health Everything You Should Normalzed About Fat-Free Body Mass. Normalize of Normalized fat range body weight, height and waist circumference in a Dutch overweight working population. Cohen, D. In addition, you need fat free mass for better bone strength and musculature.

Video

Dieting is Making You Fatter? - Body Fat Set Point Change Theory

Normalized fat range -

This means lean athletes score high in the BMI scale despite not being obese or overweight. For instance, two men may weigh lbs. However, if you compare their bodies, one person is ripped with chiseled abs, while the other looks plain with a bulging midsection.

If you calculate their BMI, it comes out as The numbers may be the same, but the physical difference is striking. Moreover, it shows achieving an aesthetic physic requires muscle and strength training to literally get in shape. Here, BMI automatically assumes individuals gain weight from fat.

In this case, it becomes a negative health indicator. Therefore, FFMI is a better measuring tool for lean and active people. Fat-free mass is a component which not only considers muscles and connective tissue. It includes bones, internal organs, and water content in the body.

Basically, your body needs just the right amount of fat to keep it healthy. Athletes have low body fat which helps them perform at their peak. Lower body fat is the outcome when professional athletes train to reach optimum fitness.

The American Council on Exercise ACE published the following body fat chart according to different fitness levels. In a related study titled Body Composition and Isokinetic Strength of Professional Sumo Wrestlers , researchers found that some sumo wrestlers have exceptionally high FFMI scores which can significantly exceed normal ranges.

The study examined how profiles of body composition and force generation capability manifested in sumo wrestlers. It included 23 low to high ranking sumo wrestlers, 21 weight classified athletes, and 21 untrained men.

The table below provides a range of the participants' body composition. Researchers found that the median value of FFM relative to body height for higher-division Sumo wrestlers ranked high among previously reported data on heavyweight athletes. If anything, the study shows it's possible to develop a high percentage of lean mass despite a lot of fat.

In the last 30 years, illegal steroid use has become common practice in sports. To discourage performance enhancers, researchers came up with drug tests and ways to determine its use.

In , scientists published a study in the Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine titled Fat-Free Mass Index in Users and Nonusers of Anabolic-Androgenic Steroids.

The research uses information from the pre-steroid era to establish a baseline on possible steroid usage among modern athletes and bodybuilders. It included male athletes, with 83 steroid users and 74 non-users. Researchers found that many of the steroid users easily exceeded FFMI of 25, with some more than While it's possible to reach FFMI levels of 25 naturally, this limit can easily be exceeded with the use of steroids.

However, not everyone agrees that FFMI levels is a good predictor of steroid use. For one, bodybuilders may still be juicing even if their FFMI does not exceed Lyle McDonald, the fitness coach and researcher behind Bodyrecomposition. com , argues that around 30 athletes in history have crossed the FFMI threshold without steroid use.

America winners into question. Fat-free mass index in users and nonusers of anabolic-androgenic steroids uses information from the pre-steroid era to establish a baseline on likely steroid usage among modern athletes and bodybuilders.

The table below includes the performance of Mr. America winners from before the steroid era to some current athletes.

Apart from bodybuilding, illegal steroid use is seen in all types of sports. Here are a few examples. John Romano and Anthony Roberts are certified crossfit instructors behind Xbodyconcepts. com who have discussed the issue openly in their site.

Seven-time baseball MVP Barry Bonds has gone under question for illegal steroid use. Multi-dimensional models combine multiple biomarkers using a joint statistical model, rather than trying to compress their information into a single, scalar output.

Examples of 1D and 2D biomarker models are illustrated in Fig. Notice that in theory, it is possible to extend our models to a dimensionality higher than 2. A A 1D d-map for a given population. B The corresponding 1D p-map for a condition C of interest.

C A 2D d-map for a given population. D The corresponding 2D p-map. NORSE scores are indicated at the end of each row and column. A distribution map reports the probability distribution of a population as a function of input biomarkers Fig. A p-map is visualized via a grey-green-yellow—red colormap, with green indicating low prevalence and vice-versa for red.

For this, we use derivative-based sensitivity analysis Illustrative examples are presented in Fig. S2 of the Supplementary Material. Derivatives and gradients capture only local sensitivity of functions with respect to independent variables.

However, our experiments show a roughly linear relationship between disease prevalence and various biomarkers, thus justifying our approach see examples in Fig.

S3 of the Supplementary Material. In general, different biomarkers have different measurement units and vary in their value ranges. To compare sensitivities of diverse biomarkers with one another we first need to map their values to a canonical range.

