You are on page 1of 10

Rapid #: -21259386

CROSS REF ID: OCLC#221583052

LENDER: INTARCHIVE (Internet Archive) :: Main Library

BORROWER: LG0 (Griffith University) :: Griffith University Library


TYPE: Article CC:CCL

JOURNAL TITLE: International journal of obesity

USER JOURNAL TITLE: International journal of obesity.

ARTICLE TITLE: Body mass index and percent body fat: a meta analysis among different ethnic groups

ARTICLE AUTHOR: Deurenberg

VOLUME: 22

ISSUE: 12

MONTH:

YEAR: 1998-12-17

PAGES: 1164-1171

ISSN: 0307-0565

OCLC #: 3007137

Processed by RapidX: 9/12/2023 11:41:23 PM

This material may be protected by copyright law (Title 17 U.S. Code)


Internet Archive Interlibrary Loan Fulfillment
Request on Wednesday, September 13th, 2023
International Journal of Obesity 1989-2003
0307-0565
Body mass index and percent body fat: a meta analysis among different ethnic groups
Deurenberg
volume 22 issue 12 year 1998
pages 1164-1171

Response from Internet Archive from: https://archive.org/details/sim_international-journal-of-obesity_1998-12_22_12


We hope this is helpful.

Did we make your day? Tweet us @internetarchive

Please explore the Internet Archive!


● Archive Scholar for fulltext search of over 25 million research articles
● https://archive.org/details/inlibrary and OpenLibrary.org for books to
borrow
● Archive-it.org for library curated web collections
● Audio, software, TV News, and the Wayback Machine as well.

The Internet Archive is a non-profit library with a mission to provide


Universal Access to All Knowledge.

NOTICE: This material may be protected by Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S. Code)
info@archive.org

300 Funston Avenue - San Francisco - California - 94118 - www.archive.org


International Journal of Obesity (1998) 22, 1164-1171 }
© 1998 Stockton Press All rights reserved 0307-0565/98 $12.00
http://www.stockton-press.co.uk/ijo

Body mass index and percent body fat: a meta


analysis among different ethnic groups

P Deurenberg', M Yap” and WA van Staveren'

'Division of Human Nutrition and Epidemiology, Wageningen Agricultural University, 6703 HD Wageningen, The Netherlands and
Department of Nutrition, Level 5, Institute ofHealth, Singapore

OBJECTIVE: To study the relationship between percent body fat and body mass index (BMI) in different ethnic groups
and to evaluate the validity of the BMI cut-off points for obesity.
DESIGN: Meta analysis of literature data.
SUBJECTS: Populations of American Blacks, Caucasians, Chinese, Ethiopians, Indonesians, Polynesians and Thais.
MEASUREMENTS: Mean values of BMI, percent body fat, gender and age were adapted from original papers.
RESULTS: The relationship between percent body fat and BMI differs in the ethnic groups studied. For the same level
of body fat, age and gender, American Blacks have a 1.3 kg/m? and Polynesians a 4.5 kg/m? lower BMI compared to
Caucasians. By contrast, in Chinese, Ethiopians, Indonesians and Thais BMls are 1.9, 4.6, 3.2 and 2.9kg/m? lower
compared to Caucasians, respectively. Slight differences in the relationship between percent body fat and BMI of
American Caucasians and European Caucasians were also found. The differences found in the body fat/BMI relation-
ship in different ethnic groups could be due to differences in energy balance as well as to differences in body build.
CONCLUSIONS: The results show that the relationship between percent body fat and BMI is different among different
ethnic groups. This should have public health implications for the definitions of BMI cut-off points for obesity, which
would need to be population-specific.

Keywords: body fat; body mass index; body build; obesity; cut-off values; ethnic; race
:
¥

Introduction recognised by Behnke et al’ who showed, using


underwater weighing, that overweight does not neces-
sarily coincide with an excess of body fat.
Obesity is a global problem, ' as the prevalence of It is known that the relationship between BMI and
obesity is increasing |in developed, as well as in less body fat is age- andgender- dependent.* '* Although
developed, countries.'? Obesity is characterised by an there are a number of publications in which no
increased amount of body fat, defined in young adults differences in the relationship between body fat and
as body fat > 25% in males and > 35% in females,” BMI of ethnic groups were found,'*:'* some recent
corresponding to a body mass index (BMI) of studies indicate that1insome populations these differ-
30kg/m? in young Caucasians.? The amount of ences may well exist.'* ?* Those differences may be
body fat can be determined in vivo, by a number of due to differences in body build,'*'° as well as
methods such as underwater weighing, deuterium differences in energy intake and physical activity.°°
dilution, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) Therefore the use of different cut-off points for
or skinfold thickness measurements. For epidemiolo- different population groups may be necessary. There
gical studies the BMI or Quetelet-index,° defined as is, however, a lack of adequate information world-
body weight divided by height squared (kg/m”), wide, but especially in less developed countries. This
regarded as the most suitable indicator for auc lack of adequate information is recognised by the
and obesity. Based on Garrow,°® the World Health WHO in its recent report, in which it is stated that
Organisation (WHO) recommends a BMI cut-off the BMI cut-off values for overweight and obesity
point for overweight at 25 kg/m’, whereas for obesity may not correspond with the same degree of fatness
a cut-off point of 30kg/m? is recommended.’ across different populations. q

