Prevalence of metabolic syndrome risk factors in high school and NCAA Division I football players
Abstract:
Metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) is a clustering of metabolic and cardiovascular disease risk factors. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of MetSyn risk factors in high school (HS) and college (College) football players, and to examine if the prevalence varied according to body fat percent (%Fat). 123 males (height 179.0+/-6.7 cm; weight 89.4+/-19.6 kg) from seven different high schools and 82 males (height 186.2+/-6.8 cm; weight 99.6+/-16.8 kg) from one university participated. All testing occurred in the early morning following an overnight fast. %Fat, waist circumference, resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fasting triglyceride, HDL cholesterol, and blood glucose were determined using standard testing procedures. MetSyn risk factor levels were determined using American Heart Association (AHA) criteria. Subjects were grouped by position and playing level (HS, College). Independent t-tests, Chi-square analysis, two-way ANOVA, and path analytic models were used in the statistical analysis. Significance was set at p<0.05. 6.8% (n = 14) of the sample met the AHA criteria for MetSyn. Offensive and defensive linemen accounted for 92.3% of the players meeting MetSyn criteria with each playing level (HS, College) having 7 subjects. MetSyn criteria differed significantly across %Fat. Obese players were more likely to meet the criteria for MetSyn. %Fat was a statistically significant predictor of mean arterial blood pressure, HDL-cholesterol, and waist circumference. MetSyn exists in both HS and College level football players with almost all cases occurring in the athletes with the highest levels of %Fat (offensive/defensive lineman). Strength and conditioning coaches should be aware of the prevalence of MetSyn risk factors in offensive and defensive linemen and take appropriate actions to ensure athlete safety.
(C) 2013 National Strength and Conditioning Association
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[b]Can we please stick to the topic.
I wrote it out in the original post.
No one said leaner people won’t get CVD.
No one said excess bodyfat alone causes CVD.
The question was/is: does being overweight put someone at risk for heart disease? (Among other things)
Is it a risk factor?
Not is it THE CAUSE of CVD.
We are looking for a correlation which would indicate that it is a risk factor [/b]
[/quote]
Re posting because it seems some here missed it[/quote]
I am apparently not understanding exactly what it is you are looking for. I thought we were discussing whether or not we think excess body fat puts someone at risk of CVD and why we think what we think through most of the thread.[/quote]
That is exactly what I am looking for
You have it right bpick
I posted that to show that we are not arguing whether or not excess bodyfat IS THE CAUSE of CVD.
We are talking about if it is an indicator of increased risk for CVD along with any studies or examples thow go along with this, one way or the other.
Son are still trying to argue that BF alone isn’t the prime indicator of CVD when that was never said in the first place.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Reposting because apparently it was missed the 3-4 other times I asked
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Brick said being overweight was a risk factor.[/quote]
Brick wrote,
…which makes you incorrect.
From 6-8-2013 @ 1:30
Page 39 of the Bulking thread.[/quote]
I am still hoping to get a reply to this post Professor?
You were sure quick to try and talk down to me with that post but have inexplicably missed my response question all 6 times it was posted.
Here’s to hoping you don’t miss it again.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Don’t you think excess bodyfat aka being overweight, is a variable that can be controlled by diet and exercise?
It could be manipulated by the experimenter aka overweight person, in order to lessen their likelihood of CVD?
:)[/quote]
Ahaha! Diet and exercise would be the factors. I suppose you could attempt to make fat a factor via liposuction and whatever the reverse of liposuction is lol. I was laughing imagining some scientist squirting a bunch of lard into someone.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Don’t you think excess bodyfat aka being overweight, is a variable that can be controlled by diet and exercise?
It could be manipulated by the experimenter aka overweight person, in order to lessen their likelihood of CVD?
:)[/quote]
Ahaha! Diet and exercise would be the factors. I suppose you could attempt to make fat a factor via liposuction and whatever the reverse of liposuction is lol. I was laughing imagining some scientist squirting a bunch of lard into someone.[/quote]
It’s already begun bro and it is no laughing matter.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
the Korean study from earlier does show a direct correlation between body fat and increased CVD risk.[/quote]
This is incorrect. The study only looked at body fat and risk factors. It did not show direct correlation at all.
[/quote]
You are correct about the study. I should have read it closer. However you really mean to tell me that you believe that as people develop more of the CVD risk factors they don’t increase there chances of CVD? And that study suggest that as body fat increases the instances of people with the CVD risk factors goes up, gradually at times but consistently.