We do so via a normalized sensitivity score namely NORSE which we define as follows. The z-score of a measurement represents its distance in terms of number of standard deviations from the mean.

The NORSE score is a unit-less number and can now be used to compare the risk predictive power of diverse biomarkers with respect to one another.

The blue and brown numbers on the side of a p-map are the NORSE scores computed for each row and column, respectively. Notice how in the example in Fig.

This important effect will be discussed in detail in the results section. These observations are enumerated upon in the sections that follow. The NORSE scores for 23 biomarkers and 6 medical conditions for adult men and women are shown in Table 1.

The last column reports NORSE scores averaged across conditions and genders. Such values are used to rank list all biomarkers. According to these results, WHR is the strongest health predictor, in the sense that normalized changes to WHR are associated with the largest changes in condition prevalence.

The waist-to-thigh ratio is second, ABSI is third and RFM is fourth. BMI is in the middle of the table and total body weight lower still. Standing height and leg length have slightly negative NORSE scores, suggesting that tall people with long legs are statistically associated with lower health risks.

Interestingly, the top performing biomarkers are all regional ones; specifically, measurements associated with abdominal fat e. In the middle of the table we have global composition biomarkers e. PBF, FMI, BMI ; and at the bottom, biomarkers that do not correlate much with body composition e.

NORSE scores were able to cluster all biomarkers into these three groups automatically. Note that PBF is the strongest of the global adiposity biomarkers. The bottom row in the table reports column-wise average NORSE scores. In our results, hypertension shows the largest average NORSE, and cancer the lowest.

As an example, the tables in Fig. As age increases diabetes prevalence increases, on average. The NORSE values follow a curve; they are low for young and elderly people, and they are higher in the middle.

Very young people tend to have low diabetes risk even for high WHR values, and older people tend to have high prevalence, independent of WHR. People in the middle are those where changing WHR may have the greatest influence on their diabetes risk.

C NORSE curve as a function of age. A 2D model associates two distinct biomarkers with the prevalence of a given condition. The example in Fig. Notice that when fixing the weight coordinate e.

Also, for a fixed waist e. This shows two things: 1 2D biomarker models can discriminate different levels of risk better than using only one biomarker at a time, and 2 There are cases where increases in body weight correspond to improvements in health risks.

Notice how all x-sensitivities in blue are negative, and all y-sensitivities in gold are positive. Here we explain the negative weight-risk correlation by separating the negative effects of fat from the positive effects of lean mass. In our 2D model, such separation happens naturally by controlling for waist circumference.

All participants within the same row have a similar waist circumference. We hypothesize that for those people, residual weight increases are mostly due to increases in lean muscle tissue, which tends to be associated with better health 38 , 39 , With this interpretation the observed prevalence trends remain explained and there is no paradox.

Two biomarkers can be combined together by e. taking a ratio as for WHR or through a joint 2D statistical model. In the former approach, some information is lost. S5 in Supplementary Material. Generally, Multi-dimensional models yield higher risk discrimination than 1D ones, as shown next.

Our 23 biomarkers combine into valid pairs. Each pair defines a 2D model, for which we measure its NORSE scores, across two genders and 6 health conditions. NORSE scores are calculated for both biomarkers both along the x and along the y dimensions.

For many models, one of those scores tends to be strongly negative increasing biomarker correlates with reduced risks and the other strongly positive increasing biomarker correlates with increased risks.

Table 2 presents results for the 10 models with the largest NORSE separation. The right-most column reports average NORSE separations across conditions and genders.

Those values are used to rank all biomarker pairs. In fact, keeping the input biomarkers separate as opposed to fusing them together into a single output allows us to subdivide the participants population into smaller and more homogeneous cohorts, for higher risk discrimination.

For both men and women, the largest NORSE separation is achieved by the hip—waist joint model. This confirms the power of using waist and hip circumferences for risk prediction see Table 1. More data ensures lower measurement noise and more confident results.

For that reason, our next example focuses on the weight-waist model. In panel A, for a fixed weight the cancer prevalence increases with increasing waist circumference.

When fixing the waist, the prevalence decreases with increasing weight. Panel B shows the same trends even after removing smokers from our analysis.

Similar results apply to hypertension panel C, D , and same trends have been observed for the other four conditions, with or without smokers in the analysis.

Age stratification results are presented in the Supplementary Material. A including smokers. B excluding smokers. C , D Same as above but for hypertension.

This study introduces a new way of assessing the strength of biomarkers as predictors of health risk changes. In contrast to AUC-ROC type techniques, here we estimate how much changes in input biomarkers affect changes in health risks.

