Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

A comparison of four methods of estimating the body composition of male endurance athletes.
Eur J Clin Nutr. 1992 Nov; 46(11):773-84.EJ

Abstract

Comparisons were effected of the following four methods of estimating the percent body fat (%BF) of 12 highly trained male endurance athletes (mean +/- SD = 2.20 +/- 4.9 years, 176.8 +/- 5.9 cm 64.2 +/- 6.4 kg): underwater weighing (UWW), total body water (TBW), total body potassium (TBK) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). The DEXA mean of 6.8% BF was significantly less (P < 0.05) than those estimated via UWW: 9.7% BF; TBW: 10.6% BF (fat-free mass of FFM = 72.0% H2O); and TBK: 9.7% BF (FFM = 66.6 mmol K.kg-1). Nevertheless, the DEXA % BF correlated 0.746 and 0.737 (both P < 0.01) with those from UWW and TBW, respectively; these were the only correlation coefficients to attain statistical significance (P < or = 0.05). Despite the similar means for UWW, TBW and TBK, 12 of the 36 individual differences between these three methods ranged from 3.2 to 10.4% BF. A critical assumption of UWW, which is regarded by many as the criterion method for the estimation of % BF, is that the FFM has a density of 1.100 g.cm-3. Use of in vivo-measured TBW and bone mineral (via DEXA) for the computation of FFM densities for our subjects, while assuming that the two other components of the FFM (protein and non-bone mineral) remained constant, resulted in scores ranging from 1.09541 to 1.10246 g.cm-3 (mean +/- SD = 1.09881 +/- 0.00254 g.cm-3). FFM and % BF differences between use of a constant FFM density of 1.100 g.cm-3 and the individual values ranged from -1.02 to 0.57 kg (mean +/- SD = -0.28 +/- 0.60 kg) and from -0.9 to 1.7% BF (mean +/- SD = 0.5 +/- 0.9% BF), respectively. It may be concluded that with young male athletes: (1) use of constants based on normal male cadavers yielded similar group means for % BF determined by UWW, TBW and TBK but the DEXA % BF correlated significantly with those from UWW and TBW; and (2) in vivo measurements of individual differences in TBW and bone mineral support the use of conventional UWW for the estimation of % BF.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Exercise Physiology Laboratory, School of Education, Flinders University of South Australia, Adelaide.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

1425531

Citation

Withers, R T., et al. "A Comparison of Four Methods of Estimating the Body Composition of Male Endurance Athletes." European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, vol. 46, no. 11, 1992, pp. 773-84.
Withers RT, Smith DA, Chatterton BE, et al. A comparison of four methods of estimating the body composition of male endurance athletes. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1992;46(11):773-84.
Withers, R. T., Smith, D. A., Chatterton, B. E., Schultz, C. G., & Gaffney, R. D. (1992). A comparison of four methods of estimating the body composition of male endurance athletes. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 46(11), 773-84.
Withers RT, et al. A Comparison of Four Methods of Estimating the Body Composition of Male Endurance Athletes. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1992;46(11):773-84. PubMed PMID: 1425531.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - A comparison of four methods of estimating the body composition of male endurance athletes. AU - Withers,R T, AU - Smith,D A, AU - Chatterton,B E, AU - Schultz,C G, AU - Gaffney,R D, PY - 1992/11/1/pubmed PY - 1992/11/1/medline PY - 1992/11/1/entrez SP - 773 EP - 84 JF - European journal of clinical nutrition JO - Eur J Clin Nutr VL - 46 IS - 11 N2 - Comparisons were effected of the following four methods of estimating the percent body fat (%BF) of 12 highly trained male endurance athletes (mean +/- SD = 2.20 +/- 4.9 years, 176.8 +/- 5.9 cm 64.2 +/- 6.4 kg): underwater weighing (UWW), total body water (TBW), total body potassium (TBK) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). The DEXA mean of 6.8% BF was significantly less (P < 0.05) than those estimated via UWW: 9.7% BF; TBW: 10.6% BF (fat-free mass of FFM = 72.0% H2O); and TBK: 9.7% BF (FFM = 66.6 mmol K.kg-1). Nevertheless, the DEXA % BF correlated 0.746 and 0.737 (both P < 0.01) with those from UWW and TBW, respectively; these were the only correlation coefficients to attain statistical significance (P < or = 0.05). Despite the similar means for UWW, TBW and TBK, 12 of the 36 individual differences between these three methods ranged from 3.2 to 10.4% BF. A critical assumption of UWW, which is regarded by many as the criterion method for the estimation of % BF, is that the FFM has a density of 1.100 g.cm-3. Use of in vivo-measured TBW and bone mineral (via DEXA) for the computation of FFM densities for our subjects, while assuming that the two other components of the FFM (protein and non-bone mineral) remained constant, resulted in scores ranging from 1.09541 to 1.10246 g.cm-3 (mean +/- SD = 1.09881 +/- 0.00254 g.cm-3). FFM and % BF differences between use of a constant FFM density of 1.100 g.cm-3 and the individual values ranged from -1.02 to 0.57 kg (mean +/- SD = -0.28 +/- 0.60 kg) and from -0.9 to 1.7% BF (mean +/- SD = 0.5 +/- 0.9% BF), respectively. It may be concluded that with young male athletes: (1) use of constants based on normal male cadavers yielded similar group means for % BF determined by UWW, TBW and TBK but the DEXA % BF correlated significantly with those from UWW and TBW; and (2) in vivo measurements of individual differences in TBW and bone mineral support the use of conventional UWW for the estimation of % BF. SN - 0954-3007 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/1425531/A_comparison_of_four_methods_of_estimating_the_body_composition_of_male_endurance_athletes_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -