OBJECTIVE
To relate subjects' clothing sizes to waist circumference, body mass index (BMI) and to the risks of ischaemic heart disease, hypertension and diabetes mellitus, and to derive cut-off levels of clothing size that correspond to increased health risks.
DESIGN
Cross-sectional study. Setting Glasgow Royal Infirmary.
PARTICIPANTS
A stratified subsample of 201 men and 161 women aged 27-67 years from the Glasgow monitoring coronary (MONICA) risk factor survey.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Measured waist, weight and height, blood pressure and history of ischaemic heart disease (angina, myocardial infarction or angioplasty), hypertension and diabetes mellitus, and medications.
RESULTS
There were 15.5% of men and 11.2% of women with ischaemic heart disease, 14.9% of men and 12.4% of women with hypertension, and 4.5% of men and 3.1% of women with diabetes mellitus. Age and smoking adjusted prevalences of these cardiovascular risks, as well as increased adiposity (waist circumference > or =102 cm in men, > or =88 cm in women or BMI > or = 30 kg m(-2)) rose with increasing clothing size. Clothing size correlated (P < 0.001) linearly with indices of adiposity. Clothing sizes which correspond to waist circumference action level 1 (94 cm in men, 80 cm in women) and action level 2 (102 cm in men, 88 cm in women) or to standardized BMI cut-offs (25 and 30 kg m(-2)) were estimated. Height has minimal influences on clothing size. Compared with men with trouser waist below 36 inches or women with UK dress size below 16, the age and smoking adjusted odds ratios for the risk of having at least one of the major health problems (ischaemic heart disease, hypertension or diabetes mellitus) were 3.9 (95% CI: 1.8-8.3) in men and 7.0 (95% CI: 2.5-19.4) in women who had trouser size > or =38 inches or UK dress size > or =18, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The present study showed that men and women with large clothing size are at increased risk of ischaemic heart disease, hypertension and diabetes mellitus. Men's trouser size equal or larger than 38 in the UK and USA or 97 in Europe and women's dress size equal or larger than 18 in the UK or 16 in the USA or 48 in Europe could be used to promote self-awareness of increased health risks by the general public.
[1]
Simon Capewell,et al.
Explaining the Decline in Coronary Heart Disease Mortality in England and Wales Between 1981 and 2000
,
2004,
Circulation.
[2]
Steven B Heymsfield,et al.
Comparisons of waist circumferences measured at 4 sites.
,
2003,
The American journal of clinical nutrition.
[3]
Robert Ross,et al.
Body mass index, waist circumference, and health risk: evidence in support of current National Institutes of Health guidelines.
,
2002,
Archives of internal medicine.
[4]
J. Seidell,et al.
The public health impact of obesity.
,
2001,
Annual review of public health.
[5]
T. Han,et al.
Self-reported waist circumference compared with the ‘Waist Watcher’ tape-measure to identify individuals at increased health risk through intra-abdominal fat accumulation
,
1998,
British Journal of Nutrition.
[6]
C. Packard,et al.
Associations of indices of adiposity with atherogenic lipoprotein subfractions
,
1998,
International Journal of Obesity.
[7]
M. Woodward,et al.
Effect of socioeconomic group on incidence of, management of, and survival after myocardial infarction and coronary death: analysis of community coronary event register
,
1997,
BMJ.
[8]
P. Deurenberg,et al.
The influences of height and age on waist circumference as an index of adiposity in adults
,
1997,
International Journal of Obesity.
[9]
J. Seidell,et al.
Waist circumference remains useful predictor of coronary heart disease
,
1996,
BMJ.
[10]
P. Deurenberg,et al.
Predicting body composition by densitometry from simple anthropometric measurements.
,
1996,
The American journal of clinical nutrition.
[11]
C. Morrison,et al.
Waist circumference as a measure for indicating need for weight management
,
1995,
BMJ.
[12]
J. Morris,et al.
Physique of London busmen; epidemiology of uniforms.
,
1956,
Lancet.