WHO Body Mass Index Research Articles

Body weight dissatisfaction in the Icelandic adult population: a normative discontent?

Body weight dissatisfaction is a common problem in many modern societies and it appears to have grown over time. This study examined the prevalence and predictors of body weight dissatisfaction among 18- to 79-year-old Icelanders. The distribution of body weight dissatisfaction according to the WHO body mass index criteria for underweight, normal weight, overweight and obesity was also assessed. The study was based on 5832 participants in the cross-sectional survey 'Health and Well-Being of Icelanders', administered by the Public Health Institute in Iceland in the fall of 2007. Around 43% of adult Icelanders are dissatisfied with their own body weight (50% of females; 35% of males) and 72% believe they need to lose weight (80% of females; 63% of males). Despite being in normal range according to the WHO-based BMI criteria, 64% of females in that category believe they need to lose weight. Multivariate results show that indicators of socio-economic status (SES) are not significantly associated with body weight dissatisfaction among females, while among males, those with university education are more often dissatisfied than those with secondary education (OR = 1.5, P < 0.05; for self-perceived need to lose weight, estimates are OR = 1.4, P < 0.05 for females, and OR = 2.5, P < 0.001 for males). The prevalence of body dissatisfaction is so prominent among Icelandic female adults that it can rightfully be labelled a normative discontent in this population.

Maternal obesity and ethnic groups: trends in 552 303 births over 13 years in England, UK

IntroductionInternational evidence shows that Asians have increased diabetes risk at a lower body mass index (BMI) than European Whites.1 UK guidance for routine gestational diabetes screening does not consider this...

New International Measuring Stick for Defining Obesity in Non-Europeans

Body mass index (BMI) is a useful way of classifying the degree of excess weight in an individual. Defining BMI cut points at which adverse cardiovascular outcomes, diabetes mellitus, and other comorbidities are more likely to occur affords clinically relevant guidelines for patient care. Expert panels from both the National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization1–3 have developed such cut points, which define overweight as a BMI (weight [in kilograms]/height [in meters squared]) of 25.0 to 29.9 kg/m2, mild or grade I obesity as a BMI of 30 to 34.9 kg/m2, grade II or more severe obesity as a BMI of 35 to 39.9 kg/m2, and extreme or grade III obesity as a BMI ≥40 kg/m2. Epidemiological studies focusing on persons of European descent have verified that these cut points are, indeed, associated with incremental risk for cardiovascular events and all-cause death.4–6 An awareness that appropriate BMI cut points for Asians may differ from those of Europeans has been largely based on observations that cardiovascular and metabolic risk in Asians occur at a lower BMI than in Europeans. For example, there is increasing evidence of a high prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus and elevated cardiovascular risk in certain Asian countries, despite an average BMI in these countries that is <25 kg/m2.7,8 Even for Asian-Americans, the prevalence of diabetes mellitus after adjustment for BMI is 60% higher than in their European counterparts.9 Article p 2111 The definition of clinically useful BMI cut points in Asian populations has been difficult, at least in part because of the limitations of previously used methodologies. Two general methodological approaches have been taken in the past to derive these BMI cut points in Asians: (1) recalculation of BMI cut …

Physical activity, body mass index, and mammographic density in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors.

To investigate the association between physical activity, body mass index (BMI), and mammographic density in a racially/ethnically diverse population-based sample of 522 postmenopausal women diagnosed with stage 0-IIIA breast cancer and enrolled in the Health, Eating, Activity, and Lifestyle Study. We collected information on BMI and physical activity during a clinic visit 2 to 3 years after diagnosis. Weight and height were measured in a standard manner. Using an interview-administered questionnaire, participants recalled the type, duration, and frequency of physical activities they had performed in the last year. We estimated dense area and percentage density as a continuous measure using a computer-assisted software program from mammograms imaged approximately 1 to 2 years after diagnosis. Analysis of covariance methods were used to obtain mean density across WHO BMI categories and physical activity tertiles adjusted for confounders. We observed a statistically significant decline in percentage density (P for trend = .0001), and mammographic dense area (P for trend = .0052), with increasing level of BMI adjusted for potential covariates. We observed a statistically significant decline in mammographic dense area (P for trend = .036) with increasing level of sports/recreational physical activity in women with a BMI of at least 30 kg/m2. Conversely, in women with a BMI less than 25 kg/m2, we observed a non-statistically significant increase in mammographic dense area and percentage density with increasing level of sports/recreational physical activity. Increasing physical activity among obese postmenopausal breast cancer survivors may be a reasonable intervention approach to reduce mammographic density.

The validity of the World Health Organisation's obesity body mass index criteria in a Turkish population: a hospital-based study.

