Garda Recruitment - Stage 3

Carroller

Archer3083 wrote: »

It doesn't matter whether you think the BMI calculator is right or wrong. Maybe ring up PAS and find out which chart/calculator they're using during the medicals, and use the next couple of weeks to get you BMI right. At least get it right for the day of the medical. No point failing over something as silly as BMI.

Sounds like a good idea alright. just need to make the interview first But having an slim to average build and being told my BMI is obese wouldnt make me a happy man.

thekopend

Don't mind what pas say it will be up to the doctor in the garda medical, there will be athletic people above 30 that will pass. It never stayed in any material provided that it is an immediate failure.

redout

This is a proper BMI calculator:

http://www.nhs.uk/Tools/Pages/Healthyweightcalculator.aspx

No physician worth their salt will fail someone for breaking 30 if it is apparent they are carrying muscle and not fat i.e. rugby player, bodybuilder etc. All physicians are aware that BMI is a flawed system of measurement. It is a system that was devised about 200 years ago i.e. when they were all fcuking clueless to be honest. Discretion will be applied.

Scouser

really really want to know ..........NOW!

near 3 weeks since I sat the test.........

its killing me

WilcoOut

Scouser wrote: »

really really want to know ..........NOW!

near 3 weeks since I sat the test.........

its killing me

Imagine how long it will take to hear back from your interview!?

ShodenMcClane

WilcoOut wrote: »

Imagine how long it will take to hear back from your interview!?

Yeah, but I wouldn't mind this stage or the interview stage taking too long to come back because they had to be marked by hand. It's the first two stages bothered me. Surely given that they were computerised they instantly had the results?

WilcoOut

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

Yeah, but I wouldn't mind this stage or the interview stage taking too long to come back because they had to be marked by hand. It's the first two stages bothered me. Surely given that they were computerised they instantly had the results?

Good point

mid april they said - so next week

Chem Lord

My guess is early next week, it will be a month next Tuesday since I did my tests :P This whole process is such a marathon and it's so important to stay focused! Hang in there everyone

Scouser

Chem Lord wrote: »

My guess is early next week, it will be a month next Tuesday since I did my tests :P This whole process is such a marathon and it's so important to stay focused! Hang in there everyone

by the way its going it will be well into the summer again students enter the college

theres a very short time frame between now and the intended intake date of July - unless they mean July 31st

Chem Lord

Scouser wrote: »

by the way its going it will be well into the summer again students enter the college

theres a very short time frame between now and the intended intake date of July - unless they mean July 31st

Yeah I think the pace will pick up a lot after this stage, some people will be doing interviews by the end of April, Meds and pcts in May

galalala123

Chem Lord wrote: »

Yeah I think the pace will pick up a lot after this stage, some people will be doing interviews by the end of April, Meds and pcts in May

Quite the opposite i reckon. Background checks can take months. Im holding out hope for today/tomorrow

BRB

galalala123 wrote: »

Quite the opposite i reckon. Background checks can take months. Im holding out hope for today/tomorrow

I'm hoping it is tomorrow/Monday. I wonder how long the interview stage will take to find out whether you're through or not. That's if we pass this stage....

Good luck everyone. Should be sometime soon!!

ShiverinEskimo

At our briefing on Stage 3 they were careful to clarify that a BMI over 30 is an automatic fail - no discretion, no second chance. The female Garda was careful to ensure everyone realised that.

I'm right on the line depending on which calculater you use (29 to 30) yet I'm relatively fit. I jog frequently - 10k the other night in 58 mins - and play 5-a-side weekly so while of course I could do with dropping a few kilos (about 20 ) I'm probably in a better state than most skinny people.

They also confirmed their first intake would be 105 people starting the last week of July which I undersood meant the 28th. I was careful to listen out for that because I'll be back from my honeymoon the week before. I'm hoping the wedding/honeymoon doesn't get in the way (if I make it that far) but it could well mess me up.
As it stands despite being fit enough I'm borderline for the BMI and therefore if I get that far it'll be celery and water for 3 weeks to lose a few kgs to get me safe.

