Recently, interest in time-restricted feeding (TRF) has increased from reports highlighting improvements in body composition and muscular performance measures. Twenty-six recreationally active males were randomly assigned to either TRF (n = 13; ~22.9 years; 82.0 kg; 178.1 cm; 8 h eating window, 25% caloric deficit, 1.8 g/kg/day protein) or normal diet (ND; n = 13; ~22.5 years; 83.3 kg; 177.5 cm; normal meal pattern; 25% caloric deficit, 1.8 g/kg/day protein) groups. Participants underwent 4-weeks of supervised full body resistance training. Changes in body composition (fat mass (FM), fat free mass (FFM), and body fat percentage (BF%)), skeletal muscle cross sectional area (CSA) and muscle thickness (MT) of the vastus lateralis (VL), rectus femoris, (RF), and biceps brachii (BB) muscles, resting energy expenditure (REE), muscular performance, blood biomarkers, and psychometric parameters were assessed. Significant (p < 0.05) decreases were noted in BM, FM, BF%, testosterone, adiponectin, and REE, along with significant increases in BP1RM, LP1RM, VJHT, VJPP, VLCSA, BBCSA, and BBMT in both groups. Plasma cortisol levels were significantly elevated at post (p = 0.018) only in ND. Additionally, FFM was maintained equally between groups. Thus, a TRF style of eating does not enhance reductions in FM over caloric restriction alone during a 4-week hypocaloric diet.
Methylliberine (Dynamine®; DYM) and theacrine (Teacrine®; TCR) are purine alkaloids purported to have similar neuro-energetic effects as caffeine. There are no published human safety data on DYM, and research on TCR is limited. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of four weeks of DYM supplementation with and without TCR on cardiovascular function and blood biomarkers. One-hundred twenty-five men and women (mean age 23.0 yrs, height 169.7 cm, body mass 72.1 kg; n = 25/group) were randomly assigned to one of five groups: low-dose DYM (100 mg), high-dose DYM (150 mg), low-dose DYM with TCR (100 mg + 50 mg), high-dose DYM with TCR (150 mg + 25 mg), and placebo. Regardless of group and sex, significant main effects for time were noted for heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and QTc (p < 0.001), high-density lipoproteins (p = 0.002), mean corpuscular hemoglobin (p = 0.018), basophils (p = 0.006), absolute eosinophils (p = 0.010), creatinine (p = 0.004), estimated glomerular filtration rate (p = 0.037), chloride (p = 0.030), carbon dioxide (p = 0.023), bilirubin (p = 0.027), and alanine aminotransferase (p = 0.043), among others. While small changes were found in some cardiovascular and blood biomarkers, no clinically significant changes occurred. This suggests that DYM alone or in combination with TCR consumed at the dosages used in this study does not appear to negatively affect markers of health over four weeks of continuous use.
ObjectiveTo determine the effects of different intensities of interval resistance training (IRT) protocols on the levels of select myokines (decorin, follistatin, myostatin, activin A, transforming growth factor beta-1 [TGF-β1]), and cardiometabolic and anthropometric measures in males with obesity.MethodsForty-four obese males (age: 27.5 ± 9.4 yr.; height: 165.4 ± 2.8 cm; weight: 97.9 ± 2.6 kg and BMI: 35.7 ± 4.3 kg/m2) were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n=11 per group): low-intensity interval resistance training (LIIRT), moderate-intensity interval resistance training (MIIRT), high-intensity interval resistance training (HIIRT) or control (C). The LIIRT group performed 10 exercises in 3 sets of 40% (20 repetitions), the MIIRT group performed 10 exercises in three sets of 60% (13 repetitions), and the HIIRT group performed 10 exercises in three sets of 80% (10 repetitions) of one maximum repetition (1RM), which were followed with active rest of 20% of 1RM and 15 repetitions. The resistance training groups exercised ~70 min per session, 3 days per week, for 12 weeks. Measurements were taken at baseline and after 12 weeks of exercise training.ResultsBaseline levels of myokines, cardiovascular risk factors, anthropometry, body composition, and cardio-respiratory fitness were not different between the four groups (p>0.05). The group x time interactions for decorin, activin A, follistatin, myostatin, and TGF-β1, total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-density cholesterol (HDL), low-density cholesterol (LDL), anthropometry, body composition, and cardio-respiratory fitness were statistically significant (p<0.05). There were increases in post-test values for decorin, follistatin, HDL (p<0.05) and decreases in TC, TG, TGF-β1, LDL, and myostatin levels in the LIIRT, MIIRT, and HIIRT groups compared to pretest values (p<0.05). Changes in fat mass, VO2peak, HDL, TG, glucose, activin A, decorin were not significant in LIIRT compared to the control group, while changes in activin A, follistatin, and TFG-β1 levels were greater in HIIRT and MIIRT groups compared to the LIIRT group (p<0.05).ConclusionThe LIIRT, MIIRT, and HIIRT protocols all produced beneficial changes in decorin, activin A, follistatin, myostatin, and TGF-β1 levels, and cardiometabolic risk factors, with greater effects from the MIIRT and HIIRT protocols compared to LIIRT.
Research suggests that healthy eating and exercise decrease the likelihood of developing osteoarthritis (OA) with age. Despite this, OA is a prevalent chronic condition that typically causes joint pain at rest and during exercise, making it difficult to develop effective training programs. Recently, blood flow restriction (BFR) training has shown to be a beneficial alternative to traditional resistance training to improve muscle function. In this article, we provide a rationale as to how BFR may be a beneficial resistance training alternative that would allow individuals with osteoarthritis to experience similar improvements in muscle function compared with traditional resistance training using lower relative intensities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.