[quote]Myosin wrote:
This might have some relevance:
Prevalence of metabolic syndrome risk factors in high school and NCAA Division I football players
Abstract:
Metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) is a clustering of metabolic and cardiovascular disease risk factors. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of MetSyn risk factors in high school (HS) and college (College) football players, and to examine if the prevalence varied according to body fat percent (%Fat). 123 males (height 179.0+/-6.7 cm; weight 89.4+/-19.6 kg) from seven different high schools and 82 males (height 186.2+/-6.8 cm; weight 99.6+/-16.8 kg) from one university participated. All testing occurred in the early morning following an overnight fast. %Fat, waist circumference, resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fasting triglyceride, HDL cholesterol, and blood glucose were determined using standard testing procedures. MetSyn risk factor levels were determined using American Heart Association (AHA) criteria. Subjects were grouped by position and playing level (HS, College). Independent t-tests, Chi-square analysis, two-way ANOVA, and path analytic models were used in the statistical analysis. Significance was set at p<0.05. 6.8% (n = 14) of the sample met the AHA criteria for MetSyn. Offensive and defensive linemen accounted for 92.3% of the players meeting MetSyn criteria with each playing level (HS, College) having 7 subjects. MetSyn criteria differed significantly across %Fat. Obese players were more likely to meet the criteria for MetSyn. %Fat was a statistically significant predictor of mean arterial blood pressure, HDL-cholesterol, and waist circumference. MetSyn exists in both HS and College level football players with almost all cases occurring in the athletes with the highest levels of %Fat (offensive/defensive lineman). Strength and conditioning coaches should be aware of the prevalence of MetSyn risk factors in offensive and defensive linemen and take appropriate actions to ensure athlete safety.
(C) 2013 National Strength and Conditioning Association
[/quote]
Wow!
Thanks for sharing.
Very informative.
This will likely be one of very few studies done on trained individuals.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
Genetics picks our risk starting point, bad diet, lack of exercise, and high body fat levels increases it and the opposite is also true. But as body fat increases, risk of CVD increases in an individual. [/quote]
No, as all of these factors and many more variables increase, the risk of CVD increases. You do not have enough data to make an n=1 claim on body fat alone.[/quote]
You repeated almost to the word what I said after telling me I no, then accused me of saying that I tried to claim body fat alone was the cause when I did not as is in the post you referenced.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
Genetics picks our risk starting point, bad diet, lack of exercise, and high body fat levels increases it and the opposite is also true. But as body fat increases, risk of CVD increases in an individual. [/quote]
No, as all of these factors and many more variables increase, the risk of CVD increases. You do not have enough data to make an n=1 claim on body fat alone.[/quote]
You repeated almost to the word what I said after telling me I was wrong, then accused me claiming body fat alone was the cause when I did not as is in the post you referenced.[/quote]
[quote]Myosin wrote:
This might have some relevance:
Prevalence of metabolic syndrome risk factors in high school and NCAA Division I football players
Abstract:
Metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) is a clustering of metabolic and cardiovascular disease risk factors. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of MetSyn risk factors in high school (HS) and college (College) football players, and to examine if the prevalence varied according to body fat percent (%Fat). 123 males (height 179.0+/-6.7 cm; weight 89.4+/-19.6 kg) from seven different high schools and 82 males (height 186.2+/-6.8 cm; weight 99.6+/-16.8 kg) from one university participated. All testing occurred in the early morning following an overnight fast. %Fat, waist circumference, resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fasting triglyceride, HDL cholesterol, and blood glucose were determined using standard testing procedures. MetSyn risk factor levels were determined using American Heart Association (AHA) criteria. Subjects were grouped by position and playing level (HS, College). Independent t-tests, Chi-square analysis, two-way ANOVA, and path analytic models were used in the statistical analysis. Significance was set at p<0.05. 6.8% (n = 14) of the sample met the AHA criteria for MetSyn. Offensive and defensive linemen accounted for 92.3% of the players meeting MetSyn criteria with each playing level (HS, College) having 7 subjects. MetSyn criteria differed significantly across %Fat. Obese players were more likely to meet the criteria for MetSyn. %Fat was a statistically significant predictor of mean arterial blood pressure, HDL-cholesterol, and waist circumference. MetSyn exists in both HS and College level football players with almost all cases occurring in the athletes with the highest levels of %Fat (offensive/defensive lineman). Strength and conditioning coaches should be aware of the prevalence of MetSyn risk factors in offensive and defensive linemen and take appropriate actions to ensure athlete safety.
(C) 2013 National Strength and Conditioning Association
[/quote]
Wow!
Thanks for sharing.
Very informative.
This will likely be one of very few studies done on trained individuals.[/quote]
This study is pretty interesting because those athletes at a college level are usually more active than us who train as a hobby.
Just an undergrad in bio-chem here but given that there is a known mechanism in fat cells which has been posted by StrongHold here before. It doesn’t surprise me that as bodyfat goes up(regardless of physical fitness) so do risk factors.
Here’s the full paper that’s been posted before and ignored repeatedly.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Is it because increased body fat itself causes the complications??
