Adjusting for fat-free mass in metabolic studies

in a recent publication, Eriksson et al. [1] explored the relationship between size at birth and resting metabolic rate and body composition in adulthood in a cohort of over 300 men and women. They reported an "unexpected" finding that people of both sexes who had a low birth weight also had a higher metabolic activity per unit muscle tissue. This conclusion was drawn from an analysis where resting metabolic rate (expressed as kcal/kg fat-free mass) in adulthood was examined relative to the birth weight of the subject. One explanation that they suggested was that the apparent increased activity of muscle tissue resulted from an increased sympathetic drive associated with low birth weight. There may be a less physiological reason for the findings of Eriksson et al. Whilst the data are not given specifically in the text, it can be seen clearly from Fig. 1 in the paper that the mean fat-free mass measured in adulthood increased, in both sexes, from the lightest birth weight group to the heaviest birth weight group when the cohort were divided into tertiles based on birth weight. The crux of the issue is that in many - indeed most - cases, expressing resting energy expenditure as kcal/kg fat-free mass does not totally adjust for fat-free mass [2 - 5], and a bias is introduced so that those who have a higher fat-free mass will tend to have a lower resting energy expenditure when expressed per kg fat-free mass. This bias found when expressing many physiological parameters relative to body size, body weight or body composition has long been known [6], and should be carefully considered by appropriate adjustment and hence analysis.