We achieve that through a new normalized sensitivity score. However, a high sensitivity also means that a small error in the input measurement is likely to have a large, detrimental effect on the accuracy of the output health risk.

These observations, exposed by the analyses reported herein, lead us to argue that to benefit from the increased sensitivity of our models, it is necessary to use state-of-the-art digital anthropometrics technology to increase input accuracy and thus the accuracy of risk predictions.

Much literature discusses errors of measurements obtained using a measuring tape for example 41 , 42 , Recent progress in computer vision and photogrammetry offers accurate and inexpensive tools for measuring body composition and anthropometrics through optical scanners or even conventional smartphones 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , Limitations of the analysis presented here include: examination of cross-sectional data only, no longitudinal studies; establishing statistical associations rather than mechanistic understanding of cause and effect; lack of an official diagnosis for health conditions with reliance only on participants self-reported answers to a questionnaire; limited population size; treating diabetes as a single condition without distinction between type I and type II by far the most common ; and use of disease prevalence as a proxy for health risks.

This study advances a new way of estimating the power of different body composition biomarkers when predicting health risk changes. Our results indicate that waist and hip circumferences, either used in a ratio or in a joint 2D model, hold the strongest predictive power.

In general, regional body composition biomarkers produce the best results. We also show how joint biomarker models provide further resolution, prediction accuracy and the possibility to separate the negative effects of body fat from the positive effects of muscle mass. Also, focusing on sensitivity measures may help individuals understand what behavior changes affect their health the most, and embrace healthier habits.

Finally, combining our findings with emerging technology for body scanning and anthropometrics measurements promises to advance the way we assess obesity and associated health risks for everyone. Després, J.

Body fat distribution and risk of cardiovascular disease: An update. Circulation , — Article Google Scholar. Church, T. Cardiorespiratory fitness and body mass index as predictors of cardiovascular disease mortality among men with diabetes.

Article CAS Google Scholar. World Health Organization. Waist Circumference and Waist—Hip Ratio: Report of a WHO Expert Consultation WHO, Google Scholar. Berardi, G. et al. Association of sarcopenia and body composition with short-term outcomes after liver resection for malignant tumors.

JAMA Surg. Hales, C. Prevalence of obesity and severe obesity among adults: United States, — NCHS Data Brief , 1—8 Must, A. The disease burden associated with overweight and obesity.

JAMA , Papadopoulos, S. Correlates of weight stigma in adults with overweight and obesity: A systematic literature review. Obesity 23 , — Finkelstein, E. Annual medical spending attributable to obesity: Payer-and service-specific estimates. Health Aff.

Millwood 28 , w—w Wang, Y. Health and economic burden of the projected obesity trends in the USA and the UK. Lancet , — Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Defining Adult Overweight and Obesity. Online Jensen, M. ee Article PubMed Google Scholar. Wharton, S. Obesity in adults: A clinical practice guideline. CMAJ , E—E Wong, J. Comparison of obesity and metabolic syndrome prevalence using fat mass index, body mass index and percentage body fat.

PLoS ONE 16 , e Sommer, I. The performance of anthropometric tools to determine obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ross, R. Waist circumference as a vital sign in clinical practice: A Consensus Statement from the IAS and ICCR Working Group on Visceral Obesity.

Tomlinson, D. Body fat percentage, body mass index, fat mass index and the ageing bone: Their singular and combined roles linked to physical activity and diet.

Nutrients 11 , Vanitallie, T. Christakoudi, S. A Body Shape Index ABSI achieves better mortality risk stratification than alternative indices of abdominal obesity: Results from a large European cohort. Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar.

Woolcott, O. Relative fat mass as an estimator of whole-body fat percentage among children and adolescents: A cross-sectional study using NHANES.

Article ADS CAS Google Scholar. Ray, P. Statistical evaluation of a biomarker. Anesthesiology , — Mazzara, S. CombiROC: An interactive web tool for selecting accurate marker combinations of omics data. Hlatky, M. American Heart Association Expert Panel on Subclinical Atherosclerotic Diseases and Emerging Risk Factors and the Stroke Council.

Criteria for evaluation of novel markers of cardiovascular risk: A scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Cook, N. Use and misuse of the receiver operating characteristic curve in risk prediction. Pencina, M. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: From area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond.

Article MathSciNet Google Scholar. Saltelli, A. Sensitivity Analysis. Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics Wiley, Borgonovo, E. Sensitivity Analysis: An Introduction for the Management Scientist Springer, Book Google Scholar.

