I disagree with this. The current standards of attraction are not necessarily based on signs of health or fertility. I'd say current standards of attraction are probably signs of the opposite.
What are you talking about? This is so wrong I'm not sure even where to start.
Almost all the things we find attractive and women and what they find attractive in us have origins in evolutionary adaptations to sexual selection and survival.
Unless your are gonna argue that;
Thin coarse hair > Thick smooth hair
Narrow red shot eyes > Wide clear eyes
Small saggy breasts > Large perky breasts
Patchy skin > Smooth skin
Waist much larger than hips > Hips slightly smaller than waist
Asymmetrical features > Symmetrical features
Short legs > Long legs
I don't know about you, but all the things on the right of that column that signify health, fertility, youth, etc are all much more attractive to me then the things on the left that don't.
Most importantly her worth in the experiment is zero.
In the experiment I vehemently agree.
In real life post apocalyptic world I would try to breed with her over any of the other women on that show.