Skip to main content
Download PDF

No association between dietary magnesium intake and body composition among Iranian adults: a cross-sectional study

BMC Nutrition volume 8, Article number: 39 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

Obesity is becoming more prevalent worldwide. Magnesium (Mg) intake may play a role in the regulation of energy metabolism and body weight. Therefore, in this cross-sectional study, we aimed to investigate the association between dietary Mg intake and body composition among healthy adults.

Methods

A total of 778 adult men and women aged 18–59 years who attended health care centers in Tehran, Iran, entered the final analysis. Dietary intake was assessed with a validated and reliable food frequency questionnaire with 168 items and the dietary Mg intake was estimated using Nutritionist IV software. Anthropometric measurements and blood samples were collected and body composition was evaluated employing the Body Mass Index (BMI), A Body Shape Index (ABSI), Body Adiposity Index (BAI), Body Roundness Index (BRI), Visceral Adiposity Index (VAI), Lipid Accumulation Index (LAP), and Triglyceride-Glucose index (TyG). Multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine the association of the dietary Mg intake with body composition indices.

Results

The mean daily dietary Mg intake was 294 ± 140 mg in men and 262 ± 112 mg in women. Unadjusted linear regression showed that dietary magnesium intake is significantly associated with a waist to hip ratio (WHR) and total cholesterol (TC) in men, and hip circumference (HC) in women. After adjusting for potential confounders including age, education, marriage, occupation and smoking, total energy intake, and activity score, there remained no significant association between dietary Mg intake and any of the body composition indices including BMI, ABSI, BAI, BRI, VAI, LAP, and TyG neither in men nor women.

Conclusion

Higher Mg intake was not associated with anthropometric indices in Iranian adults, according to our findings. Additional observational studies would be beneficial in clarifying the existing findings.

Peer Review reports

Background

In the past two decades, the prevalence of obesity has increased almost 12% and has reached a global record of 42.4% [1]. It may lead to heart diseases [2], different types of cancer [3], type 2 diabetes [4], and strokes [5], which are the primary causes of worldwide premature death [6]. The problem is more severe in developing countries that have a weaker health control system. In Iran, the prevalence of overweight and obesity were 41% and 13% in 2019, respectively, and is following an increasing trend [7].

Body Mass Index (BMI) is the most common way to evaluate body composition and obesity [8], but it does not differentiate between fat mass and fat-free mass or the location of the body fat and is not inferable to different ethnicities [9]. Therefore, other indices are necessary to assess body composition precisely. Fat distribution is as important as the fat mass in predicting risk factors [10]. Visceral Adiposity Index (VAI), A body Shape Index (ABSI), Body Roundness Index (BRI), Lipid Accumulation Index (LAP), and Body Adiposity Index (BAI) are all fairly novel indices that may enhance the measurement of obesity and body composition These indices have all been currently considered reliable and valid, and have strengths and limitations compared to each other (15-11).

Besides excessive energy intake, obesity and the poor shape of the body might be the result of inadequate nutrient consumption, as most obese people have a low intake of vital minerals and vitamins [11, 12]. The association of several micronutrients including calcium, zinc, iodine, selenium, with body composition has been studied [13,14,15,16]. Of these, magnesium (Mg) may play a key role in energy metabolism and obesity. Mg is involved in more than 300 biochemical reactions in the human body. Synthesis of proteins, muscle and nerve transmission, blood glucose control, and regulation of blood pressure have all been linked to Mg [17, 18]. It has been observed in some studies that there is a negative association between Mg intake and markers of obesity, such as waist circumference (WC) and BMI [19,20,21]. It may theoretically be the result of the regulatory effect of the referred mineral on blood glucose level and insulin resistance [22] or the synthesis of fatty acids [23]. Mg is essential for activating several key enzymes of glucose pathways and therefore, Mg deficiency can change the oxidative metabolism of glucose [24]. A decrease of the activity of Mg in the liver might generate an excess amount of NADPH from glucose thus, causing an expansion in the synthesis of TG and LDL, which the former would go on to store in adipocytes and promote adiposity [25]. Apart from this, Mg act as the cofactor of enzyme cholesterol acyltransferase (CAT) and lipoprotein lipase (LPL), two enzymes participating in fat metabolism. On the other hand, a non-significant relation has been discovered in other studies [26, 27].

