Phase angle is a composite measure that combines two raw bioelectrical impedance analysis measures: resistance and reactance. Phase angle has been considered an indicator of cellular health, integrity, and hydration. As inflammation and oxidative stress can damage cellular structures, phase angle has potential utility in early detecting inflammatory and oxidative status. Herein, we aimed to critically review the current understanding on the determinants of phase angle and its relationship with markers of inflammation and oxidative stress. We also discussed the potential role of phase angle in detecting chronic inflammation and related adverse outcomes. Several factors have been identified as predictors of phase angle, including age, sex, extracellular to intracellular water ratio, and fat-free mass. In addition to these factors, body mass index (BMI) also seems to influence phase angle. Available data also show that lower phase angle values are correlated (negligible to high correlation coefficients) with higher c-reactive protein, tumour necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6, and interleukin-10 in studies involving the general and aging populations, as well as patients with chronic conditions. Although fewer studies have evaluated the relationship between phase angle and markers of oxidative stress, available data also suggest that phase angle has potential to be used as an indicator (for screening) of oxidative damage. Future studies including diverse populations and bioelectrical impedance devices are required to confirm the validity and accuracy of phase angle as a marker of inflammation and oxidative stress for clinical use.

We have studied circuit resistance schemes with high loads as a time-effective alternative to hypertrophy-traditional resistance training. However, the oxidative stress biomarker responses to high-load circuit training are unknown. The aim of the present study was to compare oxidative stress biomarker response with an acute session of hypertrophy-resistance circuit training and traditional interval training. A week after the 1 repetition maximum (1RM) test, 11 healthy and well-trained male participants completed hypertrophy-resistance acute sessions of traditional interval training (3 × 10 repetitions at 75% of the 1RM, with 90-second passive rest) and circuit training (3 × 10 repetitions at 75% of the 1RM, in alternating performance of 2 exercises with different muscle groups) in a randomized and cross-over design. Venous blood samples were collected before (pre) and 10 minutes after (post) the resistance training sessions for oxidative stress biomarker assays. As expected, the time used to complete the circuit training (20.2 ± 1.6) was half of that needed to complete the traditional interval training (40.3 ± 1.8). Significant increases (p < 0.05) in thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (40%), creatine kinase (CK) (67%), glutathione (14%), and uric acid (25%) were detected posttraditional interval training session in relation to pre. In relation to circuit training, a significant increase in CK (33%) activity postsession in relation to pre was observed. Statistical analysis did not reveal any other change in the oxidative stress biomarker after circuit training. In conclusion, circuit resistance-hypertrophy training scheme proposed in the current study promoted lower oxidative stress biomarkers and antioxidant modulations compared with resistance traditional interval training.

No abstract

The objective of this study was to improve the cutoff points of the traditional classification of nutritional status and overweight / obesity based on the BMI in a Brazilian sample. A cross-sectional study was conducted on 1301 individuals of both genders aged 18 to 60 years. The subjects underwent measurement of weight and height and bioelectrical impedance analysis. Simple linear regression was used for statistical analysis, with the level of significance set at p < 0.05. The sample consisted of 29.7% men and 70.3% women aged on averaged 35.7 ± 17.6 years; mean weight was 67.6 ± 16.0 kg, mean height was 164.9 ± 9.5 cm, and mean BMI was 24.9 ± 5.5 kg/m2. As expected, lower cutoffs were found for BMI than the classic reference points traditionally adopted by the WHO for the classification of obesity, i.e., 27.15 and 27.02 kg/m2 for obesity for men and women, respectively. Other authors also follow this tendency, Romero-Corral et al. (2008) suggested 25.8 to 25.5 kg/m2 for American men and women as new values for BMI classification of obesity. Gupta and Kapoor (2012) proposed 22.9 and 28.8 kg/m2 for men and women of North India. The present investigation supports other literature studies which converge in reducing the BMI cutoff points for the classification of obesity. Thus, we emphasize the need to conduct similar studies for the purpose of defining these new in populations of different ethnicities.

No abstract