From the physiological point of view, it is not the The use of adequate cut-off points is of great
degree of excess weight (as is measured by, for importance in establishing reliable prevalence figures
example, the BMI), but the degree of body fatness
te

for obesity and consequent public, health policies.


that is important as a risk factor. This has already been Based on the calculations of Rose,”* it can be con- 4

cluded that lowering3 the cut-off point for obesity from


Correspondence: Dr Paul Deurenberg, Division of Human 30kg/m* to 27kg/m? could increase the prevalence
Nutrition and Epidemiology, Wageningen Agricultural of obesity in a population by as much as 14 percentage
University, Bomenweg 2, 6703 HD Wageningen, The
Netherlands.
points. Based on data from a representative study in
Received 30 January 1998; revised 26 May 1998; accepted Singapore, a lowering of the BMI cut-off point from
1 July 1998 30kg/m* to 27kg/m* would result in an increase in

aS
Ethnic differences in BMI and fatness
P Deurenberg et al
1165
+
the prevalence of obesity from 6.2% to 15.3% (1993, or skinfold thickness measurements. The principles of
unpublished results). the used methodologies are described in detail else-
The aim of the present paper was to get more where.*® It is assumed that densitometry, DEXA,
insight into differences among different ethnic deuterium dilution and a multi-compartment model,
groups of the relationship between percent body fat give valid and comparable results within 2—3% body
and BMI. For this, available data from studies on body fat at a group level.*'**34* The studies in which
fat and BMI were collected and analysed. In the skinfolds or impedance were used to determine body
analysis, age and gender differences were accounted fat were included in the analysis because they con-
for. cerned specific ethnic groups for which no other
information was available.
The mean values of BMI, body fat and age from
each study were used in the statistical analysis as
4
Subjects and methods single data points. If BMI was not reported in the
original study, the index was calculated from the
2 99:3 5 (mean) weight and height.
Data from 32 studies’ '*'® ??-4-*° were analysed, As most data were from studies in Caucasians,
consisting (in total) of 11924 subjects, 5563 females these data were used to develop a prediction equation
and 6361 males. Criteria for inclusion of these studies for body fat from BMI, taking the effects of gender
from the literature using Medline were based on and age into account. Different models were tested,
adequate information on (mean) body fat, (mean) but stepwise multiple linear regression techniques*’
BMI, gender and ethnic group. In addition, the meth- with gender coded as dummy variable (females = 0,
odology used for body fat determination should ide- males=1), appeared to have a higher explained
ally be a ‘reference method’. Key words that have variance and/or lowest prediction error compared to
H
been used were body composition, body fat, BMI, curvilinear models (using BMI squared). This predic-
Quetelet index, race and ethnicity. Some of the used tion equation was applied to the different ethnic
studies could not be found with the computer search population groups and the residuals (measured
and were added from personal records. minus predicted percent body fat) were calculated
Caucasians were used as a ‘reference’ group, for and tested for significance from zero. Differences in
comparison with data of other ethnic groups. Amer- slope and/or intercept between regression lines were
ican, Australian and European Caucasians were ana- tested using the technique described by Kleinbaum ef
lysed as one group, as no information was available on al.*’ Males and females were generally analysed
their ancestry, but they were also separately studied. together using a dummy variable to increase the
Available data on Blacks were generally data on power of statistical tests. Analysis of (co)variance
‘American’ Blacks. They were separately analysed (AN(C)OVA) was used to compare differences in
from Ethiopians. Despite the small numbers of Ethio- BMI between different ethnic groups, taking differ-
pians, they were included in the analysis as their ences in gender distribution, age and body fat into
results clearly differed from the other Black groups. account. For the statistical calculations SPSS for
Chinese were treated as one group, although there Windows** was used. Data are presented as mean+
might be differences among Chinese of different standard error (s.e.m.).
origin. Here also, only limited information was avail-
able about ancestry.
For 28 data points, body fat was determined by
densitometry (underwater weighing), in 26 studies by
Results
dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), in 13
studies by dilution techniques (deuterium oxide dilu-
tion), in 13 studies by a three or four-compartment Table | shows the distribution of males and females
model and in 14 studies using bioimpedance analysis participating in the different (ethnic) groups as well as
Table 1 Characteristics of the subjects in the different ethnic groups

Used reference method for body fat


Age Body fat BMI
Females/males (y) (%) (kg/m?) UWW D20 DEXA 3(4)C_ Skinfolds Impedance

mean s.e.m. mean s.e.m. mean s.e.m.


