Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T12:37:45.649Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Perrcentage body fat and prevalence of obesity in a UK offshore population

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

I. M. Light
Affiliation:
Robert Gordon's Institute of Technology, Offshore Survival Centre, 352 King Street, Aberdeen AB9 2TQ
M Gibson
Affiliation:
Robert Gordon's Institute of Technology, Department of Mathematics and Computing Studies, 352 King Street, Aberdeen AB9 2TQ
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Body-weight, body height and skinfold measurements were taken in 419 adult males working in the UK offshsore oil industry. Percentage body fat was estimated from skinfold thicknesses and the Quetelet index (weight: height2) determined.

2. The prevalence of overweightness, assessed from the Quetelet index, in the age groups 20–29, 30–39 and 40–49 years was 31.6, 50.0 and 66.2% respectively. The Office of Population Census and Surveys (1981) showed that for age-matched groups, the incidence of overweightness in an onshore population was 26, 40 and 50% respectively.

3. The percentage body fat for each respective age group was greater than that reported for an age-matched onshore population.

4. The Quetelet index was significantly related to body fat (r 0.765, P < 0.0001) and poorly correlated with height, thus this weight: height relation may be utilized in the assessment of overweightness in offshore personnel.

5. In conclusion it appears that the offshore population had a higher percentage body fat than their onshore peers and that the prevalence of overweightness was also greater.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1986

References

REFERENCES

Carlson, L. D., Hsieh, A. C. L., Fullington, F. & Elsner, R. W. (1958). Aerospace Medicine 29, 142152.Google Scholar
Crosbie, W. A., Clarke, M. B., Cox, R. A. F., Mclver, N. K. I., Anderson, I. K., Evans, H. A., Liddle, G. C., Cowan, J. L., Brookings, A. H. & Watson, D. G. (1977). British Journal of Industrial Medicine 34, 1925.Google Scholar
Dembert, M. L., Jekel, J. F. & Mooney, L. W. (1984). Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine 55, 391395.Google Scholar
Durnin, J. V. G. A. & Womersley, J. (1974). British Journal of Nutrition 32, 7797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrow, J. S. (1981). In Recent Advances in Medicine no. 18, pp. 7592 [Dawson, A. M., Compston, N. and Besser, G. M., editors] Edinburgh and London: Churchill Livingstone.Google Scholar
Golden, F. St. C. (1976). Journal of the Society of Occupational Medicine 26, 8588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gooderson, C. Y. & Beebee, M. (1976). Anthropometry of 500 Infantrymen 1973–74. Army Personnel Research Establishment report no. 17/76. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Haisman, M. F. (1970). Human Biology 42, 679688.Google Scholar
Hayward, J. S. & Eckerson, J. D. (1984). Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine 55, 206212.Google Scholar
Keatinge, W. R. (1960). Journal of Physiology 153, 166173.Google Scholar
McCallum, R. I. & Petrie, A. (1984). British Journal of lndustrial Medicine 41, 275278.Google Scholar
MacMillan, M. G., Reid, C. M., Shirling, D. & Passmore, R. (1965). Lancet i, 728729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Office of Population Census and Surveys (1981). OPCS Monitor, ref. SS 81/1. St. Catherine's House, London: Government Statistical Service.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, S., Skinner, R. K., Knight, I. B. & Garrow, J. S. (1985). Annals of Human Biology 12, 115127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siri, W. E. (1956). University of California Radiation Laboratory publication no. 3349. Berkley: University of California.Google Scholar
Thompson, J., Barr, D., McDonald, D. R. & Rennie, M. J. (1984). Lancet i, 52.Google Scholar