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

Class and you may whole-body structure

Muscles structure functions of your own sufferers are summarised from the sex and you will ethnicity in Desk 2. Eu guys have been young, high and had down FM and percentage of BF than its equivalents in the most other around three organizations. Western european women were more youthful than Far eastern Indian female, and you will had been large together with down FM and you may portion of BF than simply its counterparts on almost every other three communities. The latest Far-eastern Indian men got knee pounds and you can BMC but large portion of BF compared to Western european, Maori and you can Pacific guys. The fresh new Asian Indian feminine and additionally encountered the highest portion of BF and reduced BMC of four ethnic communities, when you’re themselves lbs try less than Maori and Pacific feminine and never significantly distinct from the fresh European female. After adjustment for ages, height and you can weight, Western Indians had the Quelle large FM, reasonable lbs-ten0 % free size and you may low BMC of one’s four cultural organizations, when you are Pacific met with the reasonable FM and you can large lbs-free bulk, both for someone, in addition to highest BMC for men (Desk 3).

Relationship anywhere between Body mass index and part of body 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

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 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 (-·-·).