Caucasian 2516/1976 44.1 2.1 4.41 24.1 0.3 25
Black 1109/849 43.0 1.9 26.6 2.0 25.7 0.5 1
Ethiopian 20/24 34.0 2.5 30.7 5.5 24.3 0.2
Chinese 926/684 51.1 4.5 26.1 1.4 222 U3 2
Thai 838/2703 433 2:2 32.0 1.8 23.0 0.3
Indonesian 74/77 Sta 43 23:3. 3.7 22.4 0.7
Polynesian 80/48 38.3 1.8 28.2 6.5 29.7 0.1 2

BMI=body mass index (kg/m?); UWW-=underwater weighing; D,O=Deuterium oxide dilution; DEXA=dual energy X-ray
absorptiometry; 3(4)C = 3(4)-compartment model.
|

wa Ethnic differences in BMI and fatness


P Deurenberg et al
l 166
Table 3 Differences between measured and predicted body fat
their age, percent body fat and BMI, and the body fat from body mass index (BMI), in the different ethnic groups,
oon

reference techniques that were used. Mean age in the using the Caucasian® prediction equation
separate studies ranged from 18.4—76.6 y, mean body Females Males
fat from 11.4—43.9% and mean BMI from 19.3—
36.0kg/m?. The unadjusted relationship between per- Ethnic group mean mean
cent body fat and BMI is presented in Figure | for Caucasian 0.1 0.1 0.5
males and females. It is obvious that differences in American Black =o: —1.9 1.0
percent body fat for the same BMI can be remarkable. Ethiopian? 10.0 9.9 =
Chinese —0.0 1.0 0.7
Part of this difference is due to difference in gender Thai 5.9° 7.6
and difference in age. Indonesian 8.3° 6.7 1.3
In Table 2, the regression coefficients of the step- Polynesian? —3.9
wise multiple linear regression for the total Caucasian *Prediction equation (Table 2): Percent body fat (%
population are given. Gender alone explains 52% of BF) = 1.294 x BMI+0.20 x Age- 11.4 x Gender-8.0
the variance in body fat. The complete regression ®No s.e.m. provided because only one set of data for males and
females
equation includes gender, age and BMI as indepen- *P <0.05 from zero, otherwise not significant or too small to be
dent variables. Combined, these variables explain tested (Indonesian, Ethiopian, Polynesian)
88% of the variation in body fat within the Caucasian
populations. There was no interaction between BMI
and gender, and BMI and age. The residuals (mea- in the table, as there were only data from one study in
sured minus predicted values) were not related to age each subgroup.
and gender, but were positively correlated with body Figure 2a,b,c,d show plots of measured vs predicted
fat (r=0.35, P < 0.05), meaning that at higher levels values in relation to the line of identity (measured
of percent body fat the prediction formula under- value equals predicted value). As expected, the Cau-
estimates body fat. casian data points are all located around the line of
Table 3 gives the differences between measured identity (Figure 2a). Also Chinese data points tend to
body fat (as reported in the original paper) and be around the line of identity (Figure 2b), but body fat
predicted body fat for the different male and female seems to be underestimated at lower BMI levels and
groups, using the prediction formula from Table 2. overestimated at higher BMI levels. Polynesian and
For Ethiopians and Polynesians no s.e.m. is provided Black data points (Figure 2c) are generally below the
line of identity, meaning that for the same BMI, age
and gender, these ethnic groups have lower body fat.
In Indonesians, Thais and Ethiopians the Caucasian
50

