Do gym's (fitness centre's) have responsibilities?

[Shrek]

Ok here's why I pose this question.

The other day in the gym I saw an extremely thin girl pounding away on the cardio equipment. First the treadmill then on the X-Trainer. Pounding away for over an hour while I was there. She would have weighed 40kg tops maybe less, not 100% sure but what i can say she was thin and probably anorexic.

Should the staff of the gym intervene or is it not there problem that a girl who is clearly doing more harm that good be allowed to continue? Made me cringe.

 

[kaz]

If they don't know her medical background they should mind their own business.
They provide a service, they aren't health care professionals
Same as a cafe owner shouldn't stop a fat woman buying a cake and a Coke.

 

[Darkoz]

^ this

 

[Shrek]

Don't they sign a form saying they have no medical condition before joining?

 

[kaz]

It's been a few years since I joined a gym, but I'm pretty sure you sign a waiver to say you have seeked advice from a medical practitioner before starting a new exercise regime.
Some might ask for diabetes and asthma history etc to be aware of insulins and puffers if a member were to pass out.

 

[bigD]

I think the gym should intervene if a person is damaging equipment/facilities or if the person is trying to perform an exercise in a dangerous fashion (say heavy benching, without a rack or pins) but leave those alone whom apart from appearance are otherwise ok.

 

[Goosey]

Difficult, they have a duty of care.

 

[Big Mick]

If they don't know her medical background they should mind their own business.
They provide a service, they aren't health care professionals
Same as a cafe owner shouldn't stop a fat woman buying a cake and a Coke.

I agree with this.

 

[bams_101]

If I were the owner of the gym I wouldn't let her train without at least a letter from her doctor, not in good conscience.

"If there's something wrong, those who have the ability to take action have the responsibility to take action."

 

[wingman]

I think the gym should intervene if a person is damaging equipment/facilities or if the person is trying to perform an exercise in a dangerous fashion (say heavy benching, without a rack or pins) but leave those alone whom apart from appearance are otherwise ok.

but then it becomes a beaucratic nightmare. Who decides whats dangerous (some PTs think squats are) and who defines whats heavy?

 

[judgey]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=510946538942590&set=vb.394897053880873&type=2&theater

In this instance yes.

In your instance, no.

 

[TTT]

have you seen marathon runners?

 

[Big Mick]

......if the person is trying to perform an exercise in a dangerous fashion (say heavy benching, without a rack or pins) but leave those alone whom apart from appearance are otherwise ok.

Who makes that decision??

I know people who think that weight training damages your body, I know PT's that believe squats and dead lifts are bad for you and extremely dangerous, I remember training in a gym where the owner would not let people bench press with feet on the floor as it damages your lower back, he used to make people bench press with feet up on the bench

Others think that running is bad for you as it damages your joints.

I bench press without a rack or pins, have done so for over 20 years, I know my limit, and can press to within one rep of failure without any issues benching well over 100kg for reps. PS I know how to get out from under the bar if I should fail, which to date has never happened, if I really want to push for a new PB I get my missus to spot, as she only has to take a few kg's off the bar, for me to be able to push it up.

 

[WarbyD]

From an OHS point of view... the gym does have a duty of care to ensure that people entering and using their facility are not exposed to undue risk as a result of the facility's equipment, processes, etc.

This duty of care though is limited to that which is "reasonable" for them to (A) exert some control over; and, (B) have reasonable knowledge of. ( This doesnt mean that "ignorance is bliss" - quite the contrary, the test is not "what you know" but "what you SHOULD know" )

In this case, it is not reasonable to expect the staff or owners of a gym to adequately diagnose and manage health conditions such as anorexia. They are not health care professionals. If they WERE to intervene based on their own, unqualified, assessment then it is likely they would open up a far greater can of worms than if they just left it alone.

 

[wingman]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=510946538942590&set=vb.394897053880873&type=2&theater

In this instance yes.

In your instance, no.

HULK SMASH

From an OHS point of view... the gym does have a duty of care to ensure that people entering and using their facility are not exposed to undue risk as a result of the facility's equipment, processes, etc.

This duty of care though is limited to that which is "reasonable" for them to (A) exert some control over; and, (B) have reasonable knowledge of. ( This doesnt mean that "ignorance is bliss" - quite the contrary, the test is not "what you know" but "what you SHOULD know" )

In this case, it is not reasonable to expect the staff or owners of a gym to adequately diagnose and manage health conditions such as anorexia. They are not health care professionals. If they WERE to intervene based on their own, unqualified, assessment then it is likely they would open up a far greater can of worms than if they just left it alone.

oh&s is the worst thing that happened to the modern world

 

[Grippy]

There would def be something in the law books regarding duty of care and negligence etc especially if asshole lawyer wanted to have a bun fight with a gym. I don't think it matters how many waivers they make you sign when you join up, you can't 'out contract' the law. We used to get people to sign a waiver regarding their warranty on their car if we struck what they thought was a super deal, thing is, the waiver wasn't worth a squirt of goats piss but it would make them thin twice about any claim they wanted to put forward.
I reckon if people were being clowns and fucked themselves up they could still get some compensation, iirc a bloke a while ago (10+years) was pissed, got his hero on and jumped iron man style into the surf at Bondi or somewhere and busted his neck on the bottom and still sued the council for shitloads, even though he was a pissed idiot.

 

[Admin]

I think the gym should intervene if a person is damaging equipment/facilities or if the person is trying to perform an exercise in a dangerous fashion (say heavy benching, without a rack or pins) but leave those alone whom apart from appearance are otherwise ok.

i think it should be the same as pubs/clubs with the responsible servicing of grog , while the bar tender isn't a medical professional but they should be able to tell the difference between working out and going to extremes

 

[kaz]

have you seen marathon runners?

This. And they eat like a horse!

 

[bigD]

Who decides whats dangerous

Who makes that decision??

I think the example of benching without spots is a perfect example. Squats/deads are exercises some think are up for dispute but benching with a spot is simply dangerous. Just because you do it at home doesn't make it suitable.

Having said that, the gym should be providing the equipment that spots for you, rack or bench for example so my example should never occur

Edit:
There is also a difference between questioning the dangers of squats/deads as an exercise vs questioning the dangers of poor form when doing squat/deads

 

[bigD]

i think it should be the same as pubs/clubs with the responsible servicing of grog , while the bar tender isn't a medical professional but they should be able to tell the difference between working out and going to extremes

I tend to agree when considering those gyms where PTs feedback is included in the price. PT should be allowed to comment on what you're doing. Whether you like the advice or not, it's what they are there for