WilcoOut

ShiverinEskimo wrote: »

At our briefing on Stage 3 they were careful to clarify that a BMI over 30 is an automatic fail - no discretion, no second chance. The female Garda was careful to ensure everyone realised that.

I'm right on the line depending on which calculater you use (29 to 30) yet I'm relatively fit. I jog frequently - 10k the other night in 58 mins - and play 5-a-side weekly so while of course I could do with dropping a few kilos (about 20 ) I'm probably in a better state than most skinny people.

They also confirmed their first intake would be 105 people starting the last week of July which I undersood meant the 28th. I was careful to listen out for that because I'll be back from my honeymoon the week before. I'm hoping the wedding/honeymoon doesn't get in the way (if I make it that far) but it could well mess me up.
As it stands despite being fit enough I'm borderline for the BMI and therefore if I get that far it'll be celery and water for 3 weeks to lose a few kgs to get me safe.

To be fair the gards dont make the decision, the chief medical officer does and his medical team. Plenty of holes, ommissions and discrepencies in that briefing let me tell you

being over 30bmi is not an automatic fail
Any doctor worth his salt will tell you that and they wouldnt put their name to such stringent nonsense.

ShiverinEskimo

No offence, genuinely, but the Garda Sargeant was adamant that a BMI over 30 is a fail. Now the medical physician might 'doctor' (excuse the pun) your result a bit to get you over the line and a score of under 30 but I think if a score of 30 ends up on your file for your BMI then that's the end of it. They were quite clear on that point.

I presume they compile an overall file and send it back to Garda HR at such time a decision is made, so while a doctor might know you're in decent shape in spite of your BMI the person making the decision to hire you or not doesn't and may be instructed to exclude people based purely on the BMI.

To assume otherwise and not work on getting your BMI below 30 or to suggest to others that it'll be ok if it's over 30 is a huge risk. I'm going to trust a Garda sargeant tasked with briefing us over a bunch of speculation from boards members. Again, no offence.

Archer3083

WilcoOut wrote: »

To be fair the gards dont make the decision, the chief medical officer does and his medical team. Plenty of holes, ommissions and discrepencies in that briefing let me tell you

being over 30bmi is not an automatic fail
Any doctor worth his salt will tell you that and they wouldnt put their name to such stringent nonsense.

If that's what other people were told in their briefings then it must be true. In our briefing nobody asked about the PCT or medical, so I'm depending on what other people were told in their briefings. So, the safe option is to get the BMI in order, and not question whether it's right or not, just jump through the hoop for the sake of passing the medical. I can't imagine the medical is for another 4-6 weeks anyway, so that's plenty of time to get a bit fitter and lose some weight, and that might make all the difference to some people. So, my advice would be to get get cracking this week! Use the time you have left wisely.

ShodenMcClane

WilcoOut wrote: »

To be fair the gards dont make the decision, the chief medical officer does and his medical team. Plenty of holes, ommissions and discrepencies in that briefing let me tell you

being over 30bmi is not an automatic fail
Any doctor worth his salt will tell you that and they wouldnt put their name to such stringent nonsense.

Believe us or speculate all you want but they left nothing to the imagination when they explicitly said it was a fail. This place makes me laugh, even with several people bearing witness to them saying outright that it had to be under 30 people here are still willing to speculate.

Ring them and clarify it with them if you think all of us who heard them say it outright are wrong, but I can tell you one thing. My bmi will be under 30 going in there should I make it that far.

ann.lewis

Good posts guys.. plenty of info. I'd defo be in favour of just get the weight down. When I did mine last time I had lost over a stone and was still worrying about it. This time round (if im lucky enough of course) im still worrying about it and im even lighter now than what I was then.
Yes it is a bit of a stress but as someone said there...use your time wisely now while you have the chance. Eat well and move more. Calorie deficit is all it takes. We don't have to starve just reduce and move

WilcoOut

I know what they said, i heard it with my own ears. I just think they are misinformed themselves. They made several errors on the day and even contradicted content on the official garda website

what im saying is dont take 30 as gospel, common sense will prevail

redout

I already mentioned in this thread that the method is flawed. It is nothing more than convenient and simple. BMI has no monetary cost. The most accurate measurement of body fat comes from MRI and CT scans - they cost an arm and a leg. If PAS said over 30 is a fail then play it by ear. The Minister said 250-300 recruits and now we are apparently only getting 210 according to PAS. Like the last poster said, don't take anything as gospel.

