
==== Front
BMC Musculoskelet DisordBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders1471-2474BioMed Central London 1471-2474-6-111572768610.1186/1471-2474-6-11Research ArticleAbdominal fat and hip fracture risk in the elderly: The Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study Nguyen Nguyen D 1n.nguyen@garvan.org.auPongchaiyakul Chatlert 12pchatl@kku.ac.thCenter Jacqueline R 1j.center@garvan.org.auEisman John A 1j.eisman@garvan.org.auNguyen Tuan V 1t.nguyen@garvan.org.au1 Bone and Mineral Research Program, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, UNSW, Australia2 Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Khon Kaen University, 40002 Thailand2005 23 2 2005 6 11 11 10 1 2005 23 2 2005 Copyright © 2005 Nguyen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.2005Nguyen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Background
Fat mass, which is a major component of body weight, is directly related to bone mineral density and reduced fracture risk. It is not known whether abdominal fat is associated with hip fracture. The present study was designed to examine the association between abdominal fat and hip fracture in women and men aged 60+ years.

Methods
This was a nested case-control study with one fracture case being matched with two controls of the same age. In women 63 cases were matched with 126 controls, and in men 26 cases were matched with 52 controls. Hip fracture was confirmed by X-ray and personal interview. Other measurements included weight, height, body mass index (BMI), abdominal fat, and femoral neck bone density (FNBMD). Conditional logistic regression model was used to analyse data.

Results
The odds ratio of hip fracture risk associated with each 10% lower abdominal fat was 1.5 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.1) in women and 1.2 (95% CI, 0.7 to 2.0) in men. However after adjusting for FNBMD or body weight, the abdominal fat-fracture association was no longer statistically significant. Similarly, body weight and BMI was each significantly associated with hip fracture risk (in women), but after taking with account the effect of FNBMD, the association become statistically non-significant.

Conclusion
Lower abdominal fat was associated with an increased risk of hip fracture in elderly women, but the association was not independent of FNBMD or weight. The contribution of abdominal fat to hip fracture risk is likely to be modest.
==== Body
Background
Hip fracture is a public health concern, because it is associated with increased mortality, morbidity, reduced quality of life, and incurs significant economic and social costs [1]. Bone mineral density (BMD), a measure of bone strength, is a strong predictor of hip fracture risk [2], and is used as a surrogate measure of the severity of osteoporosis [3], the mechanism of BMD-hip fracture relationship is not well understood. Body weight is strongly related to bone mineral density, such that higher weight is associated with both higher BMD [4-7], and reduced fracture risk [8,9]. Body weight is the sum of lean and fat mass, and the relative importance of each component to hip fracture risk is contentious [10-14]. Lower fat mass was associated with an increase in the risk of hip fracture after adjusting for body weight and age [15], but it is not clear whether the significant relationship is independent of BMD.

Central abdominal fat, which can be derived from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans, is highly correlated with, and has been suggested to be a surrogate measure of body fat [16]. Therefore, it is hypothesized that the BMD-fracture relationship may be partly mediated by fat mass, represented by central abdominal fat. The aim of this study was to test this hypothesis in a sample of elderly men and women of Caucasian background.

Methods
Setting and subjects
The present study was designed as a nested case-control study within the larger Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study (DOES), which has been on going since 1989 [17,18]. Briefly, in 1989, all men and women aged 60 or above living in Dubbo, a city of approximately 32,000 people 400 km north west of Sydney (Australia), were invited to participate in the DOES. At that time, the population comprised 1,581 men and 2095 women aged ≥ 60 years, of whom, 98.6 % were Caucasian and 1.4 % were indigenous Aboriginal. Dubbo was selected for the study site because the age and gender distribution of the population closely resembles the Australian population and it is relatively isolated in terms of medical care, so that virtually complete ascertainment of all fractures occurring in the target population is possible. This study has been approved by the St Vincent's Hospital Ethics Committee, and informed written consent was obtained from each participant.

By mid 2003, 2560 subjects aged 60+ have participated in the study. Within this population, 89 (63 women and 26 men) hip fracture cases, which had had abdominal fat measured were identified from radiologists' reports from the two centres providing X-ray services as previously described [17]. Fractures were only included if the report of fracture was definite and, on interview, had occurred with minimum or no trauma, including a fall from standing height or less. Fractures clearly due to major trauma (such as motor vehicle accidents) and due to underlying diseases (such as cancer or bone-related diseases) were excluded from the analysis.