Or is it because increased body fat is a result of several things that do cause complications, bad diet and lack of exercise namely??[/quote]
Option B, definitely. Increased bodyfat is the result of something. Inappropriate diet, lack of exercise, inappropriate exercise, hormonal/glandular disturbance, disease, medication side effect… something causes the body to gain (or hold onto, in the case of “frustrated dieters”) excessive bodyfat.
[/quote]
this is the crux of the matter. While the bodyfat itself might not be the actual direct cause, whatever happened to increase bodyfat (be it bad diet or whatever) leads to the associated health problems.
[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Just an undergrad in bio-chem here but given that there is a known mechanism in fat cells which has been posted by StrongHold here before. It doesn’t surprise me that as bodyfat goes up(regardless of physical fitness) so do risk factors.
Here’s the full paper that’s been posted before and ignored repeatedly.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
Genetics picks our risk starting point, bad diet, lack of exercise, and high body fat levels increases it and the opposite is also true. But as body fat increases, risk of CVD increases in an individual. [/quote]
No, as all of these factors and many more variables increase, the risk of CVD increases. You do not have enough data to make an n=1 claim on body fat alone.[/quote]
You repeated almost to the word what I said after telling me I no, then accused me of saying that I tried to claim body fat alone was the cause when I did not as is in the post you referenced.[/quote]
This is incorrect. I didn’t write “But as body fat increases, risk of CVD increases in an individual”…because this isn’t true. In an individual, all of those risk factors would be increasing to put them at risk of CVD, not just body fat…which is why the disease is seen at higher body fats…because of the LIFESTYLE associated with it.
Come on Professor.
There is no way you have missed my post 10 times already.
Am I to take your lack of a response to mean that you made up that quote and blatantly lied in order to further your argument?
I think obviously that higher levels of body fat, in general, lead to a host of ills including CVD. I do think though that there are some individuals that carry, for this group, higher levels of body fat and won’t face those risk based on their particular genetics.
I used to be morbidly obese: 5"10" nearly 3 bills of non-training fat boy and my labs were golden. Now I’m significantly less fat and my labs are still good. Of course exceptions do not disprove the rule and there is no doubt that all things being equal the lower you can keep your bf and still reach your goals the better.
Where I think all of the arguements spring from, aside from a few unreasonable individuals who want to argue, is the tipping point.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Come on Professor.
There is no way you have missed my post 10 times already.
Am I to take your lack of a response to mean that you made up that quote and blatantly lied in order to further your argument?[/quote]
Pretty sure that full ignore mode is on, until you give up re-posting.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
Genetics picks our risk starting point, bad diet, lack of exercise, and high body fat levels increases it and the opposite is also true. But as body fat increases, risk of CVD increases in an individual. [/quote]
No, as all of these factors and many more variables increase, the risk of CVD increases. You do not have enough data to make an n=1 claim on body fat alone.[/quote]
You repeated almost to the word what I said after telling me I no, then accused me of saying that I tried to claim body fat alone was the cause when I did not as is in the post you referenced.[/quote]
This is incorrect. I didn’t write “But as body fat increases, risk of CVD increases in an individual”…because this isn’t true. In an individual, all of those risk factors would be increasing to put them at risk of CVD, not just body fat…which is why the disease is seen at higher body fats…because of the LIFESTYLE associated with it.
[/quote]
Why would body fat be increasing though? Wouldn’t body fat be increasing because of poor diet or lack of exercise? The risk factors that increase your chance of CVD mirror those that increase body fat so how is it not fair to say “as body fat increases so does your risk of CVD”?
[quote]JoeGood wrote:
I think obviously that higher levels of body fat, in general, lead to a host of ills including CVD. I do think though that there are some individuals that carry, for this group, higher levels of body fat and won’t face those risk based on their particular genetics.
I used to be morbidly obese: 5"10" nearly 3 bills of non-training fat boy and my labs were golden. Now I’m significantly less fat and my labs are still good. Of course exceptions do not disprove the rule and there is no doubt that all things being equal the lower you can keep your bf and still reach your goals the better.
Where I think all of the arguements spring from, aside from a few unreasonable individuals who want to argue, is the tipping point.
That’s the point, in all people it wouldn’t be which is why everyone is noting it is simply a PART of the equation and does not dictate itself the health of an individual.
[quote]JoeGood wrote:
I think obviously that higher levels of body fat, in general, lead to a host of ills including CVD. I do think though that there are some individuals that carry, for this group, higher levels of body fat and won’t face those risk based on their particular genetics.
I used to be morbidly obese: 5"10" nearly 3 bills of non-training fat boy and my labs were golden. Now I’m significantly less fat and my labs are still good. Of course exceptions do not disprove the rule and there is no doubt that all things being equal the lower you can keep your bf and still reach your goals the better.
Where I think all of the arguements spring from, aside from a few unreasonable individuals who want to argue, is the tipping point.
