4.5 Article

Relation between body composition and age in healthy Japanese subjects

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
Volume 55, Issue 6, Pages 462-470

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601206

Keywords

aging; obesity; fat distribution; skeletal muscle; sarcopenia; ethnicity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To describe the relation between body composition and age measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in healthy Japanese adults. Design: Cross-sectional study. Subjects and measurements: The subjects were 2411 healthy Japanese adults (males 625, females 1786, age 20 -79 y) who attended the Fukuoka Health Promotion Center, Fukuoka, Japan for health check-up. Body composition was determined by DXA (QDR-2000, Hologic) for the whole body and three anatomical regions of arms, legs and trunk. Results: The mean Values of body mass index (BMI) and percentage fat mass (%FM) were 23.2 +/- 3.1 (s.d.) kg/m(2) and 21.8 +/- 6.8% for males and 22.1 +/- 3.3 kg/m(2) and 32.0 +/- 7.5% for females, respectively. For males, curvilinear relations with the peaks in their forties or fifties were seen for the variables associated adiposity, ie BMI, waist and hip circumference, waist-hip ratio, total or regional fat mass (FM), %FM and ratio of trunk FM to leg FM. For females, most of these variables increased linearly in older subjects. Lean mass (LM), bone mineral content (BMC) and bone mineral density (BMD) of the whole body and appendicular LM were relatively constant until the forties and then decreased in both sexes. The rates of decrease in the total or appendicular LM were larger for males than for females, whereas those in BMC or BMD were larger for females than for males. Conclusions: This study presents the first detailed data on body composition in Japanese, which may be useful when comparing with populations of different racial and ethnic backgrounds and studying ill subjects.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available