For every fracture case, two non-fracture controls of the same age were randomly selected from the database. Age matching tolerance of ± 5 years was applied for women 85+ years and men 81+ years. In total, data from 267 subjects were included in the analysis.

Measurements
Subjects were interviewed by a nurse co-ordinator who administered a structured questionnaire to collect data including age, life-style factors such as past and present tobacco intake (assessed as pack-years) and alcohol consumption, physical activity. Anthropometric variables (height, weight) were measured and a dietary assessment was performed based on a frequency questionnaire for calcium intake as described elsewhere [19].

Femoral neck bone mineral density (FNBMD, g/cm2) was measured by DXA using a LUNAR DPX-L densitometer (GE-LUNAR, Madison). The radiation dose with this method is <0.1 μGy. The coefficient of reliability of BMD in our institution in normal subjects is 0.96 and 0.98 at the proximal femur and lumbar spine, respectively [20].

Abdominal fat of the subjects was directly measured from the spinal DXA scan. Abdominal fat was derived from a standard window extending for 4 cm on either side of the first to fifth lumbar vertebrae. The DXA software expresses the fat mass in this abdominal window as a percentage of the total soft tissue. The coefficient of variation of this measurement as determined for dual scans performed on the same day in 60 people was 1.8% [21].

Statistical analysis
The magnitude of correlation of associations between abdominal fat, body weight and FNBMD were estimated the product moment correlation coefficients and simple linear regression analysis. Differences in these measures between fracture cases and controls expressed as standardized difference (95% confidence interval- CI) were tested by paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed ranks test with significance level of 5%, depending on the distribution of data. The association between abdominal fat and hip fracture risk was assessed by the conditional logistic regression via the PROC PHREG [22] of the Statistical Analysis System (SAS) [23].

Results
Abdominal fat in both women and men was normally distributed with no significant skewness. In the entire sample, there was no significant difference in percent of abdominal fat between women and men (23.9 ± 9.5 % vs. 24.0 ± 10.1 %, P = 0.993). Abdominal fat significantly decreased with age (r = -0.21, P = 0.003) with 1.4% (SE = 0.47) per 5 year in women. In men the rate of decrease was 0.5% (SE = 0.87) with each 5 year of age; however the decrease was not statistically significant (r = -0.07, P = 0.561). The correlation between abdominal fat and weight (r = 0.7, p < 0.001 for both genders) was higher than that between abdominal fat and FNBMD (r = 0.4, p < 0.001 in women and r = 0.2, p = 0.041 in men), (Figure).

Figure 1 Correlations between abdominal fat and weight and femoral neck bone mineral density. (Abdominal fat was expressed as percentage of the total soft tissue).

After matching for age and gender, compared to the controls, women with hip fracture had significantly lower weight (-0.7SD, p < 0.001), BMI (-0.6SD, P = 0.001), abdominal fat (-0.5SD, P = 0.014) and FNBMD (-0.9SD, P < 0.001). In contrast, in men there was no significant difference between those with hip fracture and those without fracture with respect to weight, BMI and abdominal fat; however FNBMD in men with a hip fracture was 1.1SD lower than those without a fracture (Table 1).

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of participants as at 1989

	Hip fracture	Non fracture	P value	Standardized difference (95% CI)	
Women	(n = 63)	(n = 126)			
Age (y)	76.3 ± 7.1	76.4 ± 7.2	0.067b	0.0 (-0.3 to 0.3)	
Height (cm)	155.8 ± 6.9	158.2 ± 6.1	0.008b	-0.4 (-0.7 to -0.1)	
Weight (kg)	55.6 ± 11.3	63.7 ± 10.9	<0.001b	-0.7 (-1.0 to -0.4)	
BMI (kg/m2)	22.8 ± 4.0	25.3 ± 4.7	0.001b	-0.6 (-0.9 to -0.3)	
Abdominal fata (%)	21.3 ± 9.2	25.5 ± 8.6	0.014b	-0.5 (-0.8 to -0.2)	
FNBMD (g/cm2)	0.64 ± 0.10	0.75 ± 0.14	<0.001b	-0.9 (-1.2 to -0.5)	
Home physical activity (METs)	85.5 ± 34.9	76.6 ± 30.6	0.075b	0.2 (-0.0 to 0.6)	
Calcium intake (mg/d)	608 ± 401	580 ± 370	0.455c	0.1 (-0.2 to 0.5)	
Duration of smoking (y)	40.8 ± 16.6	33.2 ± 14.4	0.204c	0.5 (-0.1 to 10.8)	
Smoking intake (c/d)	13.8 ± 8.0	11.8 ± 7.5	0.384c	0.3 (-0.3 to 0.8)	
	
