Abdominal obesity and the spectrum of global cardiometabolic risks in US adults.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the association of obesity and abdominal obesity with cardiometabolic risk factor burden and global estimated coronary heart disease (CHD) risk among multiethnic US adults. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, survey study. SUBJECTS: A total of 4456 participants (representing 194.9 million adults) aged 20-79 years in the 2003-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). MEASUREMENTS: Body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) measures, CHD risk factors and a 10-year estimated CHD risk based on Framingham algorithms. Obesity was defined as a BMI >or=30 kg/m(2) and abdominal obesity as a WC >88 cm in women and >102 cm in men. High CHD risk status included diabetes, cardiovascular disease (CVD) or a 10-year Framingham risk score of >20%. RESULTS: Overall, abdominal obesity was present in 42.3% of men and 62.5% of women and in 53.6% of whites, 56.9% of blacks and 50.5% of Hispanics (P<0.001 between gender and ethnicity). However, using International Diabetes Federation (IDF)-recommended WC cut points for Hispanics, the prevalence of abdominal obesity was 78.3%. Mean levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), systolic and diastolic blood pressure, fasting glucose and C-reactive protein increased, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) decreased (P<0.001) according to BMI and WC categories, although these associations were attenuated in blacks for blood pressure, LDL-C, HDL-C and triglycerides. Of those with high WC, 25-35% had >or=3 cardiometabolic risk factors. High CHD risk among those with high WC was most common in men (27.9%) and non-Hispanic whites (23.9%). Persons with a high vs normal WC, adjusted for age, gender, ethnicity and BMI were more likely to have >or=3 cardiometabolic risk factors (odds ratio (OR)=5.1, 95% confidence interval (CI)=3.9-6.6) and were classified as high CHD risk (OR=1.5, 95% CI=1.1-2.0). CONCLUSION: The association of abdominal obesity with risk factors varies by ethnicity and is independently associated with high CHD risk status, further validating its clinical significance.

Indirect costs of obesity: a review of the current literature.

This study reviews the recent literature on the relationship between obesity and indirect (non-medical) costs. Medline and Web of Science searches were conducted to identify published studies from 1992 to present that report indirect costs by obesity status; 31 studies were included. The indirect costs were grouped into six categories: costs associated with absenteeism, disability, premature mortality, presenteeism, workers' compensation, and total indirect costs. Compared with non-obese workers, obese workers miss more workdays due to illness, injury, or disability. Costs of premature mortality vary substantially across countries. The results for presenteeism and workers' compensation were mixed. More research is needed to determine obesity's causal role in increasing indirect costs, especially for workers' compensation and presenteeism. Cohort and longitudinal study designs should be a priority.

Determinants of youth tobacco use in West Virginia: a comparison of smoking and smokeless tobacco use.

PURPOSE: To identify and compare the determinants of different types of tobacco use among rural youths and discuss the implication of these differences for youth tobacco use cessation. METHODS: Ninth grade participants (n = 883) were 95% white, between 13 and 19 years old with a mean age of 14.6 years. Students were classified into four exclusive groups: non-tobacco use, smoking only, smokeless tobacco (ST) use only, and conjoint smoking and ST use. The influences of 14 specific risk factors on tobacco use were investigated for each group using separate multiple logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Among participants, 20% were smokers only, 6% were ST users only, and 10% were conjoint users. Students who had more friends (odds ratio [OR] =] 2.75) and siblings (OR = 1.96) who smoke, family problems (OR = 1.70), and favorable attitudes toward tobacco use (OR = 1.12) were more likely to smoke than were other students. Among students who used only ST, gender was a primary determinant (95% were male). Excluding gender, sibling ST use (OR = 4.28), friends' ST use (OR = 1.71), and favorable attitudes (OR = 1.11) were the most significant risk factors. Male students were also more likely to use both cigarettes and ST (OR = 8.62). In addition, among students who used both tobacco products, siblings' and friends' ST use were significant (OR = 3.09 and 2.13, respectively), as well as family problems (OR = 2.41) and attitude (OR = 1.15). Unlike smokers only or ST users only, lack of knowledge about tobacco was a significant determinant among conjoint users (OR = 1.39). CONCLUSIONS: Findings revealed that 7 of 14 factors were significant predictors of tobacco use. Some factors predicted smoking only, ST only, and conjoint use; however, the pattern of predictors varied for these three categories. Implications for these findings as they relate to tobacco use interventions are discussed.