Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > Medical & Health
Reload this Page >

Unrealistic CAA health guidelines

Medical & Health News and debate about medical and health issues as they relate to aircrews and aviation. Any information gleaned from this forum MUST be backed up by consulting your state-registered health professional or AME. Due to advertising legislation in various jurisdictions, endorsements of individual practitioners is not permitted.

Unrealistic CAA health guidelines

Old 23rd Nov 2017, 12:24
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angry Unrealistic CAA health guidelines

Hi all,

I'm a fairly big guy and whilst this past year I've carried some extra weight, I've worked hard to get it down. My BMI is currently 36 which requires me to undergo 6 month cardiovascular assessments (it was 42) until it gets to below 35.

My question is in my current state, I have a body fat % of 16% which is on the lower end of the average scale, I regularly run 5k fun runs, I have taken part in 10k toughmudders, rough runners you name it. I go to the gym 5 times a week and at my first cardiovascular assessment and in every other assessment conducted by trained medical professionals, they are all in disbelief that I have to go through these hoops.

Nevertheless, I am told that this is the CAA guidelines and that I have to lump it. Is there an appeal process I can take to go around these guidelines? Or is this something I'm going to have to deal with for the foreseeable future?
JEM94 is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2017, 06:57
  #2 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As a novel way of dealing with the problem you could submit a mandatory occurrence report against the regulator for having a regulation that is based on an arbitrary measurement (BMI) which doesn't adequately consider individual circumstances e.g. very tall people.....it must surely compromise safety if the 'standard' isn't fit for purpose......
bluesideoops is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2017, 08:11
  #3 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Western Europe
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Bear in mind that the entire England rugby team could likely find themselves in the same fix. I have a colleague similar to you who was rejected by an ME airline because of high bmi. It's just not meaningful for fit, larger build people.
Consol is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2017, 09:19
  #4 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Kiwiland
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Please remember a landmark judgement made by an employment tribunal in favour of the CAA a decade or so ago: although the CAA has a duty to follow and consider current medical practice and knowledge in setting standards and restrictions, it is a valid defense for them to claim they havent the time or manpower to revisit, review or amend existing regulations even if the medical evidence demonstrates their position is wrong

Since then their financial predicament has become ever more precarious so I am sorry but suspect you havent a hope of getting this changed
Radgirl is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2017, 11:32
  #5 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Age: 61
Posts: 349
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Radgirl View Post
... it is a valid defense for them to claim they havent the time or manpower to revisit, review or amend existing regulations even if the medical evidence demonstrates their position is wrong ...
This is both funny and irritating because if, as an ooperator, you were to tell the CAA that you couldn't afford or didn't have sufficient staff to do something they required, they would waste no time in telling you that you had to ensure you had sufficient resources in place or they'd look at pulling your AOC.

They really aren't ft for puropse.
Sepp is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2017, 15:05
  #6 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 3,198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have you tried getting a report from the doctor doing your cardiovascular report to state to your AME and the CAA that given your height/weight/body composition you are clearly at a low risk level for cardiovascular disease and as such in their expert medical opinion these hoops you have to jump through are an unnecessary and expensive waste of time?

I had a temporary medical problem that took 2 weeks to get back to full fitness but 6 months to resolve with the CAA, and the doctor at the CAA dealing with all the correspondence was a neurologist by trade (brain/spinal/nerve specialist). The medical problem I had was absolutely nothing to do with any of that. In fact, potentially the last time he may have dealt with the area of the body in question was possibly in medical school.

So I did a bit of my own research and spelled out in black and white, quoting a couple of medical references, why the problem I had was not a problem, and the fact that his continuous insistence on regular blood tests was unnecessary because by the very nature of the human body and the endocrine system, those results would be expected to significantly vary over a short space of time (i.e. you would expect 8 significantly different results if you get a blood test every week for 2 months, even in a completely healthy person) and that was not an indication of any abnormality whatsoever.

The next time I received a letter from him three weeks later it had my new medical certificate in with a possibly sarcastic "thank you for your correspondence".

Challenging the AME/CAA with evidence will do you no harm as long as you don't piss them off
LlamaFarmer is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2017, 22:26
  #7 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: gone surfin'
Age: 57
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looking at things pragmatically, how much weight do you have to lose to tick their boxes ?

You seem to be on the cusp. Get your height measured in the morning to.
gingernut is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2017, 09:41
  #8 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in the hills
Age: 67
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I had a similar issue, which was costing me about 700 a medical, (every 6 months!) I contacted the CAA medical division to ask about this and was told that the information given is only a guideline and not definitive. I was also told it was my prerogative to choose another AME, who possibly had a different view on this issue.
I did this and now have no issue with getting a class 1, just the usual advice about losing some weight.
wheelbarrow is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.