Men	(n = 26)	(n = 52)			
Age (y)	75.2 ± 6.0	75.1 ± 5.9	0.329b	0.0 (-0.5 to 0.5)	
Height (cm)	169.8 ± 8.0	172.2 ± 5.5	0.219b	-0.4 (-0.9 to -0.2)	
Weight (kg)	71.7 ± 15.5	75.2 ± 9.0	0.277b	-0.3 (-0.8 to 0.2)	
BMI (kg/m2)	24.7 ± 3.9	25.3 ± 2.2	0.442b	-0.2 (-0.7 to 0.3)	
Abdominal fata (%)	26.2 ± 10.2	24.8 ± 6.2	0.581b	0.2 (-0.4 to 0.7)	
FNBMD (g/cm2)	0.64 ± 0.10	0.75 ± 0.11	0.002b	-1.1 (-1.6 to -0.5)	
Home physical activity (METs)	78.4 ± 37.4	78.5 ± 25.1	0.990b	0.0 (-0.5 to 0.5)	
Calcium intake (mg/d)	546 ± 322	572 ± 242	0.450c	-0.1 (-0.6 to 0.5)	
Duration of smoking (y)	46.4 ± 13.4	36.2 ± 15.9	0.036c	0.7 (-0.01 to 1.3)	
Smoking intake (c/d)	16.3 ± 5.5	16.4 ± 4.8	0.168c	-0.01 (-0.7 to 0.7)	
Results are expressed as mean ± SD; BMI, Body mass index; FNBMD, femoral neck bone mineral density; METs, metabolic equivalents

aAbdominal fat was expressed as percentage of the total soft tissue;

bPaired t-test;

cWilcoxon Signed Ranks test

The risk of hip fracture was estimated to increase by 1.5-fold (95%CI: 1.1 to 2.1) in women and 1.2-fold (95% CI: 0.7 to 2.0) in men for each 10% lower abdominal fat. However after adjusting for BMD or body weight, the abdominal fat-fracture association was no longer statistically significant. (Table 2)

Table 2 Odds-ratio (OR) of the risk factors for hip fracture in elderly women and men by conditional logistic regression analysis

	Unadjusted OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI) adjusted for FNBMD	OR (95% CI) adjusted for weight	
Women				
 Abdominal fata (-10%)	1.5 (1.1 to 2.1)	1.1 (0.7 to 1.5)	1.1 (0.7 to 1.7)	
 Weight (-10 kg)	2.0 (1.4 to 2.8)	1.3(0.9 to 1.7)	-	
 BMI (-4 kg/m2)	1.7 (1.2 to 2.4)	1.2 (0.8 to 1.7)	1.5 (0.7 to 3.0)	
 FNBMD (-0.12 g/cm2)	2.4 (1.7 to 3.9)	-	2.1 (1.3 to 3.5)	
	
Men				
 Abdominal fata (-10%)	1.2 (0.7 to 2.0)	1.5 (0.7 to 2.9)	1.8 (0.8 to 4.0)	
 Weight (-10 kg)	1.4 (0.8 to 2.3)	1.5 (0.7 to 3.2)	-	
 BMI (-4 kg/m2)	1.3 (0.7 to 2.5)	1.7 (0.6 to 4.5)	1.3 (0.9 to 1.9)	
 FNBMD (-0.12 g/cm2)	2.3 (1.3 to 4.0)	-	3.0 (1.3 to 6.5)	
BMI, Body mass index; FNBMD, femoral neck bone mineral density.

aAbdominal fat was expressed as percentage of the total soft tissue.

Bold-faced values are statistically significant.

Similarly, body weight and BMI was each significantly associated with hip fracture risk (in women), but after taking with account the effect of FNBMD, the association become statistically non-significant. In both women and men, the association between BMD and fracture risk was consistently significant either in unadjusted or in adjusted analysis (Table 2).