Although the results can be generalizable to different geographic populations, there is still limited evidence of the mentioned association in populated developing countries like Iran, where the consumption of whole grains, legumes, and nuts, the main sources of Mg are low [28]. As obesity is a quite clear phenomenon in middle Eastern people including Iran, the aim of the current cross-sectional study is to investigate the association of magnesium intake, exclusively from the diet, and body composition and anthropometric indices in a sample of Iranian adults.

Materials and methods

Study design

A total of 850 healthy adult men and women, aged 18 to 59, who were willing to participate in this cross-sectional study, were recruited from health care centers of Tehran, from 2018 to 2019, via a two-stage cluster sampling using advertisement, distribution of flyers in common places and information sessions at health care centers about the goal and the benefit of the examination. First, the city was split into five regions north, east, south, west, and center. A list of all existing health care centers was provided and then eight health centers were randomly chosen from each region for a tally of forty health centers. Ultimately, the sample size (n = 850) was divided by 40 to obtain the number of subjects in each health center. Based on the prevalence of obesity and overweight in the adults of Tehran (65%), an error coefficient of d = 0.04 and at α level of 0.05, a sample size of 546 people was calculated.\(\left(\text{n}\mathit=\frac{z^2\mathit-p\text{(1}\mathit-p\mathit)}{d^2}\frac{{(1.96)}^2\ast0.65\ast0.35}{{(0.04)}^2}\right)\;\)  Due to the potential exclusion of participants, the sample size was multiplied by 1.5 which included the total number of 850 subjects. Of these, 72 participants were excluded, 50 of them because of missing data, 13 because of under-reporting, and 9 for the reason of over-reporting of energy intake (800 > , 4000 <) [29]. We conducted the final analysis on 778 subjects.

Data collection

Information about sex (male/ female), age (year), educational level (under diploma/ diploma and higher), smoking status (never or former smoker/ current smoker), occupation (employed/ house keeper/ retired/ unemployed) and marital status (single/ married/ divorced) were collected via demographic questionnaire during the initial visit.

Physical activity was assessed using the short form of the International physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ) [30], consisting of 7 validated questions. Data was collected regarding walking, moderate, and vigorous activity, in the previous week, and a physical activity level was determined within two categories of metabolic equivalents (METs) [31], as low (< 600 MET-minutes/week) or moderate and high physical activity (> 600 MET-minutes per week).

Systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were measured twice by a standard mercury sphygmomanometer (BC 08; Beurer, Ulm, Germany), on the right arm, after 15 min of resting, performed by a trained physician. The second measurement was done 1–2 min later. The mean of the two measurements was reported as the blood pressure of each individual.

Magnesium intake assessment

The dietary intake of the participants was assessed using a validated and reliable semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) with 168 food items [32], which consists of a list of foods with a standard serving size commonly consumed and estimates the mean intake of each food on a daily, weekly, monthly, or annual basis. It was administered by an experienced dietician through face-to-face interviews. Energy and nutrient intake estimated with FFQ has been proven to be valid and accurate [32]. Portion sizes of the consumed foods were converted to grams per day [33] and intake of energy and Mg content of foods were estimated using the Nutritionist IV software based on the Iranian foods-modified US Department of Agriculture food composition [34].

Anthropometric measurements

The height of the participants was calibrated using a wall stadiometer with a precision of 0.1 cm while standing in a normal position with no shoes on (Seca, Germany). Weight was measured by a digital scale with a sensitivity of 100 g (Seca808; Seca, Hamburg, Germany), with minimum clothes on. WC was assessed utilizing a tape measure between the lowest rib and Iliac crest during exhalation. HC was measured by a non-stretch tape around the widest portion of the buttocks over light clothing without any pressure on the body surface and WHR was calculated. To minimize subjective errors, a single technician did all the measurements.

