首页> 外文期刊>Nutrition & Diabetes >Current formula for calculating body mass index is applicable to Asian populations
【24h】

Current formula for calculating body mass index is applicable to Asian populations

机译:当前计算体重指数的公式适用于亚洲人口

获取原文
           

摘要

Body mass index (BMI, ratio of height and weight, expressed as kg/m ~(2)) is widely used to define overweight and obesity across many countries, populations, races and ethnicities. It is obvious that weight and height are linked. Hence, to adjust for the proportion between height and weight, the use of BMI assumes that in a given population, weight scales to height squared. This assumption, as well as the thresholds for defining overweight (BMI between 25 to &30?kg/m ~(2)) or obesity (BMI?≥?30?kg/m ~(2)) have been derived from studying Caucasian population, hence may or may not apply to various other groups globally. In this issue of the journal, a team of researchers ~( 1 ) including obesity researchers, mathematicians and anthropologist asked following three questions: “(1) Does weight scale to height squared in Asian Indians? (2) Does the weight-height relationship differ within different Asian populations (i.e. between Asian Indians and South Koreans)? and (3) Do BMI thresholds for overweight and obesity for South Koreans differ from those for Caucasians?” Hood et al. ~( 1 ) used a dataset of 43,880 adult Asian Indian males of age 15–54?y, including 5549 members of various tribes to conclude that weight does scale close to 2 (squared) in this geographically, socio-economically, culturally and ethnically diverse population. Even the tribal population, known for its smaller body size and stature compared to general population, showed similar scaling. Hood et al. ~( 1 ) concluded that BMI, as defined, does normalise weight for height in Asian Indians. Hence, it would be appropriate to use current formula for calculation of BMI in Asian Indian population. Next, they used the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) data and observed an overlap between South Korean and Asian Indian population for weight and height. But also, there was a segment of Asian Indian population that was smaller in weight as well as height compared to South Korean population. Finally, using available percent body fat cut-offs and cardiometabolic risk factors, Hood et al. ~( 1 ) calculated BMI thresholds for South Korean males and females, respectively, as 22 and 18?kg/m ~(2) for overweight and 26 and 23?kg/m ~(2) for obesity. These thresholds are lower than the current BMI cut-offs applicable to Caucasian populations. As outlined by the authors, the limitations of this study ~( 1 ) include the lack of data for women in Asian Indian dataset, so the applicability of BMI for Asian Indian women could not be tested. Unlike the South Korean dataset, the lack of body fat percent or cardiometabolic risk factors in the Asian Indian dataset prevented derivation of BMI thresholds for overweight and obesity in Asian Indian population. Nonetheless, similar conclusions were reached for Indians by Dudeja et al. ~( 2 ), following which a Consensus statement for Asian Indians suggested the BMI cut-offs for overweight as ≥23?kg/m ~(2) and for obesity as ≥25?kg/m ~(2) ~( 3 ). These BMI cut-offs have been adapted by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK) for migrant South Asians in UK as well ~( 4 ) The study by Hood et al. ~( 1 ) is important as it validates the use of BMI to study at least the