Sullivan, T. Introduction to Uncertainty Quantification Springer, MATH Google Scholar. Hsu, M. Biomarker selection for medical diagnosis using the partial area under the ROC curve. BMC Res. Notes 7 , 25 Liu, D. ROC analysis in biomarker combination with covariate adjustment.

Bellman, R. Dynamic programming. Science , 34—37 Abraham, A. Partial derivative-based sensitivity analysis of models describing target-mediated drug disposition. AAPS J. Anthropometric Reference Data for Children and Adults: United States, — Oreopoulos, A.

Body mass index and mortality in heart failure: A meta-analysis. Heart J.

Thank Normalizde for visiting nature. Normalizdd are using a browser version Nutrition for weightlifting limited support for CSS. To obtain the best Tange, we recommend you use Normmalized more up to date browser or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer. In the meantime, to ensure continued Normalized fat range, we are Normalized fat range the site without styles and JavaScript. The limitations of BMI as a measure of adiposity and health risks have prompted the introduction of many alternative biomarkers. However, ranking diverse biomarkers from best to worse remains challenging. This study aimed to address this issue by introducing three new approaches: 1 a calculus-derived, normalized sensitivity score NORSE is used to compare the predictive power of diverse adiposity biomarkers; 2 multiple biomarkers are combined into multi-dimensional models, for increased sensitivity and risk discrimination; and 3 new visualizations are introduced that convey complex statistical trends in a compact and intuitive manner.

Normalized fat range -

They were all measured in duplicate. Non-normally distributed data were expressed as median interquartile range [IQR] and compared using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.

Pearson correlation analysis was used to examine the relationship between serum concentrations of leptin and adiponectin and body fat mass.

Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the relationship of serum leptin and adiponectin concentrations with serum levels of inflammatory markers, as well as clinical data.

Statistical analysis was performed using JMP version 14 software © SAS Institute Inc. This study was approved by the Ethics Review Committees of Kansai Medical University Hospital, Takarazuka Hospital, Miyashima Rheumatism Orthopedic Clinic, and Sugano Orthopedic Clinic. Informed consent was obtained from all participants.

This study was carried out in accordance of the Declaration of Helsinki. The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Ghadge, A. Leptin as a predictive marker for metabolic syndrome. Cytokine , Article CAS Google Scholar. Brochu-Gaudreau, K. et al. Adiponectin action from head to toe. Endocrine 37 , 11—32 Tilg, H. Adipocytokines: mediators linking adipose tissue, inflammation and immunity.

Abella, V. Leptin in the interplay of inflammation, metabolism and immune system disorders. Fantuzzi, G. Adiponectin and inflammation: consensus and controversy. Allergy Clin. Smolen, J. Rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet , — Tian, G. Emerging role of leptin in rheumatoid arthritis. Fioravanti, A.

Tocilizumab modulates serum levels of adiponectin and chemerin in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: potential cardiovascular protective role of IL-6 inhibition. PubMed Google Scholar. Increased leptin levels in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis. Toussirot, É, Michel, F. The role of leptin in the pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis.

Life Sci. Chen, X. Adiponectin: a biomarker for rheumatoid arthritis?. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. Article Google Scholar.

Liu, D. Multifaceted roles of adiponectin in rheumatoid arthritis. Giles, J. Adiponectin is a mediator of the inverse association of adiposity with radiographic damage in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. Arita, Y. Paradoxical decrease of an adipose-specific protein, adiponectin, in obesity.

Gallagher, D. Healthy percentage body fat ranges: an approach for developing guidelines based on body mass index. Miyazaki, S. Guidelines for the management of obesity disease Nippon NaikaGakkaiZasshi. Google Scholar. Chawla, A. Macrophage-mediated inflammation in metabolic disease.

Hizmetli, S. Are plasma and synovial fluid leptin levels correlated with disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis?. Li, P. Low-molecular-weight adiponectin is more closely associated with disease activity of rheumatoid arthritis than other adiponectin multimeric forms. Cansu, B. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs increase serum adiponectin levels in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Yoshino, T. Elevated serum levels of resistin, leptin, and adiponectin are associated with C-reactive protein and also other clinical conditions in rheumatoid arthritis.

Zhang, H. Tumour necrosis factor-alpha exerts dual effects on human adipose leptin synthesis and release. Acedo, S. Participation of leptin in the determination of the macrophage phenotype: an additional role in adipocyte and macrophage crosstalk.

In Vitro Cell Dev. Ma, J. Serum matrix metalloproteinase-3 as a noninvasive biomarker of histological synovitis for diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. Mediators Inflamm. Koskinen, A. Leptin enhances MMP-1, MMP-3 and MMP production in human osteoarthritic cartilage and correlates with MMP-1 and MMP-3 in synovial fluid from OA patients.