prediction formula underestimates body fat, thus in


these population groups, body fat is relatively high in
40
eo comparison with the BMI (Figure 2d). Only the
Chinese data points are not parallel with the line of
oo
identity (P < 0.05). Separate multiple regression ana-
o
.
lysis using the 15 Chinese data points, showed that the
. a . regression coefficient for age is slightly lower
fat
Measured
body
%
(0.137+0.028) and that the regression coefficient
*.
for BMI (0.774+ 0.490) is much lower, compared to
7 SEX
the Caucasians. The regression coefficient for gender
males
10 ® females
was not different when compared to the Caucasians.
18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Figure 3 shows that European Caucasians and
Body mass index (kg/m?)
ane American Caucasians also differ slightly in their
Figure 1 Percent body fat and body mass index (BMI) in males relationship between body fat and BMI. The two
(solid squares) and females (open squares) of all ethnic groups indicated regression lines are not different in slope
(P=0.16), but are different in intercept (3.8% body
Table 2. Regression of percent body fat as dependent variable, fat (P <0.05)). When not corrected for age and
and body mass index (BMI), age and gender as independent gender, the overall difference between measured and ‘

variables for the Caucasian studies


predicted body fat was 3.6% between Europeans and
Age BMI Intercept Americans. This difference was consistent for the 5
Gender (y) (kg/m?) (%) SEE different methodologies used for the body fat mea-
B sem sem sem. Mean sem. (%) R? surements and was 0.4+0.3% for multi-compartment
models (P = 0.05), 3.34 1.8% for deuterium dilution
—105 15 - - 32.4 1.1 5:2 (0:52
—105 09 0.28 0.03 - = 20.0 1.6 3.2 0.81
(P=0.2), 4.0+0.7% for underwater weighing
—11.4 0.8 0.20 0.03 1.294 0.253 -—8.0 5.6 2.5 0.88 (P<0.01) and 5.3+1.3% for DEXA (P<0.01).
Although the subjects in the European studies had
f=regression coefficient; Gender: males = 1, females = 0; s.e.m.
standard error of the mean, SEE =standard error of estimate. higher (P <0.05) body fat (28.4+8.7) compared to
All f’s significant (P< 0.05). the Americans (23.4+4.7), this difference was not
4 oa

34
aed

Ethnic differences in BMI and fatness aa


P Deurenberg et al
ae
1167
g

o
a
“ae
rage
a”

&8
>
x > 8 a
fat
body
%
Measured fat
%body
Measured 4

a
Race Race
Caucasians Chinese

10 20 30 40 50 40 20 30 40 50
Predicted % body fat Predicted % body fat

& “
> 2 :

fat
%body
Measured fat
body
%
Measured

a
20 20 Race
Race * Indonesian

4 a a
10 r Black 10 Thai
10 20 30 40 50 10 20 30 40 50

Predicted % body fat Predicted % body fat

as
Figure 2. Relationship between measured and predicted body fat in different ethnic groups using a Caucasian prediction formula.

bie
responsible for the difference between measured and Discussion
predicted value (ANCOVA, results not shown). Also,
age and gender difference between European and
American Caucasians did not explain the difference. The assessment of body fat in populations is important
In Figure 4 the mean difference in BMI corrected for public health policies related to overweight and
for age, gender and body fat, in the different ethnic obesity. Government and responsible institutions
groups compared to Caucasians (as a reference), is | require accurate figures of obesity prevalence, to
given. The differences in BMI for a given value of
body fat, age and gender are in some populations
large. The BMI of Indonesians for example is
3.2kg/m°~ lower for the same level of body fatness. ;
)

+45°

13°

2 9
= 0.0

10

3 -46'

= -15
Caucasian Chinese Ethiopian Polynesians
Race Black Thai indonesian

— Ethnic background
Amencan

4, 4 European Figure 4 Adjustments to be made in body mass index (BMI) to


reflect equal levels of body fat compared to Caucasians of the
Predicted % body fat same age and gender (mean, 95% confidence interval). Differ-
ence in BMI (kg/m?) differences from BMI cut-off point as
\ Figure 3. Relationship between measured and predicted body suggested by the World Health Organisation (WHO) '; ns=not
fat in Caucasians of different origin. significant; “P< 0.05.
;
\ :

Ethnic differences in BMI and fatness


P Deurenberg et al
1168 :
adequately address the issue of obesity-related mor- laboratory* did overestimate body fat in Caucasian
bidity and mortality. For population studies, the BMI New Yorkers. The difference is not due to differences
is generally accepted as a measure of body fatness," in age and gender distribution (these are controlled for
although there is evidence that BMI may reflect in the prediction equation) between Americans and
different levels of body fatness in different ethnic Europeans, nor by differences in level of body fat
groups.'* ** However, not all studies among different between the two groups as was tested by ANCOVA. ae