Asian Indian and South Korean populations. Moreover, the study provides confidence to further research a very important health issue in South East Asian population. Obesity-related diseases, primarily type 2 diabetes in India and South Korea pose grim picture; in 2016, 4.8 million 30?y or older South Koreans (prevalence 13.7%) had diabetes, and about a quarter of population had prediabetes ~( 5 ). In 2017, 72.9 million Asian Indians in India (prevalence 8.8%) had diabetes and 24 million had? prediabetes ~( 6 ). Rising obesity seems to be a main contributor; and dysmetabolic state is mainly linked with excess body fat and ectopic fat deposition in various organs ~( 7 ). At a given BMI, the amount of total body fat and ectopic fat is different between Caucasians and Asians ~( 8 , 9 ). In such situations where excess body fat predominates but body weight is not very high relative to Caucasians, BMI may fail to classify obesity or may underestimate it ~( 2 , 10 ). In a sample of 1513 Hong Kong Chinese men and women, the risk of having diabetes mellitus or hypertension was at lower BMI or waist circumference levels?in Chinese than in Caucasians ~( 11 ). In their analysis, Hood et al. ~( 1 ), reach similar conclusions in South Korean populations, using body fat as comparator. Asians, and South Asians in particular, have more severe inflammation, insulin resistance, and liver fat even when non-obese by BMI standards used for Caucasians ~( 9 , 12 ). Excess liver fat may occur in non-obese south Asians as well, and has been shown to be?almost double the? amount recorded? in Caucasians when matched for weight; and is associated strongly with insulin resistance ~( 9 , 13 ). Other adipose tissue depots such as the deep subcu
机译:体重指数(BMI,身高体重比,表示为kg / m〜(2))在许多国家,人口,种族和族裔中广泛用于定义超重和肥胖。很明显,体重和身高是联系在一起的。因此,为了调整身高和体重之间的比例,BMI的使用假设在给定的人口中,体重会缩放到身高的平方。该假设以及定义超重(BMI在25至& 30?kg / m〜(2)之间)或肥胖(BMI≥≥30?kg / m〜(2)的阈值)均来自研究高加索人口,因此可能会或可能不会适用于全球其他各个群体。在本期杂志中,包括肥胖研究人员,数学家和人类学家在内的一组研究人员〜(1)问了以下三个问题:“(1)亚洲印第安人的体重与身高成正比吗? (2)不同亚洲人口之间(即亚洲印第安人和韩国人之间)的身高关系是否有所不同? (3)韩国人的BMI超重和肥胖阈值与白种人的阈值不同吗?”胡德等。 〜(1)使用了43880名15-54岁的成年亚裔印度男性的数据集,包括各个部落的5549名成员,得出的结论是,在该地理,社会经济,文化和种族上,体重的确接近于2(平方)。人口多样化。即使是部落人口,也比一般人口具有较小的体形和身材,但也有类似的缩放比例。胡德等。 〜(1)得出结论,如所定义,BMI确实使亚洲印第安人的身高体重正常化。因此,使用当前公式来计算亚洲印度人口的BMI是适当的。接下来,他们使用了韩国国民健康与营养检查调查(KNHANES)数据,并观察到韩国人和亚洲印度人的体重和身高存在重叠。而且,与南韩人口相比,亚洲印度人口的体重和身高都较小。最后,使用可用的体内脂肪截止百分比和心脏代谢风险因素,Hood等。 〜(1)计算出的韩国男性和女性的BMI阈值分别为:超重为22和18?kg / m〜(2),肥胖为26和23?kg / m〜(2)。这些阈值低于当前适用于白种人人群的BMI临界值。正如作者所概述的那样,本研究的局限性(1)包括亚洲印度裔数据集中女性数据的缺乏,因此无法测试BMI在亚洲印度裔女性中的适用性。与韩国的数据集不同,亚洲印度裔数据集中缺乏人体脂肪百分比或心脏代谢风险因素,无法得出亚洲印度裔人群超重和肥胖的BMI阈值。尽管如此,Dudeja等人对印度人也得出了类似的结论。 〜(2),其后针对亚洲印度人的共识声明建议,超重≥23?kg / m〜(2)和肥胖≥25?kg / m〜(2)〜(3)的BMI临界值。 。这些BMI临界值已经由美国国家卫生与医疗保健研究院(National Institute for Health and Care Excellence)(英国)改编为英国的移民南亚人。(4)Hood等人的研究。 〜(1)很重要,因为它验证了BMI的使用至少可以研究亚洲印度和韩国人口。此外,该研究为进一步研究东南亚人口中非常重要的健康问题提供了信心。肥胖相关疾病,主要是印度和韩国的2型糖尿病,形势严峻; 2016年,有480万名30岁以上的韩国人(患病率13.7%)患有糖尿病,约四分之一的人口患有糖尿病前期〜(5)。 2017年,印度有7290万亚裔印度人(患病率8.8%)患有糖尿病,有2400万亚裔?糖尿病前期〜(6)。肥胖的增加似乎是主要的原因。代谢异常状态主要与体内多余脂肪和异位脂肪沉积在各个器官中有关[7]。在给定的体重指数下,高加索人和亚洲人的体内总脂肪和异位脂肪的量是不同的[8,9]。在这样的情况下,相对于高加索人,身体脂肪占主导地位,但体重不是很高,BMI可能无法对肥胖进行分类,或者可能会低估肥胖〜(2,10)。在1513名香港中国男性和女性的样本中,中国人的糖尿病BMI或腰围水平低于白种人,而罹患糖尿病或高血压的风险则高于白种人11。在他们的分析中,胡德等。 〜(1),以体脂为对照,在韩国人群中得出了类似的结论。亚洲人,特别是南亚人,即使按照高加索人的BMI标准不肥胖,也具有更严重的炎症,胰岛素抵抗和肝脂肪[9,12]。非肥胖的南亚人也可能会出现过多的肝脏脂肪,并且已经被证明是其几乎两倍。记录金额?体重匹配的高加索人;并与胰岛素抵抗〜(9,13)密切相关。其他脂肪组织贮库,例如深亚库

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号