No abstract

The objective of this study was to compare acute effects of prolonged sitting, prolonged standing and sitting interrupted with regular activity breaks on vascular function and postprandial glucose metabolism. In a randomized cross-over trial, 18 adults completed: 1. Prolonged Sitting; 2. Prolonged Standing and 3. Sitting with 2-min walking (5 km/h, 10% incline) every 30 min (Regular Activity Breaks). Flow mediated dilation (FMD) was measured in the popliteal artery at baseline and 6 h. Popliteal artery hemodynamics, and postprandial plasma glucose and insulin were measured over 6 h. Neither raw nor allometrically-scaled FMD showed an intervention effect (p = 0.285 and 0.159 respectively). Compared to Prolonged Sitting, Regular Activity Breaks increased blood flow (overall effect of intervention p<0.001; difference = 80%; 95% CI 34 to 125%; p = 0.001) and net shear rate (overall effect of intervention p<0.001; difference = 72%; 95% CI 30 to 114%; p = 0.001) at 60 min. These differences were then maintained for the entire 6 h. Prolonged Standing increased blood flow at 60 min only (overall effect of intervention p<0.001; difference = 62%; 95% CI 28 to 97%; p = 0.001). Regular Activity Breaks decreased insulin incremental area under the curve (iAUC) when compared to both Prolonged Sitting (overall effect of intervention P = 0.001; difference = 28%; 95% CI 14 to 38%; p<0.01) and Prolonged Standing (difference = 19%; 95% CI 4 to 32%, p = 0.015). There was no intervention effect on glucose iAUC or total AUC (p = 0.254 and 0.450, respectively). In normal-weight participants, Regular Activity Breaks induce increases in blood flow, shear stress and improvements in postprandial metabolism that are associated with beneficial adaptations. Physical activity and sedentary behaviour messages should perhaps focus more on the importance of frequent movement rather than simply replacing sitting with standing.

Key points The human brain is particularly vulnerable to heat stress; this manifests as impaired cognition, orthostatic tolerance, work capacity and eventually, brain death. The brain's limitation in the heat is often ascribed to inadequate cerebral blood flow (CBF), but elevated intracranial pressure is commonly observed in mammalian models of heat stroke and can on its own cause functional impairment. The CBF response to incremental heat strain was dependent on the mode of heating, decreasing by 30% when exposed passively to hot, humid air (sauna), while remaining unchanged or increasing with passive hot‐water immersion (spa) and exercising in a hot environment. Non‐invasive intracranial pressure estimates (nICP) were increased universally by 18% at volitional thermal tolerance across all modes of heat stress, and therefore may play a contributing role in eliciting thermal tolerance. The sauna, more so than the spa or exercise, poses a greater challenge to the brain under mild to severe heating due to lower blood flow but similarly increased nICP. Abstract The human brain is particularly vulnerable to heat stress; this manifests as impaired cognitive function, orthostatic tolerance, work capacity, and eventually, brain death. This vulnerability is often ascribed to inadequate cerebral blood flow (CBF); however, elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) is also observed in mammalian models of heat stroke. We investigated the changes in CBF with incremental heat strain under three fundamentally different modes of heating, and assessed whether heating per se increased ICP. Fourteen fit participants (seven female) were heated to thermal tolerance or 40°C core temperature (Tc; oesophageal) via passive hot‐water immersion (spa), passive hot, humid air exposure (sauna), cycling exercise, and cycling exercise with CO2 inhalation to prevent heat‐induced hypocapnia. CBF was measured with duplex ultrasound at each 0.5°C increment in Tc and ICP was estimated non‐invasively (nICP) from optic nerve sheath diameter at thermal tolerance. At thermal tolerance, CBF was decreased by 30% in the sauna (P < 0.001), but was unchanged in the spa or with exercise (P ≥ 0.140). CBF increased by 17% when end‐tidal PnormalCO2 was clamped at eupnoeic pressure (P < 0.001). On the contrary, nICP increased universally by 18% with all modes of heating (P < 0.001). The maximum Tc was achieved with passive heating, and preventing hypocapnia during exercise did not improve exercise or thermal tolerance (P ≥ 0.146). Therefore, the regulation of CBF is dramatically different depending on the mode and dose of heating, whereas nICP responses are not. The sauna, more so than the spa or exercise, poses a greater challenge to the brain under equivalent heat strain.

No abstract

Heat stress is common and arises endogenously and exogenously. It can be acutely hazardous while also increasingly advocated to drive health and performance-related adaptations. Yet, the nature of strain (deviation in regulated variables) imposed by different heating modes is not well established, despite the potential for important differences. We, therefore, compared three modes of heat stress for thermal, cardiovascular and perceptual strain profiles during exposure and recovery when experienced as a novel stimulus and an accustomed stimulus. In a crossover design, 13 physically active participants (five females) underwent 5 days of 60-min exposures to hot water immersion (40 • C), sauna (55 • C, 54% relative humidity) and exercise in the heat (40 • C, 52% relative humidity), and a thermoneutral water immersion control (36.5 • C), each separated by ≥4 weeks. Physiological (thermal, cardiovascular, haemodynamic) and psychophysical strain responses were assessed on days 1 and 5.Sauna evoked the warmest skin (40 • C; P < 0.001) but exercise in the heat caused the largest increase in core temperature, sweat rate, heart rate (post hoc comparisons all P < 0.001) and systolic blood pressure (P ≤ 0.002), and possibly decrease in diastolic blood pressures (P ≤ 0.130), regardless of day. Thermal sensation and feeling state were more favourable on day 5 than on day 1 (P ≤ 0.021), with all modes of heat being equivalently uncomfortable (P ≥ 0.215). Plasma volume expanded the largest extent during immersions (P < 0.001). The current data highlight that exercising in the heat generates a more complex strain profile, while passive heat stress in humid heat has lower tolerance and more cardiovascular strain than hot water immersion.