Associations Between Anthropometrics, Adiposity And Mortality In Individuals With A History Of Weight Cycling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The cycling of body weight is associated with increased weight gain (Van wye et al., 2007) as well as changes in body composition (Manore et al., 1991) and fat distribution (Rodin et al., 1990). Although some studies have found negative metabolic effects (Vergnaud et al., 2008) and increased mortality risk (Folsom et al., 1996) consequent to weight cycling, others do not (Montani et al., 2006). Thus, whether individuals with a history of weight cycling are at increased adiposity or elevated health risk for a given body weight requires further study. PURPOSE: To quantify the impact of weight cycling on body composition and investigate its effects on the relative risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and all-cause mortality. METHODS: Data from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) observational study was obtained from the NHLBI (N=5675; age 50 - 79 y) and used for the analysis. Participants were classified as weight cyclers (WgtC; 37%) if they had reported that their weight had gone up and down by ≥10lb. Multiple linear regression was used to quantify the relationship between waist circumference (WC; cm), % body fat (%BF - assessed by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry), and body mass index (BMI; kg.m-2). To assess subsequent risk of mortality, Cox regressions were used to examine the effect of weight cycling for a given BMI, %BF or WC, adjusting for age, physical activity, and dietary fat consumption. RESULTS: For a given BMI, %BF and WC were higher in WgtC than non-WgtC (P<0.001). Similarly, risk for all-cause mortality was significantly higher in WgtC as compared to non-WgtC for a given BMI (HR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.01-1.46), but not WC (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.99-1.42). Alternatively, CVD mortality risk was not different between WgtC and non-WgtC for a given BMI (HR: 1.31, 95% CI: 0.94-1.83) or WC (HR: 1.31, 95% CI: 0.94-1.83). With respect to %BF, risk for both all-cause and CVD mortality was higher in WgtC versus non-WgtC (HR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.09-1.58; HR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.12-2.18, respectively). Implications: For a given BMI, women with a history of weight cycling have a higher %BF and WC. As weight cycling is associated with a higher risk of CVD and all-cause mortality even after adjusting for increased adiposity, these results have implications for the prediction of health risk within current obesity management guidelines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".