Does my BMI look big in this?

At some point – whether it's at the doctors, at the gym, or online – all of us have probably encountered the Body Mass Index.

Body Mass Index (BMI) is derived from a simple mathematical formula, devised by Belgian scientist Adolphe Quetelet in the 1830s, that divides a person's weight in kilograms by their height in metres squared to arrive at an estimate of an individual's body fat.

It's supposed to provide an approximate measure to help judge if someone has a healthy weight – and indicate, for instance, if they are obese. But as Nick Trefethen of Oxford University's Mathematical Institute pointed out in a recent letter to The Economist the basic formula BMI relies on is flawed:

'If all three dimensions of a human being scaled equally as they grew, then a formula of the form weight/height3 would be appropriate. They don't! However, weight/height2 is not realistic either,' Nick tells me.

'A better approximation to a complex reality, which is the reform I wish could be adopted, would be weight/height2.5. Certainly if you plot typical weights of people against their heights, the result comes out closer to height2.5 than height2.'

Sticking with the current formula, he says, leads to confusion and misinformation: 'Because of that height2 term, the BMI divides the weight by too large a number for short people and too small a number for tall people. So short people are misled into thinking they are thinner than they are, and tall people are misled into thinking they are fatter than they are.'

Quetelet's formula was invented at time when there were no calculators or computers so it's perhaps little wonder he opted for something so simple. What's stranger, perhaps, is why institutions such as the NHS, the Department of Health, and the National Obesity Observatory continue to use the same flawed formula today.

The reason for its survival may be that all the various agencies have agreed on it and, Nick says, 'nobody wants to rock the boat.'

It highlights, perhaps, how uncritical many of us are of the mathematics behind widely-used measures. There are probably many more flawed formulas out there but as Nick comments 'it would be hard to compete with this one in impact in a world approaching a billion obese people!'

So what's the alternative and what difference would changing the formula make to the medical measure of BMI?

Nick proposes a new formula [more detail here] where BMI = 1.3*weight(kg)/height(m)2.5 = 5734*weight(lb)/height(in)2.5

'Suppose we changed that exponent from 2.0 to 2.5 and adjusted the constant so that an average-height person did not change in BMI. Suddenly millions of people of height around 5' would gain a point in their readings, and millions of people of height around 6' would lose a point,' Nick explains.

'In our overweight world, such changes would distress some short people and please some tall people, but the number they'd be using would be closer to the truth and good information must surely be good for health in the long run.'

Intriguingly, it's likely that Quetelet would have approved of using the 2.5 exponent. Alain Goriely, also of Oxford University's Mathematical Institute, says that Quetelet himself was well aware of the wrong choice of scaling.

In 1842 Quetelet wrote in 'A Treatise on Man and the Development of his Faculties':

'If man increased equally in all dimensions, his weight at different ages would be as the cube of his height. Now, this is not what we really observe. The increase of weight is slower, except during the first year after birth; then the proportion we have just pointed out is pretty regularly observed.

'But after this period, and until near the age of puberty, weight increases nearly as the square of the height. The development of weight again becomes very rapid at puberty, and almost stops after the twenty-fifth year. In general, we do not err much when we assume that during development the squares of the weight at different ages are as the fifth powers of the height; which naturally leads to this conclusion, in supporting the specific gravity constant, that the transverse growth of man is less than the vertical.'

Alain comments: 'So according to Quetelet the scaling is 3 for babies (babies are spheres), 2 for kids (kids grow more like celery sticks, as we know), then 5/2=2.5 for grownups (beefing up so to speak). It seems Quetelet never cared about obesity (not a big issue in the 1840's).'

Nick Trefethen is Professor of Numerical Analysis at the University of Oxford.

Alain Goriely is Professor of Mathematical Modelling at the University of Oxford.