Discussion
It has been known for some time that body weight and whole body fat mass are significant predictors of hip fracture risk in women [9,15], however, it is not clear whether this association is independent of BMD. Abdominal fat has been shown to be well correlated with whole body fat mass [21]. The present study's finding of lower abdominal fat among hip fracture cases compared with the controls is consistent with previous observations [9,15]. However, it further suggests that the association between fat and hip fracture risk is not independent of BMD. Women with lower weight and fat mass may have lower FNBMD because of lower gravitational loading on the bone [24,25], or may have lower level of endogenous estrogens produced in adipose tissue and muscle [26,27]. On the basis of these findings, it may be proposed that BMD is a direct predictor of hip fracture risk, and that central abdominal fat (or fat mass) is a determinant of BMD. Thus, the previously observed relationship between fat and fracture risk is an indirect, rather than a causal association.

Interestingly, in men abdominal fat or body weight was not significantly associated with hip fracture risk either before or after adjusting for BMD. Moreover, the magnitude of difference between fracture versus non-fracture cases in body weight or abdominal fat in men was generally more modest compared to that in women. For example, men with hip fracture had 0.2SD lower abdominal fat and 0.4SD lower in weight than non-fracture men. These differences were not significant. In contrast, in women the corresponding differences were significant and were 0.5SD lower for abdominal fat and 0.7SD for weight. This may suggest that the BMD-hip fracture association in men is not mediated via fat mass, despite a similar correlation between fat mass and BMD. However the lack of significance of the association between abdominal fat and hip fracture in men in the present study may be due to the small sample size.

In recent years, there has been considerable interest in the relationships between osteoporosis, diabetes and cardiovascular disease [28-30]. A common characteristic of individuals with diabetes and cardiovascular diseases is that the majority have higher body weight and fat mass [31-38], and on this basis together with the well-known relationship between weight and BMD, it is expected these individuals would have higher BMD and lower risk of fracture. However, epidemiological data point out that individuals with cardiovascular diseases have lower BMD, and a higher risk of fracture [29,39]. The present study also found that, without BMD adjustment, men and women with lower body weight had a higher risk of hip fracture. Hypertension has been suggested as a potential contribution to the risk of hip fracture [39]. A previous study showed that abdominal fat is positively correlated with blood pressure [40]. However, in this study lower, not higher, abdominal fat was a risk for hip fracture in women. These data suggest that the association between diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and hypertension and fracture risk is also not mediated via fat mass.

From a public health point of view, the present study's finding suggests that abdominal fat does not add to the discriminatory value of hip fracture risk that is already provided by BMD. Indeed, in this study, none of the body size measurements (weight, height, BMI and abdominal fat) was a significant predictor of hip fracture risk after adjusting for BMD. This suggests that these measures have limited value in the prediction of hip fracture in a population or an individual.

A number of issues should be kept in mind before extrapolating the present finding. First, the participants in this study were Caucasian aged 60 years and above, so it may not be generalizable to younger populations and to different races. Second, neither total body fat, nor waist and hip circumferences (WHC) were measured and these may have had stronger predictive value. However, these measurements may underestimate abdominal adiposity in those with both large waist and hip circumferences, while DXA determination of regional body fat distribution may indeed be more valid than WHC [16].

Conclusion
These data have demostrated that in the elderly, abdominal fat was significantly associated with hip fracture risk in women but the association was not independent of BMD, whereas in men abdominal fat was not a significant predictor of hip fracture risk. Measurement of DXA abdominal fat does not contribute to hip fracture prediction over and above that provided by BMD.

List of abbreviations
All abbreviations are defined in the text.

Competing interests
The author(s) declare that they have no competing interest

Authours' contributions
NDN obtained and analysed the data, and drafted the manuscript. CP had an active role in data analysis and interpretation of results. JRC had an active role in the conduct of the Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study and helped with the interpretation of results. JAE established the Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study. TVN had an active role in the conception if this project, involved in study design, analysis data and interpretation of results. All authors contributed to the last version of the manuscript.