Our aim was to determine the relationship between body fat percentage (BF%) and body mass index (BMI) and to evaluate the validity of World Health Organisation's BMI cut-off values for obesity. Adult out-patients (n=909, 249 men, 660 women), mean age; 40.5 +/- 14.1 years were included. According to WHO's BMI criteria, 440 subjects were obese (79 men, 361 women). The BF% of participants were measured using a bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) system (TANITA). Randomly selected 30 patients were also subjected to the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) procedure for evaluation of the validity of TANITA measurements. The BF% results obtained by DEXA and TANITA revealed good correlation (r =0.952, p= 0.382). There was a positive correlation between BF% and BMI (p<0.001) for both methods. Cut-off values for BMI were calculated as 28.0 kg/m2 for women, 28.2 kg/m2 for men, if obesity was defined as BF >= 25% in men, >= 35% in women according to WHOfs criteria. Using the new cut-off values, the frequency of obesity increased up to 33.9% in our group. The increase was more pronounced in men (67.1% vs. 26.6%). The WHO cut-off values underestimated the frequency of obesity in this population. Further studies are warranted for different ethnic groups.

Prevalance of morbid obesity and metabolic syndrome in U.S. adolescents and very young adults

The WHO body mass index (BMI) classes were developed primarily on an older adult population and may not adequately reflect increases in metabolic risk for a younger population. The purpose of this analysis was to estimate the numbers of adolescents and very young adults within adult obesity classes and to assess metabolic risk by obesity class and age in 5-year increments. We used SUDAAN and data from NHANES 1999–2002 to estimate the prevalence in the United States of adolescents (ages 13–17) and very young adults (ages 18–22) who fell into adult WHO obesity classes I (BMI 30–34.9), II (35–39.9) and III (>40, also called morbid obesity). We used the Adult Treatment Plan III criteria to define individuals as having metabolic syndrome if they had at least three of the following: impaired fasting glucose, abdominal obesity, high triglycerides, low HDL or hypertension. We estimate that 190,185 or 1% of U.S. adolescents and 552,547 or 3% of very young adults are in adult obesity class III. An additional 590,495 (6%) adolescents and 775,903 (4%) very young adults are in adult obesity class II. While the entire NHANES 1999–2002 population shows the expected increase in the prevalence of metabolic syndrome as obesity and age increase ( p < 0.0001) this dose response is not evident in adolescents and very young adults (classes II and III), all of whom had virtually identical risks of adult metabolic syndrome (42%–44%). This equates to 2.1 million individuals between the ages of 13 and 22 years old who already have adult metabolic syndrome. Over four million U.S. adolescents and very young adults have an obesity level that significantly increases their risk of morbidity and mortality from metabolic syndrome. The risk of metabolic syndrome in these young people is equal to that of the population aged 58 to 62 and higher than any normal weight group including those over 68 years old.

Using WHO's body mass index cutoff points to classify as overweight and obese underestimates the prevalence of overweight and obese among the Chinese

The recent report on trends in obesity in the WHO MONICA Project [ [1] Silventoinen K. Sans S. Tolonen H. Monterde D. Kuulasmaa K. Kesteloot H. et al. For the WHO MONICA project: trends in obesity and energy supply in the WHO MONICA project. Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 2004; 28: 710-718 Crossref PubMed Scopus (213) Google Scholar ] confirms that obesity is a worldwide problem. But I question the validity of applying the WHO's conventional cutoff points for body mass index (BMI) to classify as overweight (BMI=25) or obese (BMI=30) to the Chinese population. Erratum to “Using WHO's body mass index cutoff points to classify as overweight and obese underestimates the prevalence of overweight and obese among the Chinese” [Int. J. Cardiol. 103 (2005) 343]International Journal of CardiologyVol. 111Issue 1PreviewThe Publisher regrets to announce that errors occurred in the original publication of the above mentioned article. An erroneous ‘=’ sign has been incorrectly published instead to the ‘≥’ sign in paragraphs one and two. The correct lines are as follows: Full-Text PDF

Appropriate body-mass index for Asian populations and its implications for policy and intervention strategies

A WHO expert consultation addressed the debate about interpretation of recommended body-mass index (BMI) cut-off points for determining overweight and obesity in Asian populations, and considered whether population-specific cut-off points for BMI are necessary. They reviewed scientific evidence that suggests that Asian populations have different associations between BMI, percentage of body fat, and health risks than do European populations. The consultation concluded that the proportion of Asian people with a high risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease is substantial at BMIs lower than the existing WHO cut-off point for overweight (> or =25 kg/m2). However, available data do not necessarily indicate a clear BMI cut-off point for all Asians for overweight or obesity. The cut-off point for observed risk varies from 22 kg/m2 to 25 kg/m2 in different Asian populations; for high risk it varies from 26 kg/m2 to 31 kg/m2. No attempt was made, therefore, to redefine cut-off points for each population separately. The consultation also agreed that the WHO BMI cut-off points should be retained as international classifications. The consultation identified further potential public health action points (23.0, 27.5, 32.5, and 37.5 kg/m2) along the continuum of BMI, and proposed methods by which countries could make decisions about the definitions of increased risk for their population.