AJCN North Carolina Research Campus
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hebbelinck, M.
Right arrow Articles by De Malsche, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hebbelinck, M.
Right arrow Articles by De Malsche, A.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Hebbelinck, M.
Right arrow Articles by De Malsche, A.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 70, No. 3, 579S-585S, September 1999
© 1999 American Society for Clinical Nutrition


Supplements

Growth, development, and physical fitness of Flemish vegetarian children, adolescents, and young adults1,2

Marcel Hebbelinck, Peter Clarys and Ann De Malsche

1 From the Laboratories of Human Biometry and Biological Chemistry, Faculty of Physical Education and Physical Therapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels.

This study was designed to assess average daily dietary intakes of energy in 82 vegetarian children (group A: 6– 9-y-old girls and 6–11-y-old boys), adolescents (group B: 10– 15-y-old girls and 12–17-y-old boys), and young adults (group C: 16–30-y-old females and 18–30-y-old males) and included determination of height and weight; triceps, suprailiac, and calf skinfold thicknesses; puberty ratings; and physical fitness. Dietary energy intake was lower than recommended values in all 3 groups. Height and weight did not differ significantly from the reference data except in group B, which had significantly lower heights and weights and lower body mass indexes (P < 0.05). Triceps and suprailiac skinfold thicknesses were lower in all age groups, whereas the calf skinfold thickness was only significantly lower in the 10–15-y-old girls (P < 0.05). The vegetarian children were as physically fit as the reference group. The vegetarian adolescent boys and girls and the young adults scored significantly lower on the standing long jump and 30-s sit-up (P < 0.05). The vegetarian subjects of groups B and C recovered significantly faster from the step test (P < 0.05). Puberty ratings plotted on percentile graphs showed that all vegetarian subjects, except for 1 girl, were within the normal developmental range. We conclude that, within the limits of this study, vegetarian subjects have lower relative body weights and skinfold thicknesses in adolescence than do nonvegetarians. They scored lower on the strength tests and better on the cardiorespiratory test when compared with reference values. The growth and maturation status of the vegetarian population were within the normal range.

Key Words: Growth • development • physical fitness • vegetarian children • adolescents • young adults • Belgium







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Nutrition