ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Stephen Cheney, a retired U.S. Marine Corps brigadier general, is president emeritus of the American Security Project. In over 30 years of service as a Marine, he focused extensively on entry-level training and served in leadership roles including Inspector General of the Marine Corps and Commanding General of Recruit Training and the Eastern Recruiting Region at Parris Island, S.C.

As Veterans Day approaches, major efforts are underway in the armed forces to address rising rates of obesity. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s emphasis on improving the troops’ health and fitness may have at first sounded like great news for active duty service members and veterans alike; after all, veterans face even higher rates of obesity than the general population, and policy improvements for active duty personnel today promise better health outcomes for the veterans of tomorrow.

But in a recent address to the United States’ top uniformed leaders, Hegseth offered a simple and underwhelming solution to this decades-old problem: “Either you are disciplined, fit and trained, or you are out.”

Around two-thirds of active duty service members are either overweight or have obesity, presenting a serious readiness challenge to the armed forces. Obesity costs the Pentagon over $1 billion annually, dramatically raises the risk of musculoskeletal injury and other health complications, and can prevent service members from deploying. Improving warfighters’ health and fitness is a both a strategic imperative and a moral responsibility to those who dedicate their lives to defending the United States.

Unfortunately, the solution Hegseth espoused in his extensive address is neither practical nor productive.

As the military struggles to make mission amid a shrinking pool of eligible recruits and a growing array of global flashpoints and crises, the secretary’s threat to remove every “unfit” service member rings hollow. The armed forces are already stretched thin, and further reductions in manpower would cripple the services’ capacity to meet the increasing demands placed upon them.

Hegseth’s approach is extreme, but the sentiment is not new to the military. Body composition standards for all service members have been in place for decades, and although these standards have fluctuated over the years, individuals with elevated body mass have consistently faced consequences ranging from stigma to separation.

Fortunately, the problem the military faces is not one of laziness or a lapse in discipline. Its real challenge lies in mitigating the structural barriers that make it difficult for service members to manage their weight and maintain a healthy lifestyle, such as long, sedentary hours, insufficient sleep, and suboptimal on-base nutrition. To this end, there are numerous policy solutions the Pentagon can pursue to enhance medical readiness without discharging scores of much-needed personnel.

First, the military can save a great deal of time and money down the road by investing in robust obesity prevention measures. Hegseth’s push for increased physical activity is a good place to start, but he has scarcely mentioned another key element of this equation: nutrition.

In recent years, the media has underscored various challenges associated with access to healthy food options on base, including large volumes of fast-food vendors, overprocessed meals, and inconvenient hours of operation at dining facilities. As Maj. Christina Deehl wrote in Army Times, “On one hand, [soldiers] are told to perform as tactical athletes. … On the other hand, they are surrounded by greasy, unhealthy and ultra-processed food options.”

If the defense secretary wants service members to adhere to the highest physical standards, the food provided to personnel must reflect this objective.

The Pentagon should also empower personnel to make healthy lifestyle choices by continuing to invest in educational initiatives, which help to dispel disinformation and reduce reliance on “bro science,” and track the success of these initiatives using specific, measurable performance metrics.

However, while a nutritious diet and consistent exercise are central components of a healthy lifestyle, they are only part of the solution for many individuals already struggling with obesity.

The “calories in, calories out” approach to obesity treatment is based on dated science and a fundamental misunderstanding of the complex physiological processes behind weight loss. Biological adaptations that fight starvation by retaining body fat make it extremely difficult for individuals with obesity to lose weight, and those who do almost always regain it.

Service members are not immune to these trends; a 2023 review of military body composition interventions relying on intense diet and exercise regimens found that while these programs effectively cut weight in the short term, there’s little evidence to suggest that service members are able to maintain this reduced weight.

For most people with obesity, diet and exercise simply aren’t enough. It’s crucial that these individuals are able to seek help from a qualified medical professional without shame or stigma and access targeted, evidence-based treatments, including pharmacotherapy if necessary. Otherwise, the military will likely continue to see rising rates of disordered eating and increased use of dangerous rapid weight loss tools, from excessive exercise to illegal knockoffs of popular GLP-1 drugs.

Maintaining health and fitness are not new challenges for the military, and neither is Hegseth’s approach to achieving them. If the Department of Defense can adopt proven prevention and treatment measures rather than relying on the same punitive policies that have failed for decades, it will see novel results. This Veterans Day, the Pentagon should remind itself that it can honor future veterans by giving its active and reserve service members the science-based tools they need to stay fit and healthy.