Objective: Tobacco smoke, as numerous studies have established, is due to some diseases related to the respiratory, cardio - circulatory and gastrointestinal systems. In addition, tobacco consumption is often associated with a decrease in weight, while former smokers often experience an increase in BMI. The purpose of this research is to test the behavior of body mass index in relation to a representative sample of the Italian population, covering the period 2004-2005. Design: Calculations were made using SPSS software. The data were stratified by age and gender, using odds ratio (OR) to determine the significance of smoking in relation to BMI. The OR was calculated both in a timely manner, both considering a confidence interval of 95%. Material and methods: In this research, we will analyze the variable BMIâ€, in relation to the variable tobacco smokeâ€, derived from the multipurpose ISTAT called Condizione di salute e ricorso ai servizi sanitari. The sample was stratified by age, 18 years and over, and gender. Results: The analysis shows that in 2005, 10% of the Italian population results in overweight, while 22% said they smoke; 23% of female smokers claiming to be underweight, while for the former smokers the value drops to 10%. For males, the difference in BMI between smokers and former smokers is minimal. The OR shows that weight gain among former smokers and smokers is actually due to custom/cessation from tobacco smoke. Conclusion: The structure of BMI in relation to smoking has confirmed the existence emerged in the literature, so that those who quit smoking reflects an increase in weight. However, the results highlighted by some foreign studies, which propose an increase in obesity among former smokers, is not confirmed in the Italian population.Keywords: body mass index; smoking; odds ratio

