David S Freedman1, Earl S Ford1. 1. From the Divisions of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity (DSF) and Adult and Community Health (ESF), CDC, Atlanta, GA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several studies showed that the waist circumference of US adults has increased over the past 25 y. However, because of the high correlation between waist circumference and body mass index (BMI; in kg/m²) (r ∼ 0.9), it is uncertain if these trends in waist circumference exceed those expected on the basis of BMI changes over this time period. OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether the recent trend in waist circumference was independent of changes in BMI, age, and race-ethnicity. DESIGN: We analyzed data from the 1999-2000 through 2011-2012 cycles of the NHANES. RESULTS: The mean waist circumference increased by ∼2 cm (in men) and ∼4 cm (in women) in adults in the United States over this 12-y period. In men, this increase was very close to what would be expected because of the 0.7 increase in mean BMI over this period. However, in women, most of the secular increase in waist circumference appeared to be independent of changes in BMI (mean: 0.6), age, and race-ethnicity over the 12-y period. We estimated that, independent of changes in these covariates, the mean waist circumference increased by 0.2 cm in men and 2.4 cm in women from 1999-2000 through 2011-2012; only the latter estimate was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that, in women but not men, the recent secular trend in waist circumference is greater than what would be expected on the basis of changes in BMI. Possible reasons for this secular increase, along with sex differences, are uncertain.
BACKGROUND: Several studies showed that the waist circumference of US adults has increased over the past 25 y. However, because of the high correlation between waist circumference and body mass index (BMI; in kg/m²) (r ∼ 0.9), it is uncertain if these trends in waist circumference exceed those expected on the basis of BMI changes over this time period. OBJECTIVE: We assessed whether the recent trend in waist circumference was independent of changes in BMI, age, and race-ethnicity. DESIGN: We analyzed data from the 1999-2000 through 2011-2012 cycles of the NHANES. RESULTS: The mean waist circumference increased by ∼2 cm (in men) and ∼4 cm (in women) in adults in the United States over this 12-y period. In men, this increase was very close to what would be expected because of the 0.7 increase in mean BMI over this period. However, in women, most of the secular increase in waist circumference appeared to be independent of changes in BMI (mean: 0.6), age, and race-ethnicity over the 12-y period. We estimated that, independent of changes in these covariates, the mean waist circumference increased by 0.2 cm in men and 2.4 cm in women from 1999-2000 through 2011-2012; only the latter estimate was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that, in women but not men, the recent secular trend in waist circumference is greater than what would be expected on the basis of changes in BMI. Possible reasons for this secular increase, along with sex differences, are uncertain.
Authors: Jack Wang; John C Thornton; Salina Bari; Bennett Williamson; Dympna Gallagher; Steven B Heymsfield; Mary Horlick; Donald Kotler; Blandine Laferrère; Laurel Mayer; F Xavier Pi-Sunyer; Richard N Pierson Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Mai A Elobeid; Renee A Desmond; Olivia Thomas; Scott W Keith; David B Allison Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: A Gokcel; Y Gumurdulu; H Karakose; E Melek Ertorer; N Tanaci; N BascilTutuncu; N Guvener Journal: Diabetes Obes Metab Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 6.577
Authors: Ike S Okosun; K M Dinesh Chandra; Angel Boev; John M Boltri; Simon T Choi; David C Parish; G E Alan Dever Journal: Prev Med Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Emelia J Benjamin; Michael J Blaha; Stephanie E Chiuve; Mary Cushman; Sandeep R Das; Rajat Deo; Sarah D de Ferranti; James Floyd; Myriam Fornage; Cathleen Gillespie; Carmen R Isasi; Monik C Jiménez; Lori Chaffin Jordan; Suzanne E Judd; Daniel Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda Lisabeth; Simin Liu; Chris T Longenecker; Rachel H Mackey; Kunihiro Matsushita; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael E Mussolino; Khurram Nasir; Robert W Neumar; Latha Palaniappan; Dilip K Pandey; Ravi R Thiagarajan; Mathew J Reeves; Matthew Ritchey; Carlos J Rodriguez; Gregory A Roth; Wayne D Rosamond; Comilla Sasson; Amytis Towfighi; Connie W Tsao; Melanie B Turner; Salim S Virani; Jenifer H Voeks; Joshua Z Willey; John T Wilkins; Jason Hy Wu; Heather M Alger; Sally S Wong; Paul Muntner Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Tae Hee Lee; Pratyusha Tirumani Setty; Gopanandan Parthasarathy; Kent R Bailey; Christina M Wood-Wentz; Joel G Fletcher; Naoki Takahashi; Sundeep Khosla; Michael R Moynagh; Alan R Zinsmeister; Adil E Bharucha Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: BongKyoo Choi; Dale Steiss; Javier Garcia-Rivas; Stacey Kojaku; Peter Schnall; Marnie Dobson; Dean Baker Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Serena C Houghton; Heather Eliassen; Rulla M Tamimi; Walter C Willett; Bernard A Rosner; Susan E Hankinson Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 11.816