Extremes of physical size

[Sifu]

ANSI/ICC A117.1 2009 includes persons of extreme physical size. Anybody know who or where the determination is made as to what that means specifically?

 

[mark handler]

Task Group on Obstructed Reach Range and Extreme Physical Size, Report of the September 28, 2001 Meeting of the Task Group on Obstructed Reach Range and Extremes of Physical Size (2001).

ANSI committee’s initial review of this issue included research from Obstructed Reach Range Survey of Adult Dwarfs (August 1996) and Anthropometric National Survey of Adult Dwarfs (July 1995).150 Transcripts of ANSI committee meetings and Task Groups document the difficulty that many little persons had in reaching high. No parallel discussion was found identifying problems that individuals of average height had, for instance, in reaching to 48 inches when compared to 54 inches high. Presumably, it was viewed that those of average stature had no trouble with the downward shift in the new reach limit. This situation illustrates the challenges in standards development to accommodate diverse users; in this case, involving relatively few individuals who face a significant barrier from the provision of a 54-inch high side reach limit.

 

[Sifu]

I read the report and it is clear the intent of the report is for those groups listed in the report. If this report is the only basis for the term "extremes of physical size" used in the code it would seem a little redundant, after all the ANSI code has existing requirements for most of the issues in the report. Even in the report itself, it is stated that there just wasn't enough data submitted to make many recommendations. The report also does not indicate what an "extreme size" is. The blanket statement in ANSI would seem to include any "extreme size" without qualification. I will try for answers from ANSI. Thanks for guiding me to that report.

 

[Sifu]

FYI, I spoke with an ICC committee member for the new ANSI. They confirmed the "extreme size" was inserted for the benefit of short people, with some for tall people. My concern, and theirs as well was that the blanket statement could be used to include just about anything. They did tell me that some provisions for the over-weight have been considered because of some current lawsuits but are not code requirements.

For what its worth!

 

[Codegeek]

Why can't they use the term bariatric to refer to the overweight people?

 

[Doorman]

Bariatrics is a branch of medicine that deals with the causes, prevention, and treatment of obesity. Not really applicable in this sense.

 

[Sifu]

Just to be clear, the rep informed me that the "persons of extreme size" is not intended to apply to the obese. It is largely meant for the short people, mostly dealing with the reach issues. Whether it applied to others was my question to them, to which they said no. I was told that there are some considerations taking place for the obese and some prescriptive measures IF an entity wanted to design for the obese but nothing codified or required. I did get the impression that there may be some in the future. IMO the rather broad term "persons of extreme size" could lead some to read more into the intent that what is actually intended and maybe should not have been used. But, I make a lot less money than them so what do I know?

 

[Codegeek]

Bariatrics is a branch of medicine that deals with the causes, prevention, and treatment of obesity. Not really applicable in this sense.

After Sifu's last comment perhaps not. However, there is movement to include provisions specific for bariatric patients in hospitals that may spill over into the accessibility provisions.

 

[Sifu]

My guess is yes, it will spill over. If being over 6'4" tall is enough to have provisions inserted into the code then I think it is only a matter of time before we see provisions for the obese. The fact that litigation is already occuring is a pretty good indicator.