De Candia, Gioacchino

English

Innovare Academic Sciences: E-Journals

   Original  study  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CIGARETTE SMOKING AND BODY MASS INDEX IN THE ITALIAN POPULATION GIOACCHINO DE CANDIA Studio de Candia 70038 Terlizzi (BA) ITALY. Email : gioacchino.decandia@fastwebnet.it  Received:1 September 2014, Revied and Accepted: 10 November 2014 ABSTRACT Objective: Tobacco smoke, as numerous studies have established, is due to some diseases related to the respiratory, cardio - circulatory and gastrointestinal systems. In addition, tobacco consumption is often associated with a decrease in weight, while former smokers often experience an increase in BMI. The purpose of this research is to test the behavior of body mass index in relation to a representative sample of the Italian population, covering the period 2004-2005.  Design: Calculations were made using SPSS software. The data were stratified by age and gender, using odds ratio (OR) to determine the significance of smoking in relation to BMI. The OR was calculated both in a timely manner, both considering a confidence interval of 95%.  Material and methods: In this research, we will analyze the variable “BMI”, in relation to the variable “tobacco smoke”, derived from the multipurpose ISTAT called Condizione di salute e ricorso ai servizi sanitari. The sample was stratified by age, 18 years and over, and gender.  Results: The analysis shows that in 2005, 10% of the Italian population results in overweight, while 22% said they smoke; 23% of female smokers claiming to be underweight, while for the former smokers the value drops to 10%. For males, the difference in BMI between smokers and former smokers is minimal. The OR shows that weight gain among former smokers and smokers is actually due to custom/cessation from tobacco smoke.  Conclusion: The structure of BMI in relation to smoking has confirmed the existence emerged in the literature, so that those who quit smoking reflects an increase in weight. However, the results highlighted by some foreign studies, which propose an increase in obesity among former smokers, is not confirmed in the Italian population.  Keywords: body mass index; smoking; odds ratio.  INTRODUCTION Tobacco smoke, as numerous studies have established, is due to some diseases related to the respiratory, cardio - circulatory and gastrointestinal[1,2]. In this case, smoking acts as an accelerator of metabolism, due to the nicotine content of cigarettes. Therefore, the consumption of tobacco is often associated with a decrease of the weight and, consequently, a decrease in body mass index; by contrast, those who stop smoking may experience an increase in weight and body mass index. Furthermore, the association of smoking styles of sedentary behavior may produce more dyscrasias and diseases in individuals[3-11]. Many are the studies and research carried out at the international level on the relationship between smoking and the development of body weight[12-25[. However, it seems to be missing in the Italian population of rigorous studies on the subject and capillaries. The purpose of this research is to test the behavior of body mass index in relation to a representative sample of the Italian population, covering the period 2004 - 2005, comparing it with the people who, at the time of the survey, stated that they smoke, they have stopped or never having been smokers. Subjects and methods In this research, we will analyze the variable “BMI”, in relation to the variable “tobacco smoke”, derived from the multipurpose ISTAT called Condizione di salute e ricorso ai servizi sanitari, created in 2004 – 2005[26]. The subjects studied as part of the investigation are: health conditions (perception of health status, presence of chronic diseases, etc.), the presence of disability, lifestyle (smoking habits, physical activity, etc.) the prevention, the use of health services, the use of drugs or unconventional therapies and the path of motherhood from pregnancy to breastfeeding. In order to minimize the effect of seasonal phenomena, of particular relevance to the issues of health, the survey was conducted on a quarterly basis in the months of March, June, September and December on the resident population in Italy, net of the permanent members of cohabitation. Every three months, was interviewed a quarter of the total sample. The sample has two stages with stratification of the units of the first stage (Towns). The sample size has been expanded over time, with the assistance of the National Health Fund mandated by the State-Regions Conference to allow regional and sub-regional estimates. The information was collected through direct interview for a part of the questions. In cases where the individual was not available to interview for particular reasons, the information was provided by another member of the family. For another part of the questions has been provided as auto. The survey unit is constituted by the family of fact (FF) associated with the family registry (FA) sampled. The family is in fact defined as the set of people who usually live in the same dwelling and are related by kinship, affinity, affection or friendship. Note that for the detection of a FF are more important than the concepts of “home” and “usual residence”, which is not the actual birth registration of individuals living together. Within each FF can be detected none, one or more families. The definition of family is more restrictive than that of the family. In fact, per household means: 1. married or cohabiting couple without children or with children never married nor cohabiting or having children of their own; 2. a single parent with one or more children never married nor cohabiting or having children of their own. The members of the family that do not meet the above requirements shall be considered as “isolated members”. For each survey, it was decided to extrapolate the variables related to the weight and height of individuals. The survey, now no longer in existence, was used in this research to the body of the sample, in addition to the presence of multiple variables related to health conditions, as well as lifestyle. The sample was stratified by age, 18 years and over, and gender. Data analysis Vol 3, Issue 1 , 2015               ISSN: 2347-5536 Candia  et al. Innovare Journal of Health Sciences, Vol 3, Issue 1, 2015, 1-4  2  Calculations were made using SPSS software. The data were stratified