Following mathematical equations were used to measure anthropometric indices:

$$BMI\hspace{0.17em}=\hspace{0.17em}\frac{Weight (kg)}{{Height (m)}^{2}}$$

The most widely used index for anthropometric measurement in epidemiological research traditionally classifies obesity. It is regarded as a reliable guideline for weight management for many years [35].

$$BAI\hspace{0.17em}=\hspace{0.17em}\frac{100 \times HC \left(m\right)}{Height(m) \times \sqrt{Height }(m)} -18$$

This parameter was defined by Bergman et al. and can evaluate adiposity percent directly even in the clinical and critical situations using only HC and height. Dissimilar to BMI, the BAI can predict the percentage of body fat in both men and women without statistical correction [36].

$$BRI\hspace{0.17em}=\hspace{0.17em}364.2\hspace{0.17em}-\times \hspace{0.17em}\surd (1-(\frac{{\left(WC (cm)/2\pi \right)}^{2}}{{\left(0.5 \times Height (cm)\right)}^{2}}))$$

Instituted by Thomas et al., it is a predictor of body fat and visceral adiposity fat percent that can assess health status [37]. It has been investigated that BRI is one of the most accurate indices in predicting metabolic syndrome among adults [38].

$$ABSI\hspace{0.17em}=\hspace{0.17em}\frac{WC (m)}{{BMI (\frac{kg}{{m}^{2}})}^\frac{2}{3}\times {Height (m)}^\frac{1}{2}}$$

First introduced by Krakauer et al. and based on the same principle used for designing BMI, ABSI measures body shape, as a risk factor for premature death and all-cause mortality in the general population and is considered one of the best indices for measuring abdominal obesity [39, 40].

$$LAP (men)\hspace{0.17em}=\hspace{0.17em}\left(Waist \left(cm\right)-65\right)\times TG (\frac{mmol}{l})$$
$$LAP (women)\hspace{0.17em}=\hspace{0.17em}\left(Waist \left(cm\right)-58\right)\times TG (\frac{mmol}{l})$$

LAP is considered to be a mighty index that predicts insulin resistance (IR) in the non-diabetic population better than BMI. It is an easy index associated with lipid overaccumulation which can detect IR in large populations [41, 42]. It is a more reliable predictor of cardiovascular risk [43].

$$VAI (men)\hspace{0.17em}=\hspace{0.17em}(\frac{WC (cm)}{39.68+\left(1.88\times BMI\right)})\times (\frac{TG (\frac{mmol}{l})}{1.03})\times (\frac{1.31}{HDL (\frac{mmol}{l})})$$
$$VAI (women)\hspace{0.17em}=\hspace{0.17em}(\frac{WC (cm)}{36.58+\left(1.89\times BMI\right)})\times (\frac{TG (\frac{mmol}{l})}{0.81})\times (\frac{1.52}{HDL (\frac{mmol}{l})})$$

A sex-specific index, based on WC, BMI, Triglyceride (TG), and High-Density Lipoprotein (HDL), that indirectly calculates visceral fat function and distribution. VAI was introduced by Amato et al. and was able to estimate the association between visceral adiposity dysfunction and cardiometabolic risk [44].

$$TyG\hspace{0.17em}=\hspace{0.17em}Ln[TG(\frac{mg}{dl})\times \frac{FPG\left(\frac{mg}{dl}\right)}{2}]$$

Triglyceride-Glucose index (TyG) is a novel marker, which has been revealed to have a high sensitivity and specificity in recognizing metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular risk, and insulin resistance at the early stages [45].

Biochemical measurements

Blood samples were collected after 12 h of fasting since the previous night by approved methods at the Nutrition and Biochemistry Laboratory of the School of Nutritional Sciences and Dietetics at Tehran University of Medical Sciences and the serum levels of TG, Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG), and HDL were determined.

Statistical analysis

General characteristics of the participants were described using mean and standard deviation (SD). Since total energy that one person consumes plays a defining role on micronutrient intake, dietary Mg intake (mg) was adjusted for the total energy intake (kcal), using the residual method performed by the linear regression, with Mg intake, exclusively from the diet, as the dependent variable and total energy intake as the independent variable, and then got categorized into quartiles. To compare the means of different quantitative and qualitative variables across quartiles of adjusted Mg intake and in each sex, we applied a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-squared test. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was applied to assess the means of biochemical and anthropometric parameters across quartiles of the energy-adjusted Mg intake for each sex adjusting for age, marital status, occupation, education status, smoking status, physical activity, and energy intake. Multiple linear regression with a confidence interval of 95 percent was used to determine the relationship between dietary Mg intake and anthropometric indices and blood glucose and lipids values, controlling for age, age, educational level, marital status, occupation, smoking, activity score, and total energy intake as covariates, in each gender separately. All analyses were run by using SPSS software (SPSS Inc., version 26), and p < 0.05 was defined as significant.

