Background There are several published anthropometric equations to estimate body fat percentage (BF%), and this may prompt uncertainty about their application. Purpose To analyze the accuracy of several anthropometric equations (developed in athletic [AT] and nonathletic [NAT] populations) that estimate BF% comparing them with DXA. Methods We evaluated 131 professional male soccer players (body mass: 73.2 ± 8.0 kg; height: 177.5 ± 5.8 cm; DXA BF% [median, 25th–75th percentile]: 14.0, 11.9–16.4%) aged 18 to 37 years. All subjects were evaluated with anthropometric measurements and a whole body DXA scan. BF% was estimated through 14 AT and 17 NAT anthropometric equations and compared with the measured DXA BF%. Mean differences and 95% limits of agreement were calculated for those anthropometric equations without significant differences with DXA. Results Five AT and seven NAT anthropometric equations did not differ significantly with DXA. From these, Oliver's and Civar's (AT) and Ball's and Wilmore's (NAT) equations showed the highest agreement with DXA. Their 95% limits of agreement ranged from −3.9 to 2.3%, −4.8 to 1.8%, −3.4 to 3.1%, and −3.9 to 3.0%, respectively. Conclusion Oliver's, Ball's, Civar's, and Wilmore's equations were the best to estimate BF% accurately compared with DXA in professional male soccer players.

Adequate protein intake per day has been associated with a lower risk of physical disability; however, if adequate protein intake per meal is also associated is unknown. The purpose of this study was to analyze the association between adequate protein intake per meal and physical disability in daily living activities in Mexican adults aged ≥60 years. We assessed the number of meals per day with an adequate protein content (24 h dietary recall), the presence of physical disability in daily living activities (two validated questionnaires), and their association in 187 participants through logistic regression. Consuming two or three meals per day with ≥30 g each was associated with lower risk of physical disability on Transportation (OR [95% CI]: 0.06 [0.01–0.50], p = 0.01), Shopping (0.05 [0.01–0.40], p = 0.004), Feeding (0.06 [0.01–0.74], p = 0.028), and Transfer (0.09 [0.01–0.98], p = 0.048). On the other hand, consuming two or three meals per day with ≥0.4 g/kg each was associated with lower risk of physical disability on Shopping (0.21 [0.05–0.89], p = 0.034) and Transportation (0.12 [0.03–0.48], p = 0.003). The consumption of two or three meals per day with adequate protein content is associated with lower risk of physical disability in Mexican adults aged 60 years and older.

Purpose. To describe the proportions of inadequate protein intake (IPI) per day and per meal and their association with functionality in middle to older aged Mexican adults. Materials and Methods. In a cross-sectional design, we evaluated the protein intake and functionality of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and activities of daily living (ADL) of 190 middle to older aged Mexican adults. IPI was considered as any protein intake: <1.2 g/kg/day, <30 g/meal, or <0.4 g/kg/meal. Functionality was organized into three groups: high, middle, and low scores. The first was set as the reference, and the other was considered as impaired functionality. With a multinomial logistic regression, we analyzed the association between IPI per day and per meal with impaired functionality. Results. A high proportion of participants showed IPI per day. The meal with the highest proportion of IPI was dinner, followed by breakfast and lunch for both criteria. IPI at lunch was a significant risk factor for impaired functionality in ADL when assessed with the 30 g/meal criterion (low scores, OR 3.82 (95% CI, 1.15–12.65); middle scores, OR 2.40 [1.03–5.62]). For the 0.4 g/kg/meal criterion, IPI at dinner was a significant risk factor for IADL middle scores only (OR 7.64, [1.27–45.85]). Conclusion. IPI per meal is high in middle to older aged Mexican adults, and at specific meals, it is a significant risk factor for impaired functionality in activities of daily living.

Recent interest in protein intake per meal is observed in studies that have reported the protein intake patterns in different countries; however, comparisons of these data are lacking. We aimed to compare protein intake patterns and the percentage of inadequate protein intake (IPI) per day and meal in older adults from different countries. We acquired data of protein intake in older adults from four countries (Mexico, United States of America, Germany, and United Kingdom). We compared protein intake (per day and meal), IPI per day and meal, and the number of meals with an adequate protein content among countries. The IPI per day significantly differed among countries for <0.8 and <1.0 (both p < 0.001), but not for <1.2 g/kg/d (p = 0.135). IPI per meal (<30 g/meal) did not differ among countries at breakfast (p = 0.287) and lunch (p = 0.076) but did differ at dinner (p < 0.001). Conversely, IPI per meal (<0.4 g/kg/meal) significantly differed among countries at breakfast, lunch, and dinner (all p < 0.001). The percentage of participants that ate ≥30 g/meal or ≥0.4 g/kg/meal at zero, one, and two or three meals per day significantly differed among countries (all p < 0.05). IPI at breakfast and lunch (<30 g/meal) was a common trait in the analyzed samples and might represent an opportunity for nutritional interventions in older adults in different countries.