Pre-publication history
The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:



Acknowledgements
We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Sr Janet Watters and Donna Reeves for the interview, data collection and measurement bone mineral density. We also appreciate the invaluable help of the staff of Dubbo base hospital. We thank Natasa Ivankovic for management of the database. This works has been partly supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia. and untied educational grants from GE-Lunar, Merck Australia, Eli Lilly International and Aventis Australia. The first author is supported by an untied educational grant from Merck Australia Pty Ltd.
==== Refs
Center JR Nguyen TV Schneider D Sambrook PN Eisman JA  Mortality after all major types of osteoporotic fracture in men and women: an observational study Lancet 1999 353 878 882 10093980 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)09075-8 
Cummings SR Bates D Black DM  Clinical use of bone densitometry: scientific review JAMA 2002 288 1889 1897 12377088 10.1001/jama.288.15.1889 
Kanis JA  Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk Lancet 2002 359 1929 1936 12057569 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08761-5 
Felson DT Zhang Y Hannan MT Anderson JJ  Effects of weight and body mass index on bone mineral density in men and women: the Framingham study J Bone Miner Res 1993 8 567 573 8511983 
Marcus R Greendale G Blunt BA Bush TL Sherman S Sherwin R Wahner H Wells B  Correlates of bone mineral density in the postmenopausal estrogen/progestin interventions trial J Bone Miner Res 1994 9 1467 1476 7817832 
Ravn P Cizza G Bjarnason NH Thompson D Daley M Wasnich RD McClung M Hosking D Yates AJ Christiansen C  Low body mass index is an important risk factor for low bone mass and increased bone loss in early postmenopausal women. Early Postmenopausal Intervention Cohort (EPIC) study group J Bone Miner Res 1999 14 1622 1627 10469292 
Reid IR Ames R Evans MC Sharpe S Gamble G France JT Lim TM Cundy TF  Determinants of total body and regional bone mineral density in normal postmenopausal women – a key role for fat mass J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1992 75 45 51 1619030 10.1210/jc.75.1.45 
Margolis KL Ensrud KE Schreiner PJ Tabor HK  Body size and risk for clinical fractures in older women. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group Ann Intern Med 2000 133 123 127 10896638 
Ensrud KE Lipschutz RC Cauley JA Seeley D Nevitt MC Scott J Orwoll ES Genant HK Cummings SR  Body size and hip fracture risk in older women: a prospective study. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group Am J Med 1997 103 274 280 9382119 10.1016/S0002-9343(97)00025-9 
Douchi T Kuwahata R Matsuo T Uto H Oki T Nagata Y  Relative contribution of lean and fat mass component to bone mineral density in males J Bone Miner Metab 2003 21 17 21 12491089 10.1007/s007740300003 
Douchi T Matsuo T Uto H Kuwahata T Oki T Nagata Y  Lean body mass and bone mineral density in physically exercising postmenopausal women Maturitas 2003 45 185 190 12818463 10.1016/S0378-5122(03)00143-9 
Compston JE Bhambhani M Laskey MA Murphy S Khaw KT  Body composition and bone mass in post-menopausal women Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 1992 37 426 431 1486693 
Reid IR Plank LD Evans MC  Fat mass is an important determinant of whole body bone density in premenopausal women but not in men J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1992 75 779 782 1517366 10.1210/jc.75.3.779 
Van Langendonck L Claessens AL Lefevre J Thomis M Philippaerts R Delvaux K Lysens R Vanden Eynde B Beunen G  Association between bone mineral density (DXA), body structure, and body composition in middle-aged men Am J Human Biol 2002 14 735 742 12400034 10.1002/ajhb.10090 
Schott AM Cormier C Hans D Favier F Hausherr E Dargent-Molina P Delmas PD Ribot C Sebert JL Breart G  How hip and whole-body bone mineral density predict hip fracture in elderly women: the EPIDOS Prospective Study Osteoporos Int 1998 8 247 254 9797909 10.1007/s001980050061 
Heiss CJ Sanborn CF Nichols DL Bonnick SL Alford BB  Associations of body fat distribution, circulating sex hormones, and bone density in postmenopausal women J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1995 80 1591 1596 7745005 10.1210/jc.80.5.1591 