Results

The current cross-sectional study included 778 participants, 546 women and 266 men aged 18 to 59 years, with a mean age of 45.7 years in men and 44.6 years in women. Men significantly had higher energy intake (mean ± SD: 2441 ± 682) and dietary Mg consumption (mean ± SD: 294 ± 140) than women (mean ± SD: 2228 ± 751 and 262 ± 112), respectively (P =  < 0.001). Other characteristics of the study population, classified by sex, and the quartiles of energy-adjusted Mg intake, are presented in Table 1 and Table 2.

Table 1 General characteristics of study participants by sex
Full size table
Table 2 General characteristics of study participants by energy-adjusted quartiles of Mg intake
Full size table

Table 3 shows the mean energy and dietary intake of Mg, anthropometric indices, and blood glucose and lipids across the quartiles of energy-adjusted dietary Mg consumption in men, adjusted for age, marital status, occupation, education status, smoking status, physical activity, and energy intake. Men in the highest quartile of energy-adjusted Mg intake had a significantly lower total daily energy intake compared to the lowest quartile (P < 0.001). None of the other values were significantly different across the quartiles. Alternatively, Table 4 presents the same values among women of the study. Similarly, women in the top quartile of energy-adjusted Mg intake had a significantly lower total daily energy intake compared to the first quartile (P < 0.001). Also, there was a significant decrease in BRI across the quartiles (P = 0.03).

Table 3 Multivariate-adjusted Sociodemographic, body composition indices and biochemical factors across quartiles of dietary Mg intake in Iranian men
Full size table
Table 4 Multivariate-adjusted Sociodemographic, body composition indices and biochemical factors across quartiles of dietary Mg intake in Iranian women
Full size table

Crude and multivariable-adjusted beta coefficients (β) with 95 percent confidence intervals of anthropometric indices and blood glucose and lipids across quartiles of the dietary Mg intake, as a continuous variable, among men and women are presented in Table 5 and Table 6. No significant association was observed between dietary Mg intake and body composition factors in men and women neither in any of the models, although there were some exceptions. There was a significant association for WHR in men, which a higher dietary Mg intake was associated with a higher WHR (β:0.001, 95% CI:0.000–0.001, P = 0.03) and TC (β: -0.044, 95% CI: -0.086- -0.002, P = 0.04) in the non-adjusted model. In women, higher intake was significantly associated with a higher BAI in partially-adjusted (β:0.005, 95% CI:0.000–0.009, P = 0.04), there was a higher likelihood of increased WC in the second model (β:0.009, 95% CI:0.001–0.017, P = 0.03), and finally, we observed an elevated HC with higher dietary Mg intake in both non-adjusted (β:0.012, 95% CI:0.004–0.020, P = 0.01) and partially-adjusted model (model 2; β:0.012, 95% CI:0.004–0,020, P = 0.01).

Table 5 Association of dietary magnesium intake with anthropometric indices and biochemical factors in Iranian men
Full size table
Table 6 association of dietary magnesium intake with anthropometric indices and biochemical factors in Iranian women
Full size table

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that assessed the association of the Mg intake from diet and body composition in a Middle East country like Iran. We compared the quartiles of the energy-adjusted Mg intake in association with BMI, BRI, BAI, ABSI, VAI, LAP, and TyG index in a sample of Iranian adults. Our findings revealed that the dietary intake of Mg was not significantly associated with any of the obesity indicators mentioned above neither in men nor in women, after adjusting for potential confounders, so it did not support the idea that alternation in Mg intake might affect weight and weight-related indices.

