83 research outputs found

    Prevalence of Obesity and the Relationship between the Body Mass Index and Body Fat: Cross-Sectional, Population-Based Data

    Get PDF
    Background: Anthropometric measures such as the body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference are widely used as convenient indices of adiposity, yet there are limitations in their estimates of body fat. We aimed to determine the prevalence of obesity using criteria based on the BMI and waist circumference, and to examine the relationship between the BMI and body fat.Methodology/Principal Findings: This population-based, cross-sectional study was conducted as part of the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. A random sample of 1,467 men and 1,076 women aged 20&ndash;96 years was assessed 2001&ndash;2008. Overweight and obesity were identified according to BMI (overweight 25.0&ndash;29.9 kg/m2; obesity 30.0 kg/m2) and waist circumference (overweight men 94.0–101.9 cm; women 80.0–87.9 cm; obesity men 102.0 cm, women $88.0 cm); body fat mass was assessed using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry; height and weight were measured and lifestyle factors documented by self-report. According to the BMI, 45.1% (95%CI 42.4&ndash;47.9) of men and 30.2% (95%CI 27.4&ndash;33.0) of women were overweight and a further 20.2% (95%CI 18.0&ndash;22.4) of men and 28.6% (95%CI 25.8&ndash;31.3) of women were obese. Using waist circumference, 27.5% (95%CI 25.1&ndash;30.0) of men and 23.3% (95%CI 20.8&ndash;25.9) of women were overweight, and 29.3% (95%CI 26.9&ndash;31.7) of men and 44.1% (95%CI 41.2&ndash;47.1) of women, obese. Both criteria indicate that approximately 60% of the population exceeded recommended thresholds for healthy body habitus. There was no consistent pattern apparent between BMI and energy intake. Compared with women, BMI overestimated adiposity in men, whose excess weight was largely attributable to muscular body builds and greater bone mass. BMI also underestimated adiposity in the elderly. Regression models including gender, age and BMI explained 0.825 of the variance in percent body fat.Conclusions/Significance: As the BMI does not account for differences in body composition, we suggest that gender- and age-specific thresholds should be considered when the BMI is used to indicate adiposity.<br /

    Determination of sin2 θeff w using jet charge measurements in hadronic Z decays

    Get PDF
    The electroweak mixing angle is determined with high precision from measurements of the mean difference between forward and backward hemisphere charges in hadronic decays of the Z. A data sample of 2.5 million hadronic Z decays recorded over the period 1990 to 1994 in the ALEPH detector at LEP is used. The mean charge separation between event hemispheres containing the original quark and antiquark is measured for bb̄ and cc̄ events in subsamples selected by their long lifetimes or using fast D*'s. The corresponding average charge separation for light quarks is measured in an inclusive sample from the anticorrelation between charges of opposite hemispheres and agrees with predictions of hadronisation models with a precision of 2%. It is shown that differences between light quark charge separations and the measured average can be determined using hadronisation models, with systematic uncertainties constrained by measurements of inclusive production of kaons, protons and A's. The separations are used to measure the electroweak mixing angle precisely as sin2 θeff w = 0.2322 ± 0.0008(exp. stat.) ±0.0007(exp. syst.) ± 0.0008(sep.). The first two errors are due to purely experimental sources whereas the third stems from uncertainties in the quark charge separations

    Measurement of the W mass by direct reconstruction in e+ee^+ e^- collisions at 172 GeV

    Get PDF
    The mass of the W boson is obtained from reconstructed invariant mass distributions in W-pair events. The sample of W pairs is selected from 10.65~pb1^{-1} collected with the ALEPH detector at a mean centre-of-mass energy of 172.09 \GEV. The invariant mass distribution of simulated events are fitted to the experimental distributions and the following W masses are obtained: WWqqqqmW=81.30+0.47(stat.)+0.11(syst.)GeV/c2WW \to q\overline{q}q\overline{q } m_W = 81.30 +- 0.47(stat.) +- 0.11(syst.) GeV/c^2, WWlνqq(l=e,μ)mW=80.54+0.47(stat.)+0.11(syst.)GeV/c2WW \to l\nu q\overline{q}(l=e,\mu) m_W = 80.54 +- 0.47(stat.) +- 0.11(syst.) GeV/c^2, WWτνqqmW=79.56+1.08(stat.)+0.23(syst.)GeV/C62WW \to \tau\nu q\overline{q} m_W = 79.56 +- 1.08(stat.) +- 0.23(syst.) GeV/C62. The statistical errors are the expected errors for Monte Carlo samples of the same integrated luminosity as the data. The combination of these measurements gives: mW=80.80+0.11(syst.)+0.03(LEPenergy)GeV/2m_W = 80.80 +- 0.11(syst.) +- 0.03(LEP energy) GeV/^2
    corecore