AJP - Endo Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 271: E302-E308, 1996;
0193-1849/96 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ritz, P.
Right arrow Articles by Coward, W. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ritz, P.
Right arrow Articles by Coward, W. A.

AJP - Endocrinology and Metabolism, Vol 271, Issue 2 E302-E308, Copyright © 1996 by American Physiological Society

ARTICLES

Interactions between 2H and 18O natural abundance variations and DLW measurements of energy expenditure

P. Ritz, T. J. Cole, P. S. Davies, G. R. Goldberg and W. A. Coward
Dunn Nutrition Centre, Medical Research Council, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Appropriate corrections for 2H and 18O natural abundance are necessary in energy expenditure measurements with the doubly labeled water (DLW) method. The contribution of natural abundance variations to errors in the method is generally ignored if an appropriate dose level is given. Calculation of the appropriate dose level assumes that 2H and 18O natural abundance values are covariant and have a fixed slope. This study has investigated the between- and within-subject natural abundance variations, the latter over periods of time similar to those used in DLW experiment. Although 2H and 18O natural abundance values are covariant between subjects, the slope of their relationship is different from that of the Meteoric Water Line. Within subjects there is no such demonstrable covariance. It is concluded that: 1) the determinants of 2H and 18O natural abundance are different within and between subjects; 2) the concept of an optimal ratio of doses is not valid, and a safer strategy is probably to use a ratio > 10; 3) natural abundance variations may contribute significantly to the magnitude of error in the DLW measurements of energy expenditure.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
M. Siervo, G. Fruhbeck, A. Dixon, G. R. Goldberg, W. A. Coward, P. R. Murgatroyd, A. M. Prentice, and S. A. Jebb
Efficiency of autoregulatory homeostatic responses to imposed caloric excess in lean men
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, February 1, 2008; 294(2): E416 - E424.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
M. A. Horvitz and D. A. Schoeller
Natural abundance deuterium and 18-oxygen effects on the precision of the doubly labeled water method
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, June 1, 2001; 280(6): E965 - E972.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online