In contrast to our findings, a 30- years longitudinal study among 5115 American young adults aged 18–30 years, indicated that Mg intake is inversely associated with BMI [20]. Another population-based probabilistic survey on 1573 Mexican adults showed that increased dietary Mg intake is associated with lower BMI and WC [21]. In a cross-sectional analysis performed on National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007–2014 data, mg intake was negatively correlated with BMI and WC, after adjusting for age and gender [19]. Another cross-sectional study conducted on NHANES 1999–2004 data showed the risk of obesity and central obesity was 20% lower with a 100 mg increase in daily Mg intake [46]. During a 15 years follow-up cohort study among 2247 white men and women, participants in the highest quartile of Mg intake had significantly lower WC, but no meaningful association was found in black men and women and between Mg intake and BMI [47]. The discrepancies between our findings and other studies could be explained by the following reasons. In the present study, Mg supplements were not considered, which can lead to an Mg under-reporting since the people who take nutritional supplements probably have a better diet consisting of seeds and nuts, green vegetables, and high-value legumes [48, 49]. The presence of other confounders also might be a reason for non-significant results. Additionally, Iranian adults may have a higher variance in consuming Mg-rich foods. Besides that, our study had a relatively smaller sample size than previous ones. No research was conducted about the association of Mg intake and previously mentioned novel anthropometric indices.

Obesity, along with type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome share a series of pathological pathways that lead to inflammation of the human body [50]. As a result of an unhealthy diet, most obese people have Mg deficiency [51]. Mg depletion may cause chronic inflammation both directly [52] and indirectly by altering intestinal microbiota [53]. In obese people, most of the daily energy intake comes from sugary foods and refined grains [54]. The bioavailability of the Mg mainly depends on the form of the consumed food. The element has a much higher concentration at unrefined whole grains and unprocessed vegetables and fruits compared to processed foods. Additionally, the content of Mg in the edible parts of the cereals and some vegetables is lower than that in non-edible parts [55]. In general, Mg is present in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, nuts, milk, fish, meat, breakfast cereals, and tap, mineral, and bottled waters [56].

The strength of this study is the relatively large nationally representative sample size and utilizing new indices to explain obesity and body composition. In addition, all information was collected with trained nutritionists using validated questionnaires, reducing any probable error. Also, we acknowledge this is the first study that analyzed the association between Mg consumption and novel body composition indices. Furthermore, we separately analyzed men and women, as there is a clear difference in body composition between the sexes. Furthermore, energy intake was controlled in our study. However, our study has some noticeable limitations. Firstly, this study is cross-sectional in design, and the risk of unmeasured confounders from a large number of dietary, lifestyle, and environmental factors is high, so we cannot estimate the causal relationships of the associations between dietary intake and obesity, thus slightly straying the results to non-significant. Secondly, Mg intake that we extracted was solely based on the consumed meals and not from supplements, which may add up to a big part of daily Mg intake in some individuals, since because of agronomical factors and food processing, the Mg content of foods like fruits and vegetables has decreased significantly [57]. This may end in a high variance in intake which may affect the results. Furthermore, while the FFQ is a typical tool for assessing long-term dietary intake, estimates of food consumption from an FFQ are not exactly accurate, and measurement error is always a possibility [58]. Lastly, since most of the participants were housekeeping women, mean dietary intake might not accurately represent all members of the Iranian society. Also because of lower activity and differences in sleep pattern, the body composition can be greatly affected, expanding the confounders and intensifying the lack of association found in our study. This highlights the necessity for more investigation to authenticate the results across either sex with more diverse occupations.

Conclusion

In conclusion, no significant association was found between dietary Mg intake and indicators of body composition in healthy Iranian adults. The authors suggest that further prospective cohort studies are warranted to clarify the results.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets analyzed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

BMI:

Body Mass Index

WHR:

Waist to Hip ratio

WC:

Waist circumference

HC:

Hip Circumference

SBP:

Systolic Blood Pressure

DBP:

Diastolic Blood Pressure

BAI:

Body Adiposity Index

BRI:

Body Roundness Index

ABSI:

A Body Shape Index

HDL:

High-Density Lipoprotein

TC:

Total Cholesterol

TG:

Triglyceride

VAI:

Visceral Adiposity Index

FPG:

Fast Plasma Glucose

TyG:

Triglyceride-Glucose Index

LAP:

Lipid Accumulation Product

References

  1. Hales CM, Carroll MD, Fryar CD, Ogden CL. Prevalence of Obesity and Severe Obesity Among Adults: United States, 2017–2018. NCHS Data Brief. 2020;360:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Eckel RH. Obesity and heart disease: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Nutrition Committee. American Heart Association Circulation. 1997;96(9):3248–50.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bianchini F, Kaaks R, Vainio H. Overweight, obesity, and cancer risk. Lancet Oncol. 2002;3(9):565–74.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Astrup A, Finer N. Redefining type 2 diabetes: “diabesity” or “obesity dependent diabetes mellitus”? Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. 2000;1(2):57–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Katsiki N, Ntaios G, Vemmos K. Stroke, obesity and gender: A review of the literature. Maturitas. 2011;69(3):239–43.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Organization WH. The top 10 causes of death Fact sheet. Geneve; 2020.

