New study reveals that belly fat is a key measure of health and longevity
A recent study found that people with thicker waists compared to their height or hips are more likely to struggle with movement as they age, and face a higher risk of premature death.
Researchers said it is not how much you weigh, it's about where you carry it. And belly fat is a major red flag for your body.
A team of Italian scientists tested 10,690 adults over six years using a simple sit-and-stand test performed five times from a chair.
Dr Elena Levati, the lead researcher and surgeon at Agostino Gemelli University Hospital Foundation in Italy, wrote: 'This can help identify people at risk before more serious problems show up.'
The study found that people were 28 per cent more likely to have trouble moving if their waist was wide compared to their hips, and 32 per cent more likely if their waist was too large for their height, regardless of their weight or age.
According to a report of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 40.3 per cent of adults in the U.S. classify as obese, which is more than 100 million people.
The CDC says that the belly fat, especially the kind that builds up around organs, raises the risk of heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and early death.
The study published in Aging focused on two numbers, the waist to hip ration (WHR) and the waist to height ratio (WHtR).
Experts note that WHR and WHtR have been used in clinical trials for years to identify risks for heart disease and diabetes.
The recent study, however, explored WHtR's link to age-related muscle decline, testing how quickly patient's muscle function deteriorates with aging.
Researchers collected participants' waist and hip measurements, had them complete questionnaires about their diet and exercise, and took blood samples to check cholesterol and glucose levels.
They discovered that about 71 per cent of men and 53 per cent of women had risky waist-to-height ratios.
For waist-to-hip ratios, 61 pe rcent of men and 39 per cent of women had unhealthy scores.
During the test, participants were timed as they stood up and sat down from a chair five times. On average, women took 7.9 seconds to complete it, while men took 7.6 seconds, both within the normal range for their age groups.
However, the study found that people with larger WHR or WHtR ratios consistently performed worse on this test.
Even after adjusting for weight, age, and other factors, these participants were more likely to show signs of declining physical ability.
Although a duration longer than 10.8 seconds is typically regarded as a warning sign for frailty or disability, the researchers found that slower performance in individuals with higher belly fat ratios indicates that their muscular function may be compromised, even if they have not yet crossed that danger threshold.
Another study published by National Institutes of Health (NIH) found that older adults, with abdominal obesity and low handgrip strength, face twice the risk of death from any cause.
This combination highlights accelerated aging and increased vulnerability to weakness, disability, and premature death.
Researchers said the root cause of this issue might be the visceral fat, a type of body fat stored deep within the abdominal area, surrounding vital organs like the liver, intestines, and stomach.
Since visceral fat wraps around the organs, it has been linked to inflammation, poor muscle quality, and sarcopenia, a condition where muscle strength declines with age.
Nearly 50 pe rcent of American adults have unhealthy waist sizes linked to excess abdominal fat, based on National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data.
This kind of fat buildup can quietly affect your balance, endurance, and even how your heart and lungs work during exercise, according to the experts.
They added that unlike body weight or body to mass index (BMI), which sometimes can be misleading, these waist ratios give a clear picture as someone with normal BMI still can carry dangerous belly fat.
The study also found that waist-to-height ratio was a better predictor than waist-to-hip ratio. It was more accurate for both men and women, and worked better regardless of age.
In fact, just measuring your waist and comparing it to your height may be the simplest way to know if your future mobility is at risk.
The waist-to-height test has another advantage, it is quick, cheap, and does not require a lab or doctor's visit.
While the study focused on physical performance, the implications go beyond that. Poor mobility has been tied to higher death rates, hospitalizations, and reduced quality of life.