ethnic groups showed differences in the relationship Different levels in energy intake and energy expendi-
between body fat and BMI.'*'* It has been long ture~’ and/or differences in body build'*’° could be
established that age and gender’! 12 determine possible explanations. No data were available about
the relationship between body fat and BMI. Thus the ancestry of the Caucasians and there are known
these parameters have to be controlled for when differences in body build within Caucasian popula-
studying the relationship between body fat and BMI tions.
among different groups. Other factors could be The prediction equation was applied to other ethnic
involved, such as differences in body build,'*'> but groups, and as can be seen in Table 3 and in Figures
for most populations this information is not available. 2a,b,c,d, there are in some populations rather large
In the present paper, data from the literature were differences between measured and predicted body fat. 4]

used. For this it was assumed that the methods used to The fact that these differences are not always statis-
determine body fat in the different studies provided tically different (Table 3) is in part due to relatively
valid estimates of body fat, at least at a population small numbers of data points in subgroups. The
level. Although there are studies showing that the differences are comparable in males and females. ;

differences between reference methods for measuring For Chinese, there were no significant differences
body fat among populations are not very between measured and predicted body fat values. It is
large,”'*?*** it cannot be excluded that some differ- notable (see Figure 2b) that the Chinese data points
ences in the present analysis may be due partly to are not parallel with the prediction line (line of
identity). The regression between measured and pre-
Ae
differences in methodology employed. These differ-
ences could be due to technical error as well as to dicted value was, in the Chinese population, signifi-
violations of assumptions, such as for example, hydra- cantly different for the slope (P < 0.05) and intercept
tion of fat free mass (FFM) and density of FFM. It (P <0.05) from the line of identity. Also the relation-
seems, however, unlikely that differences larger than ship between body fat, the BMI and age was different
2—3% body fat are due to methodological differences. in Chinese compared to Caucasians, showing a lower
For this paper, only studies using reference methods regression coefficient for BMI and a lower age effect,
(densitometry, deuterium oxide dilution, multi-com- but a much larger intercept. For this, it seems likely
partment models and DEXA) were used, with the that body fat in the Chinese is over predicted by the
exception of a few studies which used skinfolds or prediction formula, especially at lower BMI values,
where the impact of the (larger) intercept is greater.
The differences in body fat and BMI between the When BMI in the Chinese was corrected for body fat,
different ethnic groups, as shown in Table |, do not taking age and gender into account, the Chinese had a
reflect real differences in these parameters between lower BMI for the same body fat (see also Figure 4).
the populations. The subjects in the selected studies This is inaccordance with findings of Wang and co-
were by no means representative of their ethnic workers,*'” but iin contrast with findings of a study in
groups. For the purpose of this study, validating Beijing Chinese."
BMI as a measure of body fat, this criterion is also Differences and/or inconsistencies in the relation-
not necessary. ship between body fat and BMI in the Chinese could q
Most data were available from Caucasians and be due to differences in body build, northern Chinese
therefore these data were used as reference points. (Beijing) having a bigger body build than southern
4
Stepwise multiple regression (Table 2) resulted in a Chinese. It is known that C hinese have generally |
H

prediction equation for body fat of which the regres- thinner bones than Caucasians.*” Bone mineral den-
sion coefficients did not differ significantly from the sity, however, is not significantly different from Cau-
regression coefficients found in an earlier study" and casians, when corrected for weight, height and age.”” i
as recently reported by Gallagher et a/'? in a study Also, Asians seem to have less muscle mass compared
among Blacks and Whites. Curvilinear regression did to Whites, also after correction for differences in BMI
not result in better predicted values (results not or differences in FFM/height”.>' The studies of Wang
shown). It is remarkable that there are differences and co-workers,'*'? only indicate ‘Asians,’ but the
between the American Caucasians and the European subjects were mainly Chinese (J Wang, personal if

(mainly UK and Netherlands) Caucasians, in the communication). No information is, however, avail-
relationship between body fat and BMI (Figure 3), able about region of origin, which could have been H

with the Europeans having a 3.8% higher body fat at helpful in interpreting the results.
the same BMI level (after correction for age and In American Blacks, as well as in Polynesians, the }

gender). This is in line with results of Gallagher et prediction equation overestimated body fat, meaning
H
al,'* that the prediction equation developed in our that Blacks have lower body fat for the same BMI

~
>

Ethnic differences in BMI and fatness n7)