  7. Salimi Y, Taghdir M, Sepandi M, Karimi Zarchi A-A. The prevalence of overweight and obesity among Iranian military personnel: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):162.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Duren DL, Sherwood RJ, Czerwinski SA, Lee M, Choh AC, Siervogel RM, et al. Body composition methods: comparisons and interpretation. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008;2(6):1139–46.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Buss J. Limitations of body mass index to assess body fat. Workplace health & safety. 2014;62(6):264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Walton C, Lees B, Crook D, Worthington M, Godsland IF, Stevenson JC. Body fat distribution, rather than overall adiposity, influences serum lipids and lipoproteins in healthy men independently of age. Am J Med. 1995;99(5):459–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Astrup A, Bügel S. Overfed but undernourished: recognizing nutritional inadequacies/deficiencies in patients with overweight or obesity. Int J Obes. 2019;43(2):219–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. García OP, Long KZ, Rosado JL. Impact of micronutrient deficiencies on obesity. Nutr Rev. 2009;67(10):559–72.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Othman FB, Mohamed H, Sirajudeen KNS, Noh M, Rajab NF. The influence of selenium status on body composition, oxidative DNA damage and total antioxidant capacity in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus: A case-control study. Journal of trace elements in medicine and biology : organ of the Society for Minerals and Trace Elements (GMS). 2017;43:106–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Pallavi Panth AN, DiMarco N, Petterborg L. Association between Dietary Iodine Consumption and Body Composition in Caucasian Females between the Ages of 18 to 60: The Pioneer Project. Endocrinol Diabetes Metab J. 2018;2(3):1–8. https://doi.org/10.31038/EDMJ.2018231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cunha TA, Vermeulen-Serpa KM, Grilo EC, Leite-Lais L, Brandão-Neto J, Vale SHL. Association between zinc and body composition: An integrative review. J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2022;71: 126940.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jacqmain M, Doucet E, Després JP, Bouchard C, Tremblay A. Calcium intake, body composition, and lipoprotein-lipid concentrations in adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003;77(6):1448–52.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gröber U, Schmidt J, Kisters K. Magnesium in Prevention and Therapy. Nutrients. 2015;7(9):8199–226.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Al Alawi AM, Majoni SW, Falhammar H. Magnesium and Human Health: Perspectives and Research Directions. International Journal of Endocrinology. 2018;2018:9041694.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Jiang S, Ma X, Li M, Yan S, Zhao H, Pan Y, et al. Association between dietary mineral nutrient intake, body mass index, and waist circumference in U.S. adults using quantile regression analysis NHANES 2007–2014. PeerJ. 2020;8:e9127.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lu L, Chen C, Yang K, Zhu J, Xun P, Shikany JM, et al. Magnesium intake is inversely associated with risk of obesity in a 30-year prospective follow-up study among American young adults. Eur J Nutr. 2020;59(8):3745–53.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Castellanos-Gutiérrez A, Sánchez-Pimienta TG, Carriquiry A, da Costa THM, Ariza AC. Higher dietary magnesium intake is associated with lower body mass index, waist circumference and serum glucose in Mexican adults. Nutr J. 2018;17(1):114.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Takaya J, Higashino H, Kobayashi Y. Intracellular magnesium and insulin resistance. Magnes Res. 2004;17(2):126–36.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Inoue I. Lipid metabolism and magnesium. Clin Calcium. 2005;15(11):65–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Piuri G, Zocchi M, Della Porta M, Ficara V, Manoni M, Zuccotti GV, et al. Magnesium in Obesity, Metabolic Syndrome, and Type 2 Diabetes. Nutrients. 2021;13(2):320.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Maguire D, Talwar D, Shiels PG, McMillan D. The role of thiamine dependent enzymes in obesity and obesity related chronic disease states: A systematic review. Clinical Nutrition ESPEN. 2018;25:8–17.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Moslehi N, Vafa M, Sarrafzadeh J, Rahimi-Foroushani A. Does magnesium supplementation improve body composition and muscle strength in middle-aged overweight women? A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial. Biol Trace Elem Res. 2013;153(1–3):111–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Rafiee M, Ghavami A, Rashidian A, Hadi A, Askari G. The effect of magnesium supplementation on anthropometric indices: a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis of clinical trials. Br J Nutr. 2021;125(6):644–56.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Anjom-Shoae J, Sadeghi O, Hassanzadeh Keshteli A, Afshar H, Esmaillzadeh A, Adibi P. The association between dietary intake of magnesium and psychiatric disorders among Iranian adults: a cross-sectional study. Br J Nutr. 2018;120(6):693–702.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mendez MA, Popkin BM, Buckland G, Schroder H, Amiano P, Barricarte A, et al. Alternative methods of accounting for underreporting and overreporting when measuring dietary intake-obesity relations. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;173(4):448–58.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjöström M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(8):1381–95.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Herrmann SD, Meckes N, Bassett DR Jr, Tudor-Locke C, et al. 2011 Compendium of Physical Activities: a second update of codes and MET values. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(8):1575–81.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mirmiran P, Esfahani FH, Mehrabi Y, Hedayati M, Azizi F. Reliability and relative validity of an FFQ for nutrients in the Tehran lipid and glucose study. Public Health Nutr. 2010;13(5):654–62.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ghaffarpour M, Houshiar-Rad A, Kianfar H. The manual for household measures, cooking yields factors and edible portion of foods. Tehran: Nashre Olume Keshavarzy. 1999;7(213):42–58.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Haytowitz D, Lemar L, Pehrsson P, Exler J, Patterson K, Thomas R, et al. USDA national nutrient database for standard reference, release 24. US Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wellens RI, Roche AF, Khamis HJ, Jackson AS, Pollock ML, Siervogel RM. Relationships between the body mass index and body composition. Obes Res. 1996;4(1):35–44.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Bergman RN, Stefanovski D, Buchanan TA, Sumner AE, Reynolds JC, Sebring NG, et al. A better index of body adiposity. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2011;19(5):1083–9.

    PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Thomas DM, Bredlau C, Bosy-Westphal A, Mueller M, Shen W, Gallagher D, et al. Relationships between body roundness with body fat and visceral adipose tissue emerging from a new geometrical model. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2013;21(11):2264–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Rico-Martín S, Calderón-García JF, Sánchez-Rey P, Franco-Antonio C, Martínez Alvarez M, Sánchez Muñoz-Torrero JF. Effectiveness of body roundness index in predicting metabolic syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. 2020;21(7): e13023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Krakauer NY, Krakauer JC. A new body shape index predicts mortality hazard independently of body mass index. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(7): e39504.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Christakoudi S, Tsilidis KK, Muller DC, Freisling H, Weiderpass E, Overvad K, et al. A Body Shape Index (ABSI) achieves better mortality risk stratification than alternative indices of abdominal obesity: results from a large European cohort. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):14541.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kahn HS. The “lipid accumulation product” performs better than the body mass index for recognizing cardiovascular risk: a population-based comparison. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2005;5:26.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Xia C, Li R, Zhang S, Gong L, Ren W, Wang Z, et al. Lipid accumulation product is a powerful index for recognizing insulin resistance in non-diabetic individuals. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2012;66(9):1035–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Rotter I, Rył A, Szylińska A, Pawlukowska W, Lubkowska A, Laszczyńska M. Lipid Accumulation Product (LAP) as an Index of Metabolic and Hormonal Disorders in Aging Men. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2017;125(3):176–82.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Amato MC, Giordano C, Galia M, Criscimanna A, Vitabile S, Midiri M, et al. Visceral Adiposity Index: a reliable indicator of visceral fat function associated with cardiometabolic risk. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(4):920–2.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Unger G, Benozzi SF, Perruzza F, Pennacchiotti GL. Triglycerides and glucose index: a useful indicator of insulin resistance. Endocrinologia y nutricion : organo de la Sociedad Espanola de Endocrinologia y Nutricion. 2014;61(10):533–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Beydoun MA, Gary TL, Caballero BH, Lawrence RS, Cheskin LJ, Wang Y. Ethnic differences in dairy and related nutrient consumption among US adults and their association with obesity, central obesity, and the metabolic syndrome. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;87(6):1914–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  47. He K, Liu K, Daviglus ML, Morris SJ, Loria CM, Van Horn L, et al. Magnesium intake and incidence of metabolic syndrome among young adults. Circulation. 2006;113(13):1675–82.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sebastian RS, Cleveland LE, Goldman JD, Moshfegh AJ. Older adults who use vitamin/mineral supplements differ from nonusers in nutrient intake adequacy and dietary attitudes. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007;107(8):1322–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Razzaque MS. Magnesium: Are We Consuming Enough? Nutrients. 2018;10(12):1863.

    PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Saltiel AR, Olefsky JM. Inflammatory mechanisms linking obesity and metabolic disease. J Clin Investig. 2017;127(1):1–4.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Morais JBS, Severo JS, Santos LRd, de Sousa Melo SR, de Oliveira Santos R, de Oliveira ARS, et al. Role of Magnesium in Oxidative Stress in Individuals with Obesity. Biological Trace Element Research. 2017;176(1):20–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Nielsen FH. Effects of magnesium depletion on inflammation in chronic disease. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2014;17(6):525–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Lobionda S, Sittipo P, Kwon HY, Lee YK. The Role of Gut Microbiota in Intestinal Inflammation with Respect to Diet and Extrinsic Stressors. Microorganisms. 2019;7(8):271.

    CAS  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Drewnowski A. The Real Contribution of Added Sugars and Fats to Obesity. Epidemiol Rev. 2007;29:160–71.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Blaszczyk U, Duda-Chodak A. Magnesium: its role in nutrition and carcinogenesis. Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig. 2013;64(3):165–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Costello R, Wallace TC, Rosanoff A. Magnesium. Adv Nutr. 2016;7(1):199–201.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Cazzola R, Della Porta M, Manoni M, Iotti S, Pinotti L, Maier JA. Going to the roots of reduced magnesium dietary intake: A tradeoff between climate changes and sources. Heliyon. 2020;6(11): e05390.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Willett WC, Sampson L, Stampfer MJ, Rosner B, Bain C, Witschi J, et al. REPRODUCIBILITY AND VALIDITY OF A SEMIQUANTITATIVE FOOD FREQUENCY QUESTIONNAIRE. Am J Epidemiol. 1985;122(1):51–65.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks go to all those who participated in this study. 

Funding

This manuscript has been granted by Tehran University of Medical. Sciences (Grant No: 40186). The funder had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Community Nutrition, School of Nutritional Sciences and Dietetics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, 14167-53955, Iran

    Amin Mirrafiei, Bahareh Jabbarzadeh & Sakineh Shab-Bidar

  2. Department of Clinical Nutrition, School of Nutritional Sciences and Dietetics, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Tehran, 14167-53955, Iran

    Yasaman Hosseini & Kurosh Djafarian

Authors
  1. Amin Mirrafiei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bahareh Jabbarzadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yasaman Hosseini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kurosh Djafarian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sakineh Shab-Bidar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SS-B and KDJ conceived and designed the study, AM and SS-B performed the analyses. AM, BJ and YH wrote the first draft of the manuscript, SS-B and KDJ critically revised the manuscript, KDJ received financial support for undertaking this study, and all authors have read and approved the final manuscript. SS-B in the guarantor. The author's read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sakineh Shab-Bidar.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval and consent to participate

The sample collection was made possible by the coordination of the Health Bureau of the Municipality of Tehran and the cooperation of the health care centers of Tehran. The study was approved by the ethical committee of the Tehran University of Medical Sciences (Ethics No. IR.TUMS.VCR.REC.1397.157). All the methods of this study was conducted according to the guidelines laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki and all procedures involving research study participants were approved by the ethics committee of Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Written informed consent was obtained from all the subjects.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mirrafiei, A., Jabbarzadeh, B., Hosseini, Y. et al. No association between dietary magnesium intake and body composition among Iranian adults: a cross-sectional study. BMC Nutr 8, 39 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-022-00535-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-022-00535-6

Keywords

  • Magnesium
  • Diet
  • Body Composition
  • Obesity

BMC Nutrition

ISSN: 2055-0928

Contact us