A study published in NIH in 2023 found that older adults with high waist circumference were significantly more likely to develop a disability within five years, even when their overall weight stayed stable.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
15 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Scientists reveal the REAL number of daily steps you should aim for to prevent dementia
Experts, influencers and fitness trackers have long touted 10,000 steps a day as the 'perfect' number to ward off obesity, cancer and early death. However, 10,000 steps, equivalent to five miles, might not be the magic number. In fact, researchers in Australia suggest aiming lower. In a new analysis of nearly 60 studies, researchers found just 7,000 steps in a day was enough to lower the risk of dementia, heart disease and some forms of cancer. This adds up to roughly 3.5 miles. Scientists compared the effects of 7,000 daily steps to 2,000. Based on health data from 160,000 people, those who walked 7,000 steps a day had a 25 percent lower risk of cardiovascular disease, America's number one killer. Additionally, 7,000 daily steps led to a 38 percent drop in dementia risk. People who adhered to the measure were also less likely to suffer from depression than those who got just 2,000 steps in a day. And though the average American only takes about 4,000 to 5,000 daily steps, according to the CDC, researchers said even this level of activity could lead to lower chronic disease risk. It's unclear exactly how walking prevents cancer, dementia and other chronic diseases, but it's thought to be due to regulating hormone levels and lowering the risk of obesity, which is consistently linked to lasting health issues. Exercise in general, including walking, has been proven to lower chronic disease risk, and walking in particular can burn about 100 to 200 calories per mile and improve joint, heart and brain health. Dr Melody Ding, lead study author and epidemiologist at the University of Sydney, said: 'We have this perception we should be doing 10,000 steps a day, but it's not evidence based.' The figure dates back to a marketing campaign in Japan centered around the 1964 Tokyo Olympics. At the time a brand of pedometer launched called the manpo-kei, which translates to '10,000-step meter.' Dr Ding said that figure was then 'taken out of context' and became an unofficial guideline, even for modern-day fitness trackers and apps. However, she noted it's still important not to discourage people who are already surpassing 10,000 steps to cut back if they don't have to. She said this is because 'it's not that after 7,000 steps it becomes harmful.' The idea is that 7,000 is just 'a lot more accessible and approachable' for more people. The new research, published this week in The Lancet Public Health, analyzed 57 studies conducted between 2014 and 2025. The studies included data on the risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular disease, cancer, type 2 diabetes, cognitive outcomes, mental health outcomes, physical function and falls. Overall, people who walked at least 7,000 steps every 24 hours were at a 25 percent lower risk of developing cardiovascular disease and 47 percent lower risk of dying from it compared to people who got 2,000 steps a day. Additionally, those in the higher step count group were six percent less likely to develop cancer overall and 37 percent less likely to die from it, though the study did not distinguish between specific forms of the disease. The 7,000 step benchmark could also reduce the likelihood of developing dementia by 38 percent and depression by 22 percent. The chance of dying from any cause also decreased 47 percent in people who walked 7,000 steps a day compared to 2,000. Walking may help fend off disease by decreasing the risk of obesity, which is tied to heart disease, diabetes, depression, dementia and some forms of cancer. It also has been shown to improve blood flow to the brain and reduce inflammation, key preventative techniques against dementia. Additionally, walking lowers levels of hormones like estrogen and insulin, which can fuel breast, ovarian, endometrial and pancreatic cancers, among others. And it even releases feel-good endorphins, natural chemicals that boost mood and promote a sense of well-being. Dr Ding said if 7,000 still feels too ambitious, aiming for a more reasonable number like 4,000 could also lower the risk of all-cause mortality by as much as 36 percent compared to 2,000 steps. With this in mind, she encouraged moving as much as possible within limits. There were several limitations to the new study, including lack of data on specific participant factors like sex, race, ethnicity, age, weight and overall health status. Additionally, many of the studies included only measured differences for several weeks or months, so there was a lack of long-term data.