Link: http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/science_blog/130116.html

ShodenMcClane

redout wrote: »

I already mentioned in this thread that the method is flawed. It is nothing more than convenient and simple. BMI has no monetary cost. The most accurate measurement of body fat comes from MRI and CT scans - they cost an arm and a leg. If PAS said over 30 is a fail then play it by ear. The Minister said 250-300 recruits and now we are apparently only getting 210 according to PAS. Like the last poster said, don't take anything as gospel.

No One is disagreeing that BMI is a bad thing to use for this but it is what they are using. If you think that everything that happens in the public sector is logical and will make sense you're going to have a bad time.

Tommy_utd16

Hey guys, congrats on completing stage 3 best of luck with results. Just wondering if there was any mention at the stage 3 briefing of another batch being called after the first 600 to sit stage 3. Thanks

redout

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

No One is disagreeing that BMI is a bad thing to use for this but it is what they are using. If you think that everything that happens in the public sector is logical and will make sense you're going to have a bad time.

I don't think most things related to government make much sense to be honest.

Archer3083

Tommy_utd16 wrote: »

Hey guys, congrats on completing stage 3 best of luck with results. Just wondering if there was any mention at the stage 3 briefing of another batch being called after the first 600 to sit stage 3. Thanks

Nope, nothing was said about another batch. From what I could gather, they wanted to get at least the 2 batches of 105 for July and October from the 600 that was called forward. I think they maybe even want to get more than that from the first 600 but that's my opinion. So, it's hard to know what will happen next year. I would expect more to be called next year and the year after.

WitchyWan

No offence, genuinely, but the Garda Sargeant was adamant that a BMI over 30 is a fail. Now the medical physician might 'doctor' (excuse the pun) your result a bit to get you over the line and a score of under 30 but I think if a score of 30 ends up on your file for your BMI then that's the end of it. They were quite clear on that point.

Hi all, I've been following this thread for quite a while as my boyfriend got through to Stage 3, so I never had anything to contribute before (but I've learned a lot, so thanks!)

Obviously I don't know what PAS have or haven't said about what they are taking as a cut-off for BMI, but I don't know about this 'doctoring' of results you're talking about... as a doctor myself, we all know BMI isn't a perfect marker of overweight or obesity, but it's the international standard, and there's no escaping it. If you have a BMI of 30 by the internationally accepted formula of kg/m^2, I'm pretty sure that's what'll be written in the chart. It's a simple, reproducible formula based on 2 readily available measurements, and there really isn't much ambiguity about that.

(Except perhaps whether you dare to go fully bare while standing on the scale, which might lose you an extra few grams!)

ann.lewis

Will it be today ?
Oh will it, will it ? Here's hoping

Sit tight Folks, stop pulling hair and biting nails -cause there's none left to pull or bite

WilcoOut

ann.lewis wrote: »

Will it be today ?
Oh will it, will it ? Here's hoping

Sit tight Folks, stop pulling hair and biting nails -cause there's none left to pull or bite

A nice little friday pick me up would be nice!

Carroller

WilcoOut wrote: »

A nice little friday pick me up would be nice!

Unless you dont get through

WilcoOut

Carroller wrote: »

Unless you dont get through

Nice one - rain on my parade!!

Carroller

WilcoOut wrote: »

Nice one - rain on my parade!!

Was talking about myself :O

ann.lewis

At least the torment of waiting would be over though.

Ha.. I huh'ed at that. Thought the same.. sound yea, rain in his parade haha.

ShodenMcClane

It's always been a Monday so far though hasn't it?

octigen

ShodenMcClane wrote: »

It's always been a Monday so far though hasn't it?

Wednesday 12th of Feb and Monday 10th of March previous results have been out.

But in reality this means nothing. They'l be out once they are ready to be sent out.

I'm sure someone in PAS is reading this having a laugh at us speculating!

octigen

Do people feel they did better, worse or about the same on Inductive & Verbal compared to online? Personally I think I was about the same.

ann.lewis

octigen wrote: »

Wednesday 12th of Feb and Monday 10th of March previous results have been out.

But in reality this means nothing. They'l be out once they are ready to be sent out.

I'm sure someone in PAS is reading this having a laugh at us speculating!