P Deurenberg et al

compared to Caucasians. When comparing American obesity (based on the BMI) could be different for
Blacks and Caucasians, the differences between mea- different populations and as a result, population-spe-
sured and predicted body fat were not significant, cific (rather than general) cut-off points have to be
confirming the findings of Gallagher et al.'* How- defined. This meta-analysis shows, like some other
ever, Luke et al7° found differences in the relation- papers in the literature, that in some populations the
ship of body fat/BMI also among Blacks living in level of obesity in terms of percent body fat is reached
different areas. As a possible explanation, Luke ef at a much lower BMI compared to the cut-off values
al*® discussed differences in dietary pattern and suggested by the WHO. In Indonesians, Thais and
physical activity. It is remarkable that the African Ethiopians the cut-off values for obesity based on
(Nigerian) Blacks in the study of Luke et al*° have a BMI could be as low as 27kg/m’, whereas, for
low body fat for their BMI compared to other Blacks example, in Blacks and Polynesians, the cut-off
‘Gor
(outlier in Figure 2c). point could be slightly higher than the now used
In Indonesians, Thais and Ethiopians, the prediction value of 30kg/m*. Data from this study do not
equation largely underestimated body fat. In Indone- allow definitive conclusions about any ethnic group,
sians the underestimation was of the same magnitude as in many populations the number of data points was
in males and females independent of the body fat too limited. More research into different ethnic groups
methodology used (3-compartment model based on is necessary and, as the differences between the =
densitometry and deuterium oxide dilution,?' and American Caucasians and the European Caucasians
deuterium dilution alone'®). In Thais, there was no in this study show, also within one ‘ethnic’ group
difference whether skinfolds** or DEXA” was used there could be differences that could be large enough
as the reference method. The reason for this under- to be important. The inclusion of body build para-
estimation remains unclear, but body build of some meters, such as (relative) sitting height and skeletal
Asians is rather slender *’ and earlier we reported a widths, in such studies would be advisable.
ay |
slender body build in Ethiopians*' and also recently in
Indonesians.'®?!' Subjects with a small frame, but the
same body height, are likely to have a relatively lower
FFM (due to lower muscle mass) and hence BMI is Summary
likely to underestimate their body fat when using
prediction formulae developed in subjects with a
There are differences in BMI among populations of
bigger body build.
the same age, gender and level of body fatness. ‘3

The reason for the different relationships between


Consequently the prevalence of obesity in populations
body fat and BMI in the different populations is
will be over- or underestimated using general cut-off
unknown. Apart from differences between dietary
points. The relationship between body fat and BMI in
patterns and differences in physical activity,”° differ-
a specific population should be studied before the
ences in body build may be an important contributor.
WHO cut-off point of30kg/m? for obesity is applied.
Norgan '*'° has discussed the importance of rela-
tive leg length for the interpretation of the BMI, and it
is known that there are differences in relative sitting References
height between Caucasians and Blacks, and between
Caucasians and Asians, with Blacks having relatively | World Health Organisation. Obesity: Preventing and mana-
longer legs and Asians having relatively shorter ging the global epidemic. Report on a WHO Consultation on
Obesity, Geneva, 3—5 June 1997 WHO/NUT/NCD/98. 1,
legs.” Apart from relative leg length, a stocky or
Geneva, 1998.
slender body build may also have an impact. A stocky bo Drewnowski A, Popkin BM. The nutrition transition: new
person is likely to have more muscle mass/connective trends in the global diet. Nutr Rev 1997; 55: 31—43.
tissue than a slender person with the same body World Health Organisation. Physical Status: The use and
height. Thus, at the same BMI, the slender person interpreation of anthropometry. Technical Report Series 854,
Geneva, 1995.
will have more body fat. Additional anthropometric
Lohman TG, Houtkoper L, Going SB. Body fat measurements
measures may be necessary to improve the quality of goes high tech. Not all are created equal. ACSM's Health &
the BMI as an indicator of body fatness among ethnic Fitness Journal 1997; 1: 30—35.
groups. Quetelet LA. Physique Social. Vol 2 C Muquardt. Brussels,
1869, 92.
a Garrow JS. Treat obesity seriously- a clinical manual. Church-

ii! Livingstone, London, 1981.


Behnke AR, Feen BG, Welham WC. The specific gravidity of
|
Conclusions healthy men: body weight/volume as an index of obesity. J
Am Med Assoc 1942; 118: 495—498.
oo Deurenberg P, Weststrate JA, Seidell JC. Body mass index as

a measure of body fatness: age and sex specific prediction


The consequences of the different relationships
formulas. Brit J Nutr 1991; 65: 10S5—114.
between body fat and BMI are evident. As increased 9 Visser M, Heuvel van den E, Deurenberg P. Prediction
f
body fat and not increased weight or BMI is the risk equations for the estimation of body composition in the elderly
factor for excess mortality,'” cut-off points for using anthropometric data. Brit J Nutr 1994; 71: 823-833.
||
\
|
:

Ethnic differences in BMi and fatness


P Deurenberg et al

1170
10 Norgan NG, Ferro-Luzzi A. Weight-height indices as estima- 30 Jiang Z, Yang N, Chou C, Liu Z, Sun T, Chen Y, Xue B, Fei
tors of fatness in men. Hum Nutr Clin Nutr 1982; 36¢e: L, Tseng H, Brown E, Scheltinga M, Wilmore DW. Body
363 —372 composition in Chinese subjects: Comparison with data from
Womersley J, Durnin JVGA. A comparison of the skinfold North America. World J Surg 1991; 15: 95—102.
method with extent of overweight and various weight-height Deurenberg P, Tagliabue A, Wang J, Wolde-Gebriel Z.
relationships in the assessment of obesity. Brit J Nutr 1977; Multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance for the predic-
38: 271 —284. tion of body water compartments: validation in differ-
Gallagher D, Visser M, Sepulveda D, Pierson RN, Harris T, ent ethnic groups. Asia Pacific J Clin Nutr 1996; 5:
Heymsfield SB. How useful is BMI for comparison of body 217-221.
fatness across age, sex and ethnic groups. Am J Epidemiol 52 Broekhoff C, Voorrips LE, Wijenberg MP, Witvoet GA,
1996; 143: 228—239. Deurenberg P. Relative validity of different methods to
Deurenberg P, Ge K, Hautvast JGAJ, Wang J. BMI as assess body composition in apparently healthy, elderly
predictor for body fat: comparison between Chinese and women. Ann Nutr Metab 1992; 36: 148—156.
33
Dutch adult subjects. Asia Pacific J Clin Nutr 1997; 6: Wang J, Russell M, Mazariegos M, Burastero S, Thornton J,
102—105. Lichtman S, Heymsfield SB, Pierson RN. Body fat by dual
Norgan NG. Population differences in body composition in photon absorptiometry: comparisons with traditional methods
relation to BMI. Eur J Clin Nutr 1994; 48 (suppl 3): S1O—S27. in Asians, Blacks and Whites. Am J Human Biol 1992; 4:
5 Norgan NG. Interpretation of low body mass indices: Aus- 501—510.
tralian Aborigines. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1994; 94: 229-237. 34 Cote K, Adams WC. Effect of bone density on body composi-
|
Gurrici S, Hartiryanti Y, Hautvast JGAJ, Deurenberg P. tion estimates in young adult black and white women. Med Sci
Relationship between body fat and BMI: differences between Sports Exerc 1993; 25: 290—296.
Indonesians and Caucasians. Eur J Clin Nutr, (in press). 35 Clark RR, Kuta JM, Sullivan JC. Prediction of percent body |

