Search

The ketogenic diet (KD) is, nowadays, considered an interesting nutritional approach for weight loss and improvement in insulin resistance. Nevertheless, most of the studies available in the literature do not allow a clear distinction between its effects on insulin sensitivity per se, and the effects of weight loss induced by KDs on insulin sensitivity. In this review, we discuss the scientific evidence on the direct and weight loss mediated effects of KDs on glycemic status in humans, describing the KD's biochemical background and the underlying mechanisms.

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and anthropometry are considered alternatives to well-established reference techniques for assessing body composition. In team sports, the percentage of fat mass (FM%) is one of the most informative parameters, and a wide range of predictive equations allow for its estimation through both BIA and anthropometry. Although it is not clear which of these two techniques is more accurate for estimating FM%, the choice of the predictive equation could be a determining factor. The present study aimed to examine the validity of BIA and anthropometry in estimating FM% with different predictive equations, using dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as a reference, in a group of futsal players. A total of 67 high-level male futsal players (age 23.7 ± 5.4 years) underwent BIA, anthropometric measurements, and DXA scanning. Four generalized, four athletic, and two sport-specific predictive equations were used for estimating FM% from raw bioelectric and anthropometric parameters. DXA-derived FM% was used as a reference. BIA-based generalized equations overestimated FM% (ranging from 1.13 to 2.69%, p < 0.05), whereas anthropometry-based generalized equations underestimated FM% in the futsal players (ranging from −1.72 to −2.04%, p < 0.05). Compared to DXA, no mean bias (p > 0.05) was observed using the athletic and sport-specific equations. Sport-specific equations allowed for more accurate and precise FM% estimations than did athletic predictive equations, with no trend (ranging from r = −0.217 to 0.235, p > 0.05). Regardless of the instrument, the choice of the equation determines the validity in FM% prediction. In conclusion, BIA and anthropometry can be used interchangeably, allowing for valid FM% estimations, provided that athletic and sport-specific equations are applied.

We aim to investigate the effect of 6 weeks of betaine supplementation on body composition and muscle performance during CrossFit© training. Twenty-nine subjects matched for training status (4.16 0.95 day/week) and body fat mass (12.66 4.08%) were randomly assigned to a betaine (BET; N = 14) or placebo group (PLA; N = 15). Body composition and cellular hydration were estimated with skinfolds measurement and bioelectrical impendence before and after 6 weeks of training. Muscle performance was assessed using three different tests: 3-RM back-squat for muscle strength, 2 km rowing test for aerobic capacity and Bergeron Beep Test for anaerobic capacity. Muscle strength assessed during back squat significantly increased in BET (p = 0.04) but not in the PLA group, however, there were no statistical differences between groups. Although not significant, fat mass was reduced in BET compared to PLA. Overall, body composition and cell hydration measurements did not change in response to training or betaine supplementation. Short-term (6 weeks) betaine supplementation supports muscle strength but was not ergogenic for trained subjects to aerobic and anaerobic performance in the CrossFit©-specific test., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

The influence of meal frequency and timing on health and disease has been a topic of interest for many years. While epidemiological evidence indicates an association between higher meal frequencies and lower disease risk, experimental trials have shown conflicting results. Furthermore, recent prospective research has demonstrated a significant increase in disease risk with a high meal frequency (≥6 meals/day) as compared to a low meal frequency (1⁻2 meals/day). Apart from meal frequency and timing we also have to consider breakfast consumption and the distribution of daily energy intake, caloric restriction, and night-time eating. A central role in this complex scenario is played by the fasting period length between two meals. The physiological underpinning of these interconnected variables may be through internal circadian clocks, and food consumption that is asynchronous with natural circadian rhythms may exert adverse health effects and increase disease risk. Additionally, alterations in meal frequency and meal timing have the potential to influence energy and macronutrient intake.A regular meal pattern including breakfast consumption, consuming a higher proportion of energy early in the day, reduced meal frequency (i.e., 2⁻3 meals/day), and regular fasting periods may provide physiological benefits such as reduced inflammation, improved circadian rhythmicity, increased autophagy and stress resistance, and modulation of the gut microbiota.

The response to resistance training and protein supplementation in the latissimus dorsi muscle (LDM) has never been investigated. We investigated the effects of resistance training (RT) and protein supplementation on muscle mass, strength, and fiber characteristics of the LDM. Eighteen healthy young subjects were randomly assigned to a progressive eight-week RT program with a normal protein diet (NP) or high protein diet (HP) (NP 0.85 vs. HP 1.8 g of protein·kg(-1)·day(-1)). One repetition maximum tests, magnetic resonance imaging for cross-sectional muscle area (CSA), body composition, and single muscle fibers mechanical and phenotype characteristics were measured. RT induced a significant gain in strength (+17%, p < 0.0001), whole muscle CSA (p = 0.024), and single muscle fibers CSA (p < 0.05) of LDM in all subjects. Fiber isometric force increased in proportion to CSA (+22%, p < 0.005) and thus no change in specific tension occurred. A significant transition from 2X to 2A myosin expression was induced by training. The protein supplementation showed no significant effects on all measured outcomes except for a smaller reduction of 2X myosin expression. Our results suggest that in LDM protein supplementation does not further enhance RT-induced muscle fiber hypertrophy nor influence mechanic muscle fiber characteristics but partially counteracts the fast-to-slow fiber shift.