Literature DB >> 2927308

Impact of total body water fluctuations on estimation of body fat from body density.

J C Bunt1, T G Lohman, R A Boileau.   

Abstract

The purpose was to investigate the possibility that variability in body weight in females due to water retention causes differences in body density (Db) values determined by hydrostatic weighing (HW). Determination of total body water (TBW) and Db were concurrently measured in seven females who experienced considerable fluctuations in body weight (1.5-4.5 kg) and seven males, ages 19-24. Females were measured when they felt they were at their lowest (LO) and highest (HI) body weights (BW) during a menstrual cycle. Males were randomly tested approximately 3 wk apart. Mean values of selected variables were compared in the LO vs HI testing sessions by paired t-tests. Significant mean differences were found in the females (P less than 0.01) for the following variables: BW (kg) (LO = 58.9, HI = 61.1), Db (g.cc-1) (LO = 1.0430, HI = 1.037), and percent body fat (%BF) as determined by HW alone (LO = 24.8%, HI = 27.6%). Variables significant at the P less than 0.05 level were TBW(l) (LO = 33.6, HI = 35.1) and %TBW of the fat-free body (LO = 74.5, HI = 75.9). However, changes in TBW could not entirely account for observed changes in Db. Only mean BW (kg) was significant (P less than 0.01) in the males (LO = 74.3, HI = 74.6). It is concluded that changes in TBW can in part result in significantly different Db values obtained from HW in females who did experience perceptible changes in BW during a menstrual cycle. The remaining differences may be due to changes in fat and protein content or methodological errors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2927308     DOI: 10.1249/00005768-198902000-00017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc        ISSN: 0195-9131            Impact factor:   5.411


  7 in total

1.  Estimating body fat in NCAA Division I female athletes: a five-compartment model validation of laboratory methods.

Authors:  Jordan R Moon; Joan M Eckerson; Sarah E Tobkin; Abbie E Smith; Christopher M Lockwood; Ashley A Walter; Joel T Cramer; Travis W Beck; Jeffrey R Stout
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2008-10-21       Impact factor: 3.078

2.  Comparison of body composition assessment methods in pediatric intestinal failure.

Authors:  Nilesh M Mehta; Bram Raphael; Ivan M Guteirrez; Nicolle Quinn; Paul D Mitchell; Heather J Litman; Tom Jaksic; Christopher P Duggan
Journal:  J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.839

3.  Influence of subject presentation on interpretation of body composition change after 6 months of self-selected training and diet in athletic males.

Authors:  Ava D Kerr; Gary J Slater; Nuala M Byrne
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2018-04-10       Impact factor: 3.078

Review 4.  Body fat assessment in women. Special considerations.

Authors:  J A Vogel; K E Friedl
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 11.136

5.  Estimation of prepractice hydration status of National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I athletes.

Authors:  Stella L Volpe; Kristen A Poule; Erica G Bland
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2009 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.860

6.  Adiposity, reproductive and metabolic health, and activity levels in zoo Asian elephant (Elephas maximus).

Authors:  Daniella E Chusyd; Tim R Nagy; Lilian Golzarri-Arroyo; Stephanie L Dickinson; John R Speakman; Catherine Hambly; Maria S Johnson; David B Allison; Janine L Brown
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 3.312

7.  Pain Across the Menstrual Cycle: Considerations of Hydration.

Authors:  Beverly Tan; Michael Philipp; Stephen Hill; Ahmad Munir Che Muhamed; Toby Mündel
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 4.755

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.