by age and gender, using descriptive statistics to analyze the salient features of the variables and the odds ratio (OR) to determine the significance of smoking in relation to BMI. The OR was calculated both in a timely manner, both considering a confidence interval of 95%. Results and discussion The descriptive statistics are summarized in Table 1. It is apparent that 43.7% of Italians are overweight, while 22% say they smoke (compared to 55.4% who say they have never smoked) at the time of the interview. Stratification by age shows that the working-age population amounted to 77.6% of the total, while you generally get almost equal: 47.7% males and 52.3% females. Table 1 Descriptive statistics for the entire sample (N=105844) Variables % BMI   Until to 19,99 3.4 18.50 – 24.99 53.0 25,00 - 29,99 33.6 30,00 - 34,99 8.4 40,00 - 44,99 1.5 45 and over 0.1 Smoking habits   Smokers 22.0 Former smokers 22.6 Never smokers 55.4 Gender   Male 47.7 Female 52.3 Age   18 - 25 10.4 26 - 35 17.0 36 - 45 19.0 46 - 55 16.4 56 - 65 14.8 oltre 65 22.4 Variables Mean BMI 24.79 Age 49.19  Going in the analysis for smoking status, gender and characteristics of BMI (overweight, underweight) the following graphs show the evolution of intersections for these variables.  In general, there is an increase in body weight among former smokers compared to smokers. The analysis by gender shows that the female part of the population was affected by a greater increase in BMI among former smokers, compared to female smokers (Figures 2, 4 and 6). The male part of the Italian population, in absolute terms, give the biggest contributor to the increase in BMI than women among former smokers, ex-smokers as males tend to serve  a more   significant  weight gain  than females, when they stop      smoking. Interesting analysis by age group, which still shows a marked underweight for female youth classes, analyzed more carefully in other studies[27]. Regarding the male component of the Italian population, there is a general tendency to ”excess weight” for each age class (Figures 1, 3 and 5). As for the female, the youngest  Candia  et al. Innovare Journal of Health Sciences, Vol 3, Issue 1, 2015, 1-4  3  age (18-25) shows a higher tendency to “underweight”. The next class (26-35) shows an increase of overweight women, which exceed those    in under  weight. This feature   is as  true for smokers, former  smokers than for never smokers and, although former smokers show a further increase of the “overweight” compared to the other two variables related to smoking. It should be noted that the female part of the population is, especially in the age groups younger, more attentive to weight control, compared to their male counterparts, regardless of the habit of smoking tobacco. A better contribution to this analysis comes from processing of odds ratio, which in Table 2 shows the values of the OR in relation to BMI and smoking habits. In the category “non-smoking” have been merged both “former-smokers”, and the “never smokers”. The variable “underweight” sum the values of BMI less than 18.50, while the variable “overweight2 sum the values of BMI greater than 24.99.  Table 2 Values of OR in relation to BMI and smoking habits Smoking habits Underweight Overweight Value Confidence interval 95% Value Confidence interval 95% Lower Upper Lower Upper Smokers/No smokers 1.212 1.126 1.304 0.984 0.978 0.991 Smokers/Former smokers 2.314 2.076 2.579 0.951 0.944 0.957 Former smokers/Never smokers 0.421 0.383 0.464 1.055 1.049 1.060 Smokers/Never smokers 0.975 0.904 1.051 1.002 0.995 1.009  The results clearly show that smokers are serving on average lower BMI values than in former-smokers and non-smokers in general. There appears to be little difference between smokers and never-smokers. For former smokers, the OR values are greater than 1, so   those who have stopped smoking affected, indeed, an increase in weight; on the contrary, the values of the OR for former smokers are significantly less than 1 for the variable underweight. A better explanation of this phenomenon comes from the analysis of the OR for gender, summarized in Tables 3 and 4.  Table 3 Values of OR in relation to BMI and smoking habits (females) Smoking habits Underweight Overweight Value Confidence interval 95% Value Confidence interval 95% Lower Upper Lower Upper Smokers/No smokers 1.875 1.740 2.020 0.876 0.858 0.894 Smokers/Former smokers 2.039 1.819 2.285 0.866 0.846 0.886 Former smokers/Never smokers 0.904 0.816 1.002 1.014 1.000 1.028 Smokers/Never smokers 1.844 1.708 1.990 0.878 0.860 0.896  Table 4 Values of OR in relation to BMI and smoking habits (males) Smoking habits  Underweight Overweight Value Confidence interval 95% Value Confidence interval 95% Lower Upper Lower Upper Smokers/No smokers 1.320 1.090 1.599 0.995 0.991 0.999 Smokers/Former smokers 2.178 1.669 2.808 0.988 0.985 0.992 Former smokers/Never smokers 0.436 0.344 0.554 1.013 1.009 1.016 Smokers/Never smokers 0.951 0.775 1.166 1.001 0.997 1.006  The analysis by gender essentially confirms the findings in the overall analysis (Table 2). Note the greater contribution of female non-smokers, respects to those who have never smoked, in relation to an accentuated weight (Table 3). Regarding the comparison between former smokers and never smokers, the OR values are similar both for males, both for females. CONCLUSIONS The structure of BMI in relation to smoking has confirmed the existence emerged in the literature, so that those who quit smoking reflects an increase in weight. However, the results highlighted by some foreign studies, which propose an increase in obesity among former smokers, is not confirmed in the Italian population, analyzed in 2005. For Italians, both males and females, weight gain appears to be content among former smokers without encroaching obesity. Therefore, it should be analyzed more carefully the temporal dynamics, especially in relation to the period in which it is smoked, in relation to the period in which it was stopped smoking, as in other studies[28]. Just always pay attention to the risks and costs associated with obesity [29-30], but it is necessary capillarizzare attention on real causes, which are not necessarily linked to smoking. More attention should be paid to the need to analyze the structure in advance, over time, the physical characteristics of the population in relation to BMI[31], but also to other physiological aspects. Only in this way                you  can define exhaustively the real contribution of smoking to the  increase or decrease in weight, as well as many other human diseases. REFERENCES 1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Smoking attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and productivity losses—United States 2000–2004, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 2008, vol. 57, no. 45: 1226–1228. 