Validity of Body Density with Methods of Body Mass Index, Skin Fold, Bio- Electrical Impedance & Criterion Method of Hydrostatic in Men Athletes of Swimming

Abstract

The goal of present research is estimating and validity of body density with methods ofBody Mass Index, Skin Fold, Bio-Electrical Impedance and Criterion Method ofHydrostatic in men athletes of swimming. The present research has been conducted withsemi-experimental and functional method. For doing so 25 men swimming athletes wererandomly selected N= 120 . Statistical analysis was conducted with Pearson coefficient,correlated T-test, TE & SEE. The results of statistical analysis show that the method ofSkin Fold Stat with hydrostatic criterion method has meaningful difference in society ofswimmers. Also there is meaningful difference between body mass index and criterionmethod. There was not any meaningful difference between bio-electrical impedance andcriterion method in swimmers. TE=3.01, SEE=2.91,R=0.924, P=0.064 . The findings show that that bio-electrical impedance in swimmerathletes is more suitable method.

Keywords

• Body Density
• Body Mass Index
• Skin Fold
• Bio-Electrical Impedance
• Hydrostatic

Validity of Body Density with Methods of Body Mass Index, Skin Fold, Bio- Electrical Impedance & Criterion Method of Hydrostatic in Men Athletes of Swimming

Abstract

The goal of present research is estimating and validity of body density with methods of Body Mass Index, Skin Fold, Bio-Electrical Impedance and Criterion Method of Hydrostatic in men athletes of swimming. The present research has been conducted with semi-experimental and functional method. For doing so 25 men swimming athletes were randomly selected (N= 120). Statistical analysis was conducted with Pearson coefficient, correlated T-test, TE & SEE. The results of statistical analysis show that the method of Skin Fold Stat with hydrostatic criterion method has meaningful difference in society of swimmers. Also there is meaningful difference between body mass index and criterion method. There was not any meaningful difference between bio-electrical impedance and criterion method in swimmers. (TE=3.01, SEE=2.91, R=0.924, P=0.064). The findings show that that bio-electrical impedance in swimmer athletes is more suitable method.

Keywords

• Body Density
• Body Mass Index
• Skin Fold
• Bio-Electrical Impedance
• Hydrostatic

References

1. 1. Witt, K. A, and E. A. Bush, 2005. College athletes with an elevated body mass index often have a high upper arm muscle area, but not elevated triceps and sub scapular skin folds. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 105: 599-602.
2. 2. Curtin, F, A. Morabia, C. Pichard, and D. O. Slosman. 1997; Body mass index compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: evidence for a spectrum bias. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 50: 837-843.
3. 3. Maria Fatima Glaner. 2005. Body mass index as indicative of body fat compared to the skin folds. Rev Bras Med sport . Vol. 11, No4.
4. 4.Pacy P J, Quevedo M, Gibson N R, Cox M, Koutedakis Y, Mill ward J. 1995. Body composition measurement in elite heavyweight oarswomen: a comparison of five methods. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 35(1): 67-74.
5. 5. Coolville, B, C: Hex ward, V, H: Sandoral, W, m. 1989. Comparison of two methods for estimation body composition of body builders. Jour apply sci research. 3(3) 57, 61. Refs: 19.
6. 6.Brozek J, Grande F, Anderson J T, Keys A. 1963. Densitometry analysis of body composition: revision of some quantitative assumptions. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1 10: 113-140.
7. 7. Heyward V H, Stolarczyk, L M. 1996. Applied Body Composition Assessment. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics: 21-43.
8. 8. Lohman TG. 1992. Advances in Body Composition Assessment: Current Issues in Exercise Science. Champaign, I L: Human Kinetics: 109-118.

9. 9.Segal, K R. 1996. Use of bioelectrical impedance analysis measurements as an evaluation for participating in sports. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Vol 64, 469S-471S
10. 10. Nevill, A, A. Stewart, T. Olds, and R. Holder, 2006. Relationship between adiposity and body size reveals limitations of BMI. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 129: 151-156.
11. 11. Lohman TG. 1981. Skin fold and body density and their relationship to body fatness: a review. Hum Biol; 53: 181- 225.
12. 12. DeLorenzo A; 2004. Multicompartment model to assess body composition in professional water polo player. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 44(1): 38-43 (ISSN: 0022-4707).
13. 13. Ainsworth, B, E. Stolarczyk, I, M. Heyward, V, H. Berry, C, B. Irwin, M, L. Musulman, L, M. 1997. Predictive accuracy of bioelectrical impedance in estimating fat free mass of African-American women. Med and sci in sport and exercise. 29(6), 781-187, Refs: 41.
14. 14. Andreoli, A; Melchiorri G; Volpe S L; Sardella F; Iacopino, L; Arrese, A. L, Ostariz , E, S. 2006. Skin fold thicknesses associated with distance running performance in highly trained runners, Journal of Sport Sciences, Volume 24, Issue1, Pages 69-76.
15. 15. Baumgartner, RN & et al, 1989. Estimation of body composition from bioelectric impedance of body segments. Am J Clint Nut. 50(2): 221-6.
16. 16. Lohman T G. Research progress in validation of laboratory methods of assessing body composition. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 16: 596–605.
17. 17. Lukaski H C, Bolonchuk W W, Hall C B, Siders W A. . 1986. Validation of tetra polar bioelectrical impedance method to assess human body composition. j App. Physiology; 60: 1327–1332.
18. 18. Lukaski H C. 1989. Use of bioelectrical impedance analysis to assess human body composition: a review. In: Livingston GE, ed. Nutritional Status Assessment of the Individual. Trumbull, Conn: Food and Nutrition Press: 189-204.
19. 19. Lukaski H C, Bolonchuk W W, Siders WA, Hall CB. l990. Body composition assessment of athletes using bioelectrical impedance measurements. J Sports Med Phys Fitness; 30: 434-40.
20. 20. Witt, K. A, and E. A. Bush, 2005. College athletes with an elevated body mass index often have a high upper arm muscle area, but not elevated triceps and sub scapular skin folds. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 105: 599-602.
21. 21. Curtin, F, A. Morabia, C. Pichard, and D. O. Slosman. 1997; Body mass index compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: evidence for a spectrum bias. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 50: 837-843.
22. 22. Maria Fatima Glaner. 2005. Body mass index as indicative of body fat compared to the skin folds. Rev Bras Med sport .Vol. 11, No4.
23. 23. Pacy P J, Quevedo M, Gibson N R, Cox M, Koutedakis Y, Mill ward J. 1995. Body composition measurement in elite heavyweight oarswomen: a comparison of five methods. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 35(1): 67-74.
24. 24. Coolville, B, C: Hex ward, V, H: Sandoral, W, m. 1989. Comparison of two methods for estimation body composition of body builders. Jour apply sci research. 3(3) 57, 61. Refs: 19.
25. 25. Brozek J, Grande F, Anderson J T, Keys A. 1963. Densitometry analysis of body composition: revision of some quantitative assumptions. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1 10: 113-140.
26. 26. Heyward V H, Stolarczyk, L M. 1996. Applied Body Composition Assessment. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics: 21-43.
27. 27. Lohman TG. 1992. Advances in Body Composition Assessment: Current Issues in Exercise Science. Champaign, I L: Human Kinetics: 109-118.