FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2041369153> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2041369153 endingPage "186" @default.
• W2041369153 startingPage "186" @default.
• W2041369153 abstract "Background: Obesity does not predispose to chronic disease in fit men. PURPOSE: To investigate if fat distribution might help to explain why the 'fat-fit' are protected from the ravages of obesity. METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging was used to assess total and regional body fat and magnetic resonance spectroscopy was used to assess liver fat in 13 slim-fit men, 4 slim-unfit men, 12 fat-fit men, and 13 fat-unfit men aged 45±6 years. Waist girth at the narrowest part of the torso was used to distinguish slim men (≤90 cm) and fat men (≥100 cm). Maximal aerobic power (l·min-1) was used to distinguish fit men (above average for age) and unfit men (average or below for age). We excluded fit men who had not trained regularly in the last two years. General linear model analysis of variance and Bonferroni post hoc tests were used to compare groups. Data are mean±SD. RESULTS: Total fat was not significantly different in the slim-fit and the slim-unfit (15.2±4.0 and 19.8±5.5 l, respectively), but was higher in the fat-fit and the fat-unfit (37.3±11.4 and 37.5±6.9 l, both p<0.05 compared to slim men and NS for inter-group comparison). Abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue was not significantly different in the slim-fit and the slim-unfit (3.0±1.4 and 3.5±1.4 l, respectively), but was higher in the fat-fit and the fat-unfit (9.4±4.2 and 8.0±1.8 l, both p<0.05 compared to slim men and NS for inter-group comparison). Visceral adipose tissue was not significantly different in the slim-fit and the slim-unfit (1.4±0.8 and 3.1±1.3 l, respectively), but was higher in the fat-fit (4.8±1.0 l, p<0.05 compared to the slim-fit) and higher still in the fat-unfit (7.2±2.4 l, p<0.05 compared to every other group). Liver fat (geometric mean) was not significantly different in the slim-fit (0.41±0.54), the slim-unfit (1.61±1.59) and the fat-fit (5.90±6.14), but was higher in the fat-unfit (24.08±24.2, p<0.05 compared to every other group). Significant differences remained when total, abdominal subcutaneous, and visceral fat were expressed as percentages (data not shown). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that favourable levels of visceral and liver fat may help to explain why the fat-fit enjoy protection from the ravages of obesity." @default.
• W2041369153 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2041369153 creator A5026997531 @default.
• W2041369153 creator A5035638085 @default.
• W2041369153 creator A5069000219 @default.
• W2041369153 creator A5072374594 @default.
• W2041369153 creator A5088338372 @default.
• W2041369153 creator A5088690113 @default.
• W2041369153 date "2009-05-01" @default.
• W2041369153 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2041369153 title "Fat Distribution In The 'Fat-fit' As Determined By Magnetic Resonance Imaging And Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy" @default.
• W2041369153 doi "https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000355124.63729.ff" @default.
• W2041369153 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W2041369153 type Work @default.
• W2041369153 sameAs 2041369153 @default.
• W2041369153 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2041369153 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2041369153 hasAuthorship W2041369153A5026997531 @default.
• W2041369153 hasAuthorship W2041369153A5035638085 @default.
• W2041369153 hasAuthorship W2041369153A5069000219 @default.
• W2041369153 hasAuthorship W2041369153A5072374594 @default.
• W2041369153 hasAuthorship W2041369153A5088338372 @default.
• W2041369153 hasAuthorship W2041369153A5088690113 @default.
• W2041369153 hasBestOaLocation W20413691531 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C111214947 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C143409427 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C171089720 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C2776193436 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C2780005051 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C2989005 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C2991684624 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C2993503589 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C3019796165 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C511355011 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C111214947 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C126322002 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C126838900 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C143409427 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C171089720 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C2776193436 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C2780005051 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C2989005 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C2991684624 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C2993503589 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C3019796165 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C511355011 @default.
• W2041369153 hasConceptScore W2041369153C71924100 @default.
• W2041369153 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2041369153 hasLocation W20413691531 @default.
• W2041369153 hasLocation W20413691532 @default.
• W2041369153 hasOpenAccess W2041369153 @default.
• W2041369153 hasPrimaryLocation W20413691531 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W1481851830 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W1847293156 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W2016882411 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W2074012250 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W2140101587 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W2142654040 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W2611291627 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W3029956022 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W3137237876 @default.
• W2041369153 hasRelatedWork W39938533 @default.
• W2041369153 hasVolume "41" @default.
• W2041369153 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2041369153 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2041369153 magId "2041369153" @default.
• W2041369153 workType "article" @default.