Infancy Weight Gain Predicts Childhood Body Fat and Age at Menarche in Girls

Abstract Context: Rapid postnatal weight gain has been associated with subsequent increased childhood adiposity. However, the contribution of rapid weight gain during specific infancy periods is not clear. Objective: We aimed to determine which periods of infancy weight gain are related to childhood adiposity and also to age at menarche in UK girls. Design, Setting, and Participants: A total of 2715 girls from a prospective UK birth cohort study participated in the study. Main Outcome Measures: Routinely measured weights and lengths at ages 2, 9, and 19 months were extracted from the local child health computer database. Body composition was assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at age 10 yr, and age at menarche was assessed by questionnaire (categorized into three groups: <12.0, 12.0–13.0, and >13.0 yr). Results: Faster early infancy weight gain between 0 and 2 months and also 2 to 9 months were associated with increased body fat mass relative to lean mass at age 10 yr and also with earlier age at menarche. Each +1 unit gain in weight sd score between 0 and 9 months was associated with an odds ratio (95% confidence interval) = 1.48 (1.27–1.60) for overweight (body mass index > 85th centile) at 10 yr, and 1.34 (1.21–1.49) for menarche at less than 12 yr. In contrast, subsequent weight gain between 9 and 19 months was not associated with later adiposity or age at menarche. Conclusions: In developed settings, rapid weight gain during the first 9 months of life is a risk factor for both increased childhood adiposity and early menarche in girls.

Download Full-text

Reference curves for body fat (%) for Danish children evaluated by skinfolds and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry

Endocrine Abstracts ◽

10.1530/endoabs.32.p792 ◽

2013 ◽

Author(s):

Christine Wohlfahrt-Veje ◽

Jeanette Tinggaard ◽

Annette Mouritsen ◽

Casper Hagen ◽

Mikkel Grunnet ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Body Fat ◽

Dual Energy ◽

X Ray ◽

Reference Curves

Download Full-text

Estimations of body fat by anthropometry or bioelectrical impedance differ from those by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in prefrail community-dwelling older women

Nutrition Research ◽

10.1016/j.nutres.2020.12.002 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Jessica S M da Silva ◽

Simone Biesek ◽

Audrin S Vojciechowski ◽

Victoria Z C Borba ◽

Estela I Rabito ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Older Women ◽

Body Fat ◽

Bioelectrical Impedance ◽

Dual Energy ◽

Community Dwelling ◽

X Ray

Download Full-text

Limitations of body mass index for counseling individuals with unilateral lower extremity amputation

Prosthetics and Orthotics International ◽

10.1177/0309364616650079 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 41 (2) ◽

pp. 186-193 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Alexandra P Frost ◽

Tracy Norman Giest ◽

Allison A Ruta ◽

Teresa K Snow ◽

Mindy Millard-Stafford

Keyword(s):

Body Mass Index ◽

Lower Extremity ◽

Health Risk ◽

Body Mass ◽

Body Fat ◽

Lower Limb ◽

Dual Energy ◽

Limb Loss ◽

Percent Body Fat ◽

X Ray

Background: Body composition is important for health screening, but appropriate methods for unilateral lower extremity amputees have not been validated. Objectives: To compare body mass index adjusted using Amputee Coalition equations (body mass index–Amputee Coalition) to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in unilateral lower limb amputees. Study design: Cross-sectional, experimental. Methods: Thirty-eight men and women with lower limb amputations (transfemoral, transtibial, hip disarticulation, Symes) participated. Body mass index (mass/height2) was compared to body mass index corrected for limb loss (body mass index–Amputee Coalition). Accuracy of classification and extrapolation of percent body fat with body mass index was compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Results: Body mass index–Amputee Coalition increased body mass index (by ~ 1.1 kg/m2) but underestimated and mis-classified 60% of obese and overestimated 100% of lean individuals according to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Estimated mean percent body fat (95% confidence interval) from body mass index–Amputee Coalition (28.3% (24.9%, 31.7%)) was similar to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry percent body fat (29.5% (25.2%, 33.7%)) but both were significantly higher ( p < 0.05) than percent body fat estimated from uncorrected body mass index (23.6% (20.4%, 26.8%)). However, total errors for body mass index and body mass index–Amputee Coalition converted to percent body fat were unacceptably large (standard error of the estimate = 6.8%, 6.2% body fat) and the discrepancy between both methods and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry was inversely related ( r = −0.59 and r = −0.66, p < 0.05) to the individual’s level of body fatness. Conclusions: Body mass index (despite correction) underestimates health risk for obese patients and overestimates lean, muscular individuals with lower limb amputation. Clinical relevance Clinical recommendations for an ideal body mass based on body mass index–Amputee Coalition should not be relied upon in lower extremity amputees. This is of particular concern for obese lower extremity amputees whose health risk might be significantly underestimated based on body mass index despite a “correction” formula for limb loss.

Download Full-text