Course they are haha.
Sure that's all we can do isn't it and keep each other company on this wait !

ShodenMcClane

octigen wrote: »

Wednesday 12th of Feb and Monday 10th of March previous results have been out.

But in reality this means nothing. They'l be out once they are ready to be sent out.

I'm sure someone in PAS is reading this having a laugh at us speculating!

Ah cool, my apologies!

Do people feel they did better, worse or about the same on Inductive & Verbal compared to online? Personally I think I was about the same.

I wasn't well on the day. Definitely did worse on the verbal. Weirdly think I did better on the inductive though. That said though I'm much more worried about the report writing!

Zadie10

ann.lewis wrote: »

Will it be today ?
Oh will it, will it ? Here's hoping

Sit tight Folks, stop pulling hair and biting nails -cause there's none left to pull or bite

It's not looking like its today does it? At least I'll forget about it for the weekend since theres no chance they'll be out tomorrow. (Although the public jobs site won't load for me right now so I'm reading all sorts of things into that ) prob my crappy WiFi though!

Malarkey101

Zadie10 wrote: »

It's not looking like its today does it? At least I'll forget about it for the weekend since theres no chance they'll be out tomorrow. (Although the public jobs site won't load for me right now so I'm reading all sorts of things into that ) prob my crappy WiFi though!

Ha not working for me either was thinking loads of people were logging in to check results wishful thinking on my part!

ann.lewis

Zadie10 wrote: »

It's not looking like its today does it? At least I'll forget about it for the weekend since theres no chance they'll be out tomorrow. (Although the public jobs site won't load for me right now so I'm reading all sorts of things into that ) prob my crappy WiFi though!

I'm finished work for the weekend so that's me. Not going to be looking at the phone every 2 seconds or checking emails or what not. It's going to be next week like they said I guess

Zadie10

ann.lewis wrote: »

I'm finished work for the weekend so that's me. Not going to be looking at the phone every 2 seconds or checking emails or what not. It's going to be next week like they said I guess

It's a four day week too so it'll have to be out by Thursday All the nerves & second guessing can wait til Monday now!

ann.lewis

Zadie10 wrote: »

It's a four day week too so it'll have to be out by Thursday All the nerves & second guessing can wait til Monday now!

Exactly Zadie. You said it

Mistabutts

The longer it goes on the calmer I get. Nerves piqued on the bus back to cork from the exam haha

WilcoOut

Zadie10 wrote: »

It's a four day week too so it'll have to be out by Thursday All the nerves & second guessing can wait til Monday now!

Has to be early next week, time is ticking for them to get everything done for july.

Id expect interviews to be underway by may 1st

Rothmans

Realistically I reckon it has to be Monday, or Tuesday at the latest!

octigen wrote:

Do people feel they did better, worse or about the same on Inductive & Verbal compared to online?

I think the general consensus was that they were indeed harder than stage 2.

WilcoOut

Rothmans wrote: »

I think the general consensus was that they were indeed harder than stage 2.

It was the setting and environment that i think made it harder, not the content of the test

Rothmans

WilcoOut wrote: »

It was the setting and environment that i think made it harder, not the content of the test

Hopefully, PAS take this into account when marking the tests!

newmug

Just a quick question about the BMI - If you fail and get kicked out, is it that you're still in "band 2" as it were, or are you gone altogether? And could you apply again next year?

KERSPLAT!

newmug wrote: »

Just a quick question about the BMI - If you fail and get kicked out, is it that you're still in "band 2" as it were, or are you gone altogether? And could you apply again next year?

I'm pretty sure that if you fail any aspect, you're out altogether

Swoop23

newmug wrote: »

Just a quick question about the BMI - If you fail and get kicked out, is it that you're still in "band 2" as it were, or are you gone altogether? And could you apply again next year?

If you fail you are out and they have enough people in band 1, 2, and 3 to cover any recruitment for the next 5 to 10 years.

ShodenMcClane

Swoop23 wrote: »

If you fail you are out and they have enough people in band 1, 2, and 3 to cover any recruitment for the next 5 to 10 years.

Ha, what a load of nonsense.

2-3 years max.