Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:05:39.771Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Body mass index: a measure of fatness or leanness?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Alan M. Nevill  and
Roger L. Holder
Alan M. Nevill
Affiliation:
School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT
Roger L. Holder
Affiliation:
School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The relationship between body fat and stature-adjusted weight indices was explored. Assuming the term height2 is a valid indicator of a subject's lean body mass, height2/weight was shown to be an accurate measure of percentage lean body mass and, as such, a better predictor of percentage body fat than the traditional body mass index (BMI; weight/height2). The name, lean body mass index (LBMI), is proposed for the index height2/weight. These assumptions were confirmed empirically using the results from the Allied Dunbar National Fitness Survey (ADNFS). Using simple allometric modelling, the term heightp explained 74% of the variance in lean body mass compared with less than 40% in body weight. For the majority of ADNFS subjects the fitted exponent from both analyses was approximately p = 2, the only exception being the female subjects aged 55 years and over, where the exponent was found to be significantly less than 2. Using estimates of percentage body fat as the dependent variable, regression analysis was able to confirm that LBMI was empirically, as well as theoretically, superior to the traditional BMI. Finally, when the distributional properties of the two indices were compared, BMI was positively skewed and hence deviated considerably from a normal distribution. In contrast, LBMI was found to be both symmetric and normally distributed. When height and weight are recorded in centimetres and kilograms respectively, the suggested working normal range for LBMI is 300–500 with the median at 400.

Keywords

Regression modelsPercentage body fatLean body mass
Type
Dietary assessment and body composition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 73 , Issue 4 , April 1995 , pp. 507 - 516
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1995

References

Abdel-Malek, A. K., Mukherjee, D. & Roche, A. F. (1985). A method of constructing an index of obesity. Human Biology 57, 415–430.Google ScholarPubMed
Allied Dunbar National Fitness Survey (1992). Main Findings. London: Sports Council and the Health Education Authority.Google Scholar
Benn, R. T. (1971). Some mathematical properties of weight-for-height indices used as measures of fadiposity. British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine 25, 42–50.Google Scholar
Box, G. E. P. & Cox, D. R. (1964). An analysis of transformations (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 26, 211–252.Google Scholar
Cole, T. J. (1991). Weight-stature indices to measure underweight, overweight and obesity. In Anthropometric Assessment of Nutritional Status, pp. 83–111 [Himes, J. H. editor]. New York: Wiley-Liss.Google Scholar
Deurenberg, P., Weststrate, J. A. & Seidell, J. C. (1991). Body mass index as a measure of fatness: age- and sex- specific prediction formulas. British Journal of Nutrition 65, 105–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durnin, J. V. & Womersley, J. (1974). Body fat assessed from total body density and its estimation from skinfold thickness measurements on 481 men and women aged 16 to 72 years. British Journal of Nutrition 32, 77–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Filliben, J.J. (1975). The probability plot correlation coefficient test for normality. Technometrics 17, 111–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrow, J. S. & Webster, J. (1985). Quetelet's index (fV/H2) as a measure of fatness. International Journal of Obesity 9, 147–153.Google Scholar
MINITAB (1989). Reference Manual. Minitab Inc., 3081, Enterprise Drive, State College, PA 16801.Google Scholar
Nevill, A. M. & Holder, R. L. (1994). Modelling maximum oxygen uptake: a case study in non-linear regression formulation and comparison. Applied Statistics 43, 653–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quételet, L. A. (1869). Physique Sociale, Vol. 2. Brussels: C. Muquardt.Google Scholar