Jones G Nguyen T Sambrook PN Kelly PJ Gilbert C Eisman JA  Symptomatic fracture incidence in elderly men and women: the Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study (DOES) Osteoporos Int 1994 4 277 282 7812076 
Nguyen T Sambrook P Kelly P Jones G Lord S Freund J Eisman J  Prediction of osteoporotic fractures by postural instability and bone density BMJ 1993 307 1111 1115 8251809 
Angus RM Sambrook PN Pocock NA Eisman JA  A simple method for assessing calcium intake in Caucasian women J Am Diet Assoc 1989 89 209 214 2915093 
Nguyen TV Sambrook PN Eisman JA  Sources of variability in bone mineral density measurements: implications for study design and analysis of bone loss J Bone Miner Res 1997 12 124 135 9240735 
Carey DG Nguyen TV Campbell LV Chisholm DJ Kelly P  Genetic influences on central abdominal fat: a twin study Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1996 20 722 726 8856394 
Stokes ME Davis CS Koch GG  Conditional Logistic Regression Categorical Data Analysis Using the SAS System 1995 1 SAS Campus Drive, Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc 247 276 
SAS Institute Inc., SAS/STAT user's guide Version 8 1999 8.01 (TSL01M0) Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute Inc 
Simkin A Ayalon J Leichter I  Increased trabecular bone density due to bone-loading exercises in postmenopausal osteoporotic women Calcif Tissue Int 1987 40 59 63 3105835 
Raisz LG  Local and systemic factors in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis N Engl J Med 1988 318 818 828 3281002 
Schindler AE Ebert A Friedrich E  Conversion of androstenedione to estrone by human tissue J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1972 35 627 630 5052980 
Grodin JM Siiteri PK MacDonald PC  Source of estrogen production in postmenopausal women J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1973 36 207 214 4688315 
Jorgensen L Engstad T Jacobsen BK  Bone mineral density in acute stroke patients: low bone mineral density may predict first stroke in women Stroke 2001 32 47 51 11136913 
Nishio K Mukae S Aoki S Itoh S Konno N Ozawa K Satoh R Katagiri T  Congestive heart failure is associated with the rate of bone loss J Intern Med 2003 253 439 446 12653873 10.1046/j.1365-2796.2003.01130.x 
Schwartz AV Sellmeyer DE Ensrud KE Cauley JA Tabor HK Schreiner PJ Jamal SA Black DM Cummings SR  Older women with diabetes have an increased risk of fracture: a prospective study J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2001 86 32 38 11231974 10.1210/jc.86.1.32 
Bertrais S Balkau B Vol S Forhan A Calvet C Marre M Eschwege E  Relationships between abdominal body fat distribution and cardiovascular risk factors: an explanation for women's healthier cardiovascular risk profile. The D.E.S.I.R. Study Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1999 23 1085 1094 10557030 10.1038/sj.ijo.0801033 
Colditz GA Willett WC Stampfer MJ Manson JE Hennekens CH Arky RA Speizer FE  Weight as a risk factor for clinical diabetes in women Am J Epidemiol 1990 132 501 513 2389754 
Colditz GA Willett WC Rotnitzky A Manson JE  Weight gain as a risk factor for clinical diabetes mellitus in women Ann Intern Med 1995 122 481 486 7872581 
Garrison RJ Higgins MW Kannel WB  Obesity and coronary heart disease Curr Opin Lipidol 1996 7 199 202 8883494 
Havlik RJ Hubert HB Fabsitz RR Feinleib M  Weight and hypertension Ann Intern Med 1983 98 855 859 6847025 
Hubert HB Feinleib M McNamara PM Castelli WP  Obesity as an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease: a 26-year follow-up of participants in the Framingham Heart Study Circulation 1983 67 968 977 6219830 
Lubree HG Rege SS Bhat DS Raut KN Panchnadikar A Joglekar CV Yajnik CS Shetty P Yudkin J  Body fat and cardiovascular risk factors in Indian men in three geographical locations Food Nutr Bull 2002 23 146 149 12362784 
Staessen J Fagard R Amery A  Obesity and hypertension Acta Cardiol Suppl 1988 29 37 44 3291511 
Cappuccio FP Meilahn E Zmuda JM Cauley JA  High blood pressure and bone-mineral loss in elderly white women: a prospective study. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group Lancet 1999 354 971 975 10501357 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)01437-3 
Troisi RJ Weiss ST Segal MR Cassano PA Vokonas PS Landsberg L  The relationship of body fat distribution to blood pressure in normotensive men: the normative aging study Int J Obes 1990 14 515 525 2401588

