then abandoned it altogether after six months or so. I recently dropped back in to see how things were going and got a serious shock.

First of all, the reddit has somehow grown to around 8,300 members. But what made my jaw drop is that the conversations - and there are often more then 50 new posts each month - is calm and helpful. People ask reasonable questions about getting started with their data analytics studies and other users offer intelligent and helpful answers. There’s no moderation (I’m the only moderator there, and I’m completely absent), but people there behave beautifully.

So there are pockets of civility spread around the platform and, where there’s civility, there might also be interesting opinions.

Another nice thing about Reddit is that they’re fairly accommodating when it comes to accessing threads through their API. That means I can use software automation tools to download and analyze LOTS of user comments from hundreds or thousands of Canadians.

As a proof of concept, take a look at the CanadianForces reddit, an unofficial platform where 82,000 individuals with links to CAF chat with each other. Someone started a thread just a few weeks ago addressing a recent announcement from CAF of a significant pay hike.

As of this writing, there are nearly 1,100 comments in that thread. As much as I respect our men and women in uniform, I’m not going to read through all that. But submitting the full set of comments to a powerful A.I. model for a summary takes a lot less effort.

Suffice to say that, while there is some skepticism about the fine details, as a group, CAF members are surprised and delighted by the news. And there seems to be a general consensus that this move will have a positive impact on personnel retention rates. Nothing shocking there.

So here’s an A.I.-generated summary of the 350+ comments from a more contentious discussion from earlier this year about obesity in the CAF:

---

Discussion Summary: Obesity and Fitness in the Canadian Armed Forces

Reactions to the Article and Statistics

• The article is identified as a David Pugliese piece (reposted by the Sun), with some accusing it of framing the CAF as “hiding” information.

• The headline stat (≈72–78% overweight/obese) sparked debate:

  • Support: Cited CAFHS/StatsCan data (2013/2019) showing similar numbers; many say this matches what they see on bases and in clinics. NATO comparisons are considered embarrassing.

  • Skepticism: Some argue the numbers are inflated by BMI use, over-represented in NCR/clerical roles, or missing age/trade/element adjustments.

---

BMI and Body Composition Debate

BMI Critics:

• Doesn’t distinguish fat from muscle; mislabels muscular members as overweight/obese.

• Thresholds penalize tall/wide frames; many cite examples of high-performing members with “obese” BMIs.

• Reports of measurement errors by PSP staff; calls for calipers, tape tests, or combined BMI+waist metrics.

BMI Defenders:

• Useful for population-level tracking; few are actually misclassified.

• Main concern is “skinny fat”: normal BMI but low muscle, high fat.

• Waist circumference and waist-to-hip ratio are simple, evidence-based, and improve accuracy.

Disagreements:

• Should waist thresholds vary by height?

• Should BMI be replaced with calipers or performance-only metrics?

---

Fitness Standards and the FORCE Test

• Many argue for focusing on performance (FORCE scores) over appearance or BMI.

• Critics say the FORCE test is too easy; want tougher requirements, like running components.

• Reality check: CAF only releases members for failing to meet UoS standards, not size alone; weight matters if it impairs tasks (gear fit, hatch access).

---

Systemic and Cultural Factors

• Common theme: PT time isn’t protected; workload and culture prioritize meetings over exercise.

• Other contributors:

  • Aging force, desk-heavy jobs, stress, burnout, poor sleep.

  • Medications (mental health), alcohol, and easy access to high-calorie food.

  • Mess and food environments vary widely; some say “all-you-can-eat” is overstated, but desserts and calorie-dense options are common.

• Facilities: gyms and PSP programs underfunded; PT perceived as one-size-fits-all, discouraging for some.

---

Personal Responsibility vs Empathy

• Accountability camp: Fitness is part of the job; some advocate shaming.

• Pushback: Shaming seen as harmful; many cite injuries, workloads, medical issues, and housing/cost barriers. Supportive approaches preferred.

---

Transparency, Data, and Media Critique

• Mixed views: some accuse CAF of stonewalling ATIP requests, others note CAFHS already publishes this data.

• Pugliese criticized as “anti-CAF” or a “hit-piece” writer; some claim propaganda links; others defend his transparency work.

---

Suggested Fixes (Recurring Ideas)

• Make PT part of the duty day consistently; advocate for structured unit PT.

• Use better metrics: combine BMI with waist measures, add calipers, publish FORCE data breakdowns by element/trade/age.

• Improve food environments: healthier staples, lower-calorie defaults.

• Invest in gyms, PSP staff, and tailored PT programming.

• Expand mental health, dietitian, and nutritionist access.

• Publish detailed data to target interventions effectively.

---

Tone and Subthreads

• Humor and sarcasm about food, donuts, and photos; occasional fat-shaming and insults. Mods intervened.

• Many first-hand accounts: deployments, mess practices, measurement errors, gym conditions.

• Agreement: “Overweight ≠ automatically unfit,” but widespread concern over readiness.

---

Overall Takeaways

• Broad agreement that the CAF faces a fitness and health challenge, though its exact scope is debated.

• BMI is controversial: weak at individual level, acceptable for population surveillance if paired with other measures.

• Both personal and systemic factors are at play; consensus centers on:

  • Protecting PT time,

  • Improving measurement methods,

  • Creating healthier food and fitness environments,

  • Rebuilding a fitness-first culture.

---

This isn’t my first piece exploring healthcare-related issues. And I’ve also written on veterans affairs:

---