## Results
### Differences in BMD Based on Sex and Age  
The results of the two-way ANOVA for BMD of each sex according to age are presented in Table 4. In addition, the results of the post-hoc test are presented in Tables 5 and 6. According to a two-way ANOVA based on sex and age, there was a significant main effect of participant sex on whole-body BMD (F(1,234) = 104.48 (\(p<0.01\))). There was also a significant main \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Source** & **DF** & **SS** & **MS** & **F** & **Pr > F** & **Post-Hoc** \\ \hline Model & 2 & 0.66760870 & 0.33380435 & 44.83 & 0.0001 & \\ Error & 123 & 0.91591302 & 0.0074645 & & & \\ Age & 2 & 0.66760870 & 0.33380435 & 44.83 & 0.0001 & a b c \\ Corrected Total & 125 & 1.58352171 & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: [PERSON] post-hoc analysis in female participants according to age. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Item**Age** & **Group A:** & **Group B:** & **Group C:** \\
**20-39 Years** & **40-59 Years** & **60-79 Years** \\ \hline Weight (kg) & 59.08 \(\pm\) 10.0 & 58.76 \(\pm\) 7.5 & 57.06 \(\pm\) 6.6 \\ Height (cm) & 158.6 \(\pm\) 4.8 & 155.1 \(\pm\) 5.1 & 152. \(\pm\) 64.5 \\ BMD (arms) & 0.81 \(\pm\) 0.08 & 0.80 \(\pm\) 0.15 & 0.69 \(\pm\) 0.07 \\ BMD (legs) & 1.14 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 1.14 \(\pm\) 0.11 & 0.97 \(\pm\) 0.10 \\ BMD (trunk) & 0.91 \(\pm\) 0.09 & 0.90 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 0.78 \(\pm\) 0.08 \\ BMD (ribs) & 0.68 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 0.68 \(\pm\) 0.07 & 0.60 \(\pm\) 0.05 \\ BMD (pelvis) & 1.11 \(\pm\) 0.13 & 1.09 \(\pm\) 0.13 & 0.92 \(\pm\) 0.10 \\ BMD (spine) & 1.13 \(\pm\) 0.15 & 1.12 \(\pm\) 0.16 & 0.92 \(\pm\) 0.13 \\ BMD (total) & 1.14 \(\pm\) 0.08 & 1.14 \(\pm\) 0.09 & 0.98 \(\pm\) 0.08 \\ \hline BMC (arms) & 222.6 \(\pm\) 57.53 & 228.5 \(\pm\) 52.11 & 190.1 \(\pm\) 34.79 \\ BMC (legs) & 785.3 \(\pm\) 158.6 & 772.5 \(\pm\) 146.8 & 649.7 \(\pm\) 96.81 \\ BMC (trunk) & 694.5 \(\pm\) 176.0 & 694.3 \(\pm\) 160.4 & 525.6 \(\pm\) 114.7 \\ BMC (total) & 2261 \(\pm\) 433.5 & 2266 \(\pm\) 402.8 & 1830 \(\pm\) 271.5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} All values are presented as mean \(\pm\) standard deviation. BMD (g/cm\({}^{2}\)): bone mineral density; BMC (g): bone mineral content.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: The mean values weight, height, BMD, and BMC in various body segments of female participants. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Source** & **DF** & **SS** & **MS** & **F Value** & **Pr > F** \\ \hline Model & 5 & 1.61163354 & 0.3223671 & 40.09 & 0.0001 \\ Error & 234 & 1.88121320 & 0.00803937 & & \\ Sex & 1 & 0.83994322 & 0.83994322 & 104.48 & 0.0001 \\ Age & 2 & 0.57732961 & 0.28866481 & 35.91 & 0.0001 \\ Sex * Age & 2 & 0.15328471 & 0.07664236 & 9.53 & 0.0001 \\ Corrected Total & 239 & 3.49284673 & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: The results of the two-way ANOVA for whole-body BMD of males and females according to age. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Source** & **DF** & **SS** & **MS** & **F** & **Pr > F** & **Post-Hoc** \\ \hline Model & 2 & 0.11420968 & 0.05710484 & 6.57 & 0.0020 & \\ Error & 111 & 0.96530018 & 0.00869640 & & & \\ Age & 2 & 0.11420968 & 0.05710484 & 6.57 & 0.0020 & a b c \\ Corrected Total & 113 & 1.07950986 & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: [PERSON] post-hoc test in male participants according to age. effect of age on whole-body BMD (F(2,234) = 35.91 (\(p<0.01\))), and a significant interaction of sex by age (F(2,234) = 9.53 (\(p<0.01\))). Post-hoc analyses revealed a significant difference between the whole-body BMD of males and females, and certain distinctions were found between Groups A, B, and C.  
A one-way ANOVA based on age showed a significant difference in whole-body BMD between the age groups among male participants (F(2,111) = 6.57 (\(p<0.01\))). There was a significant difference between Group A and Group C in the Tukey post-hoc.