va
Swinburn BA, Craig PL, Daniel R, Dent DPD, Strauss BJG. fat in adult males using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry,
Body composition differences between Polynesians and Cau- skinfolds, and hydrostatic weighing. Med Sci Sports Exerc
casians assessed by bioelectrical impedance. /nt J Obes 1996; 1993; 25: 528—535.
20: 889-894. 36 Stewart SP, Bramley PN, Heighton R, Green JH, Horsman A,
Wang J, Thornton JC, Russell M, Burastero S, Heymsfield SB, Losowsky MS, Smith MA. Estimation of body composition
Pierson RN. Asians have lower BMI (BMI) but higher percent from bioelectrical impedance of body segments: comparison
body fat than do Whites: comparisons of anthropometric with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Brit J Nutr 1993; 69:
measurements. Am J Clin Nutr 1994; 60: 23—28. 645 —655.
Wang J, Thornton JC, Burastero S, Shen J, Tanenbaum S, Waart de, FG, Li R, Deurenberg P. Comparison of body
Heymsfield SB, Pierson RN. Comparison for BMI and body composition assessments by bio-electrical impedance and
fat percent among Puerto Ricans, Blacks, Whites and Asians anthropometry in pre-menopausal Chinese women. Brit J
living in the new York City area. Obes Res 1996; 4: 377—384. Nutr 1993; 69: 657—664.
2 Luke A, Durazo-Arvizzu R, Rotimi C, Prewitt E, Forrester T, 38 Wilmore KM, McBride PJ, Wilmore JH. Comparison of
Wilks R, Ogunbiyi OL, Schoeller DA, McGee D, Cooper RS. bioelectric impedance and near infrared interactance for
Relation between BMI and body fat in black population body composition assessment in a population of self perceived
samples from Nigeria, Jamaica and the United States. Am J overweight adults. /nt J Obes 1994 18: 375—381.
Epidemiol 1997; 145: 620—628. Deurenberg P, Tagliabue A, Schouten FJM. Multi-frequency
5
Kiipper J, Bartz M, Schultink JWE, Lutiko W, Deurenberg P.
39 impedance for the prediction of extra-cellular water and total eta:
Measurements of body fat in Indonesian adults: comparison body water. Brit J Nutr 1995 73: 349—358.
between a three compartment model and widely used methods. 40 Deurenberg P, Wolde-Gebriel Z, Schouten FJM. The validity
Asia Pacific J Clin Nutr, in press. of predicted total body water and extra-cellular water using
Stevens NHC. The correlation and prediction of body compo- multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance in an Ethiopian popu-
sition from dual energy x-ray absorptiometry and anthropo- lation. Ann Nutr Metab 1995; 39: 234-241. a
metric measurements in Thai women aged 30 to 39 years. Lean MEJ, Han TS, Deurenberg P. Predicting body composi-
MSc. Thesis Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand, 1997. tion by densitometry from simple anthropometric measure-
4 3 Rose G. Population differences of risk and disease. Nutr ments. Am J Clin Nutr 1996; 63: 4—14.
Metab Cardiovasc Dis 1991; 1: 37—40. 42 Wang J, Deurenberg P. The validity of predicted body com-
Deurenberg P, van der Kooy K, Hulshof T, Evers P. Body position in Chinese adults from anthropometry and bio-elec-
mass index as a measure of body fatness in the elderly. Eur J trical impedance in comparison with densitometry. Brit J Nutr
Clin Nutr 1989; 43: 231—236. 1996; 76: 175-182.
Fuller NJ, Elia M. Potential use of bio-electrical impedance of 43 Kwok T, Woo J, Chan Henry HL, Lau E. The reliability of
the ‘whole body’ and of body segments for the assessment of upper limb anthropometry in older Chinese people. /nt J Obes
body composition: comparison with densitometry and anthro- 1997; 21: 542—547.
pometry. Eur J Clin Nut 1989; 43: 779—791. Visser M, Gallagher D, Deurenberg P, Wang J, Pierson RN,
Wang J, Heymsfield SB, Aulet M, Thornton JC, Pierson RN. Heymsfield SB. Density of fat-free body mass: relationship
Body fat from body density: underwater weighing vs dual- with race, age and level of body fatness. Am J Physiol 1997;
photon absorptiometry. Am J Physiol 1989; 256: E829—E834. 272: E781 —E787.
Heitmann BL. Evaluation of body fat estimated from BMI, 45 Wattanapenpaiboon N, Lutiko W, Strauss BJG, Hsu-
skinfolds and impedance. A comparative study. Eur J Clin Hage BHH, Wahlqvist ML, Stroud DB. Agreement of
Nutr 1990; 44: 831 —837. skinfold measurement and bioelectrical impedance analy-
4 Tanphainchitr V, Kulapongse S, Pakpeankitvatana R, Leela- sis methods with dual energy x-ray absorptiometry in esti-
hagul P, Tamwiwat C, Lochya S. Prevalence of obesity and its mating total body fat in Anglo-Celtic adults. /nt J Obes, in
associated risks in urban Thais. In: (ed Oomura Y et al.) press.
Progress in Obesity Research John Libbey: London, 1990, 46 Roche AF, Heymsfield SB, Lohman TG. Human body com-
pp. 649-652. position. Human Kinetics: Champaign, 1996.
Zillikens MC, Conway JM. Anthropometry in blacks: applic- = Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE, Nizam A. Applied
47
ability of generalized skinfold equations and differences in fat regression analysis and other multivariate methods (3rd edn).
patterning between Blacks and Whites. Am J Clin Nutr 1990; Duxbury Press: Pacific Grove, 1998.
52: 45—51. 48 SPSS/Windows. V 7.0 SPSS Manuals: Chicago, 1995.
Ethnic differences in BMI and fatness Bn
P Deurenberg et al

117 1
49 Garn SM, Pao EM, Rihl ME. Compact bone in Chinese and 51 Ishida Y, Kanehisa H, Fukunaga T, Pollock ML. A com-
Japanese. Science 1964; 143: 1439—1440. parison of fat and muscle thickness in Japanese and
= 50 Russel-Aulet M, Wang J, Thornton J. Bone mineral density American women. Ann Physiol Anthropol 1992; 11:
and mass by total body dual photon absorptiometry in normal 29-35.
white White and Asian men. J Bone Min Res 1991; 6: 52 Malina RM, Bouchardt C. Growth, maturation and physical
1109—1113. activity. Human Kinetics: Champaign, 1996.

4 ;

if

You might also like