The Guardian
16 hours ago
- The Guardian
Resident doctors' strike undermines union movement, Wes Streeting says
A strike by resident doctors 'enormously undermines the entire trade union movement', Wes Streeting has argued, urging them not to join industrial action on Friday morning. In an article for the Guardian, the health secretary says the decision by the British Medical Association (BMA) to push for new strikes in England immediately after receiving a pay rise of 22% to cover 2023-24 and 2024-25 is unreasonable and unprecedented. Taking aim squarely at the leadership of the BMA, which represents the medics formerly known as junior doctors, Streeting condemns their demand for a fresh 29% rise over the next few years. He says that while there was 90% backing for the strike, it was on a turnout of just over 55% of members. Streeting says the move to strike after the offer of a 5.4% pay rise for 2025-26, was rushed into and is 'bitterly disappointing' amid efforts to improve NHS services. 'There was a deal here to be done,' he writes. 'Instead, the BMA leadership's decision to not even consider postponing these strikes will place an enormous burden on their colleagues, and hit the recovery we can all see our health service is making. 'Not only that, it enormously undermines the entire trade union movement. No trade union in British history has seen its members receive a such a steep pay rise only to immediately respond with strikes – even when a majority of their members didn't even vote to strike. This action is unprecedented, and it is unreasonable.' The BMA argues that resident doctors have seen their pay fall by a much greater amount in real terms since 2008-09 than the rest of the population. 'Doctors are not worth less than they were 17 years ago, when austerity policies began driving wages down. We're simply asking for that value to be restored,' it said. Streeting says resident doctors have privately contacted him to express their dismay at the decision to strike, saying they 'feel the BMA's leaders are out of lockstep with not just patients but most resident doctors themselves'. The health secretary urges doctors to defy their union and not join in the strike, which runs until 7am next Wednesday. 'I am urging resident doctors to not follow the BMA leadership, who I do not believe are representing the best interests of their members, any further down this path as strikes begin on Friday at 7am,' he writes. The public have been urged to keep coming forward for NHS care during the strike, and NHS England has urged hospital chief executives to keep routine operations and appointments and only reschedule if there is a risk to patient safety. A Department of Health and Social Care blog noted that the NHS was 'taking a different approach' after learning lessons from previous strikes, and would avoid cancelling planned appointments for illnesses such as cancer because this posed 'a risk to patients too'. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion On Wednesday, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges urged the BMA to suspend its guidance to resident doctors that they do not have to share their intentions to strike with their employers – as is their entitlement under employment law – to enable hospitals to better plan. It is understood that in previous strikes, healthcare leaders filled rota gaps of unknown size by overstaffing and cancelling procedures, with the result that there was insufficient work for some highly paid consultants. Fewer resident doctors are expected to go on strike on Friday than in the previous round of industrial action that started in 2023 after the BMA achieved a smaller mandate in the strike ballot. Of 48,000 members, 55% voted, of whom 90% supported industrial action – representing less than half of members – compared with a turnout of 71.25% in 2023, of whom 43,440 (or 98.37%) voted to go on strike. The numbers of striking doctors is expected to vary between hospitals and trusts, with anticipated staff rota gaps filled locally by consultants, agency doctors and other NHS staff. Hospital leaders will monitor demand and if they are overwhelmed with patients they will have contingency plans in place, for example cancelling some appointments to prioritise urgent and emergency care, calling in extra bank or agency staff, or requesting derogations – where resident doctors are called in to work – with the BMA. The Health Service Journal (HSJ) reported that the NHS England chief, Sir Jim Mackey, had told trust leaders to crack down on resident doctors' ability to earn money during the strike by working locum shifts.
Reuters
16 hours ago
- Reuters
GSK's blood cancer drug gets EU approval
July 24 (Reuters) - The European Union has approved GSK's (GSK.L), opens new tab drug Blenrep to treat relapsed or treatment-resistant forms of a cancer affecting blood plasma cells, the British drugmaker said on Thursday. EU regulators approved Blenrep after phase III trials showed the drug, when used in combination with standard treatments, extended progression-free survival and improved overall survival in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, GSK said. The approval comes a day after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration extended its review of the drug as a combination treatment for the same illness. The FDA's panel of independent experts had last week recommended against the drug, citing concerns about previously documented risks of eye-related side effects. The EU approval marks the sixth regulatory nod for Blenrep combinations, with applications still under review across all major markets. The drug delivers a cell-killing agent directly to tumour cells while limiting damage to healthy tissue — unlike conventional chemotherapy. Multiple myeloma is the third most common blood cancer globally and is generally considered treatable but not curable. It affects the immunity-boosting plasma white blood cells.