2. Accortt NA, Waterbor JW, Beall C, Howard G. Chronic disease mortality in a cohort of smokeless tobacco users, Am J Epidemiol 2002; 156: 730-737. 3. World Health Organization. Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases, Report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation, WHO technical report series no. 916, World Health Organization: Geneva; 2003. 4. Kaufman A, Augustson EM, and Patrick H. Unraveling the Relationship between Smoking and Weight: The Role of Sedentary Behavior, Journal of Obesity, Volume 2012; Hindawi Publishing Corporation. 5. Seidell JC, Perusse L, Despres JP, Bouchard C. Waist and hip circumferences have independent and opposite effects on cardiovascular disease risk factors: the Quebec Family Study, Am J Clin Nutr 2001; 74: 315–321. 6. Manson JE, Coditz GA, Stampfer MJ, Willett WC, Rosner B, Manson RR, Speizer FE, Hennekens CH. A prospective study of Candia  et al. Innovare Journal of Health Sciences, Vol 3, Issue 1, 2015, 1-4  4  obesity and risk of coronary heart disease in women, N Engl J Med 1990; 322: 882–889. 7. Shukla HC, Gupta PC, Mehta HC, Hebert JR. Descriptive epidemiology of body mass index in an urban adult population living in western India, J Epidemiol Community Health 2002; 56: 876-880. 8. Goodarz D, Ding EL, Mozaffarian D et al. The preventable causes of death in the U.S.: comparative risk assessment of dietary, lifestyle, and metabolic risk factors, Public Library of Science 2009; vol. 6, no. 1: 1–23. 9. Flegal KM. Epidemiologic aspects of overweight and obesity in the United States, Physiol Behav 2005; 15: 599–602.  10. Proper KI, Singh AS, Mechelen WW and Chinapaw MJM. Sedentary behaviors and health outcomes among adults: a systematic review of prospective studies, The American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2011; vol. 40, no. 2: 174–182. 11. E. J. Jacobs, C. C. Newton, Y.Wang et al. Waist circumference and all-cause mortality in a large US cohort, Archives of Internal Medicine 2010; vol. 170, no. 15: 1293–1301. 12. Akbartabartoori M, Lean MEJ and Hankey CR. Cigarette smoking, body mass index, body shape, International Journal of Obesity 2005; 29: 236–243. 13. John U, Hanke M, Rumpf HJ and Thyrian JR. Smoking status, cigarettes per day, and their relationship to overweight and obesity among former and current smokers in a national adult general population sample, International Journal of Obesity 2005 29: 1289–1294. 14. Burke JP, Hazuda HP and Stern MP. Rising trend in obesity in Mexican Americans and non-Hispanic whites: is it due to cigarette smoking cessation?, International Journal of Obesity 2000; 24: 1689-1694. 15. Bamia C, Trichopoulou A, Lenas D and Trichopoulos D. Tobacco smoking in relation to body fat mass and distribution in a general population sample, International Journal of Obesity 2004; 28: 1091–1096. 16. Chhabra P, Chhabra SK. Effect of smoking on body mass index: a community-based study, National Journal of Community Medicine, Vol 2 Issue 3, Oct-Dec 2011: 325-330. 17. Pednekar MS, Gupta PC, Shukla HC and Hebert JR. Association between tobacco use and body mass index in urban Indian population: implications for public health in India, BMC Public Health 2006; 6:70. 18. Sneve M, Jorde R. Cross-sectional study on the relationship between body mass index and smoking, and longitudinal changes in body mass index in relation to change in smoking status: The Tromsø Study, Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 2008; 36: 397–407. 19. Spring B., Howe D., Berendsen M. et al. Behavioral intervention to promote smoking cessation and prevent weight gain: a systematic review and meta-analysis, Addiction 2009; vol. 104, no. 9: 1472–1486. 20. Canoy D, Wareham N, Luben R,Welch A, Bingham S, Day N et al. Cigarette smoking and fat distribution in 21828 British men and women: a population-based study, Obes Res 2005; 13: 1466–1475. 21. Lahti-Koski M, Pietinen P, Heliovaara M, Vartiainen E. Associations of body mass index and obesity with physical activity, food choices, alcohol intake, and smoking in the 1982–1997 FINRISK studies, Am J Clin Nutr 2002; 75: 809–817. 22. Li MD, Kane JK, Konu O. Nicotine, body weight and potential implications in the treatment of obesity, Curr Top Med Chem 2003; 3: 899–919. 23. Pomerleau CS, Zucker AN, Stewart AJ. Characterizing concerns about post-cessation weight gain: results from a national survey of women smokers, Nicotine Tob Res 2001; 3: 51–60. 24. Rasmussen F, Tynelius P, Kark M. Importance of smoking habits for longitudinal and age-matched changes in body mass index: a cohort study of Swedish men and women, Prev Med 2003; 37: 1–9. 25. Chinn S, Jarvis D, Melotti R, Luczynska C, Ackermann-Liebrich U, Anto JM, et al. Smoking cessation, lung function, and weight gain: a follow-up study, Lancet 2005; 365: 1629–35. 26. ISTAT. Condizione di salute e ricorso ai servizi sanitari, Indagine multiscopo sulle famiglie, 2005; Rome 27. Canzian G. Tendenze nel consumo di tabacco fra i giovani in Alto Friuli, Tabaccologia 2009; 2-3: 17-23. 28. Robb CA, Huston SJ and Finke MS. The mitigating influence of time preference on the relation between smoking and BMI scores, International Journal of Obesity 2008; 32: 1670–1677. 29. Chou S-Y, Grossman M, Saffer H. An economic analysis of adult obesity: results from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, J Health Econ 2004; 23: 565–587. 30. Davis C, Levitan RD, Muglia P, Bewell C, Kennedy JL. Decisionmaking deficits and overeating: a risk model for obesity, Obes Res 2004; 12: 929–935. 31. de Candia G. The weight of the Italians: application of the Gaussian curve to the body mass index, Human Biology Review 2014; 3 (1): 95-104.  

Relationship between cigarette smoking and body mass index in the Italian population

https://innovareacademics.in/journals/index.php/ijhs/article/download/2864/1869/14668

Relationship between cigarette smoking and body mass index in the Italian population

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Innovare Academic Sciences: E-Journals