The results are expressed as means and standard deviations, unless stated otherwise. Between-group differences in subject characteristics were tested using one-way ANOVA followed by pairwise comparisons using Tukey’s multiple comparison procedure if a significant F test was obtained. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to adjust body composition results for comparison across ethnic groups. Before carrying out the ANCOVA, similarity of regression slopes among the ethnic groups was verified by examining the significance of the interaction between the covariate(s) and the group variable. Relationships between body composition measurements and age were investigated by multiple regression analysis controlling for independent variables such as height and weight. Potential interaction terms and non-linear relationships were examined for selected variables. Pearson’s correlation coefficients are presented for bivariate linear relationships with age and partial correlation coefficients where adjustment is made for weight and height. Data were analysed using SPSS version 13.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Results with P < 0·05>

Class and you can entire-body composition

Body structure qualities of your own victims is actually summarised by sex and ethnicity for the Desk dos. European men were younger, large along with down FM and you can part of BF than simply its equivalents in the most other about three communities. Western european female were young than simply Western Indian female, and you can had been tall along with down FM and you can part of BF than simply their equivalents in the almost every other around three groups. The newest Western Indian dudes had knee weight and you may BMC but high part of BF versus Eu, Maori and you will Pacific men. The latest Asian Indian female as well as met with the high portion of BF and also the reasonable BMC of four ethnic groups, if you are themselves lbs is lower than Maori and you may Pacific women and not notably different from the brand new Eu female. Shortly after modifications to have decades, height and you will weight, Far-eastern Indians met with the high FM, reduced weight-ten0 % free bulk and you can low BMC of your own five ethnic organizations, when you find yourself Pacific encountered the low FM and you can large pounds-free bulk, for folk, as well as the highest BMC for men (Dining table step 3).

Relationships anywhere between Bmi and you may part of extra fat

Curvilinear relationships between the percentage of BF and BMI for each ethnic group were linearised by logarithmically transforming BMI (Fig. 1)parison of regression equations of the percentage of BF on the logarithm of BMI with age as a covariate and with sex and ethnicity as group variables indicated significant heterogeneity in the slopes of the male and female equations (P < 0·0001).>

Fig. 1 Relationship between the percentage of body fat (BF) and BMI of European (?), Maori (0), Pacific Island (^) and Asian Indian (?) (a) men and (b) women. The linear regressions are: percentage of BF = 117·7 log₁₀(BMI) ? 144·2 (standard alleinstehende Russisch-Frauen in Amerika error of estimate (SEE) = 5·2 %, r 2 0·61, n 124) for European men (-); percentage of BF = 101·3 log₁₀(BMI) ? 122·0 (SEE = 4·6 %, r 2 0·74, n 109) for Maori men (- – -); percentage of BF = 93·6 log₁₀(BMI) ? 113·6 (SEE = 4·1 %, r 2 0·68, n 104) for Pacific Island men (·····); percentage of BF = 78·6 log₁₀(BMI) ? 79·4 (SEE = 5·0 %, r 2 0·52, n 117) for Asian Indian men (-·-·); percentage of BF = 103·5 log₁₀(BMI) ? 109·7 (SEE = 4·8 %, r 2 0·72, n 186) for European women (-); percentage of BF = 74·8 log₁₀(BMI) ? 70·3 (SEE = 3·9 %, r 2 0·72, n 90) for Maori women (—); percentage of BF = 65·2 log₁₀(BMI) ? 57·8 (SEE = 4·1 %, r 2 0·65, n 97) for Pacific Island women (·····); percentage of BF = 71·0 log₁₀(BMI) ? 57·7 (SEE = 4·4 %, r 2 0·60, n 107) for Asian Indian women (-·-·).