Arnett, F. The American Rheumatism Association revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Aletaha, D. Steinbrocker, O. Therapeutic criteria in rheumatoid arthritis. Hochberg, M. The American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of global functional status in rheumatoid arthritis.

Beeson, W. Comparison of body composition by bioelectrical impedance analysis and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in Hispanic diabetics. Body Compos. CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar. Chihara, K. Procedures for the diagnosis of macro-follicle stimulating hormone FSH in a patient with high serum FSH concentrations.

Download references. This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan and from Ritsumeikan University. We thank Drs. Shigeo Miyashima, Hiroshi Sugano, Yoshio Ozaki, and Masato Baden for their support in collecting the clinical samples.

Department of Orthopedics, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan. Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ritsumeikan University, Nojihigashi, Kusatsu-city, Shiga, , Japan. You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar.

and H. designed the study, assayed, analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. obtained informed consent from participants and collected serum samples. assayed leptin, adiponectin, and MMP-3 concentrations.

contributed to the discussion and reviewed the manuscript. Correspondence to Naoki Hattori. Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.

If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. Reprints and permissions.

Re-evaluation of serum leptin and adiponectin concentrations normalized by body fat mass in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Sci Rep 10 , Download citation. Received : 01 July Accepted : 08 September Published : 28 September Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:. Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative.

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate. Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily. Skip to main content Thank you for visiting nature.

nature scientific reports articles article. Download PDF. Subjects Obesity Rheumatic diseases. Abstract Leptin and adiponectin are produced mainly in adipocytes and classified as adipocytokines because of their possible involvement in inflammation and immunity. Introduction Adipocytes produce several types of cytokines, termed adipocytokines, which include leptin and adiponectin 1 , 2.

Figure 1. Full size image. Figure 2. Figure 3. Table 1 Multiple regression analysis of serum concentrations of leptin and adiponectin with serum levels of inflammatory markers, as well as clinical data, in patients with RA.

Full size table. Table 2 Multiple regression analysis of serum concentrations of leptin and adiponectin with serum levels of CRP and MMP-3 in controls. Discussion The current study demonstrated that serum concentrations of leptin and adiponectin were positively and negatively correlated with body fat mass, respectively.

Conclusions Serum leptin and adiponectin concentrations normalized by body fat mass were elevated in RA. Methods Participants We examined patients with RA 26 males and females, Table 3 Clinical characteristics of subjects.

Ethics approval and consent to participate This study was approved by the Ethics Review Committees of Kansai Medical University Hospital, Takarazuka Hospital, Miyashima Rheumatism Orthopedic Clinic, and Sugano Orthopedic Clinic. Data availability The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References Ghadge, A. Article CAS Google Scholar Brochu-Gaudreau, K. Article CAS Google Scholar Tilg, H. Article CAS Google Scholar Abella, V. Article CAS Google Scholar Fantuzzi, G. Article CAS Google Scholar Smolen, J. Article CAS Google Scholar Tian, G. Article CAS Google Scholar Fioravanti, A.

PubMed Google Scholar Tian, G. Article CAS Google Scholar Toussirot, É, Michel, F. Article CAS Google Scholar Chen, X. Article Google Scholar Liu, D.

Article CAS Google Scholar Giles, J. Article CAS Google Scholar Arita, Y. Article CAS Google Scholar Gallagher, D. Article CAS Google Scholar Miyazaki, S. Google Scholar Chawla, A. Article CAS Google Scholar Hizmetli, S. Purpose of review: This review presents the latest clinical applications of bioelectrical impedance analysis.

Recent findings: Fat-free mass and body fat can be used to evaluate nutritional status by comparing individuals or groups of individuals with themselves or with reference values.

Percentile distributions are also useful in determining whether individuals or groups fall within the population range. Percentile ranks can also be used to define nutritional depletion and obesity.

The use of the fat-free mass and body fat mass indices has the advantage of compensating for differences in body height. The use of low, normal, high and very high fat-free mass and body fat mass indices ranges that correspond to underweight, normal, overweight and obese body mass index categories further aid in the nutritional assessment process.

Thank Normalzied for Pomegranate antioxidant supplements nature. You fxt using a browser version Nprmalized limited support for Normalized fat range. To obtain the best experience, we Normalied you use a more up to date browser or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer. In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript. Leptin and adiponectin are produced mainly in adipocytes and classified as adipocytokines because of their possible involvement in inflammation and immunity.