Search

This study measured the influence of 2-weeks ingestion of high chlorogenic acid (CQA) coffee on postexercise inflammation and oxidative stress, with secondary outcomes including performance and mood state. Cyclists (N = 15) were randomized to CQA coffee or placebo (300 ml/day) for 2 weeks, participated in a 50-km cycling time trial, and then crossed over to the opposite condition with a 2-week washout period. Blood samples were collected pre- and postsupplementation, and immediately postexercise. CQA coffee was prepared using the Turkish method with 30 g lightly roasted, highly ground Hambela coffee beans in 300 ml boiling water, and provided 1,066 mg CQA and 474 mg caffeine versus 187 mg CQA and 33 mg caffeine for placebo. Plasma caffeine was higher with CQA coffee versus placebo after 2-weeks (3.3-fold) and postexercise (21.0-fold) (interaction effect, p < .001). Higher ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) levels were measured after exercise with CQA coffee versus placebo (p = .01). No differences between CQA coffee and placebo were found for postexercise increases in plasma IL-6 (p = .74) and hydroxyoctadecadienoic acids (9 + 13 HODEs) (p = .99). Total mood disturbance (TMD) scores were lower with CQA coffee versus placebo (p = .04). 50-km cycling time performance and power did not differ between trials, with heart rate and ventilation higher with CQA coffee, especially after 30 min. In summary, despite more favorable TMD scores with CQA coffee, these data do not support the chronic use of coffee highly concentrated with chlorogenic acids and caffeine in mitigating postexercise inflammation or oxidative stress or improving 50-km cycling performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to compare force– and power–time curve variables during jumping between Division I strength-matched male and female basketball athletes. Males (n = 8) and females (n = 8) were strength matched by testing a one-repetition maximum (1RM) back squat. 1RM back squat values were normalised to body mass in order to demonstrate that strength differences were a function of body mass alone. Subjects performed three countermovement jumps (CMJ) at maximal effort. Absolute and relative force– and power–time curve variables from the CMJs were analysed between males and females. Average force– and power–time curves were generated for all subjects. Jump height was significantly greater (p ≤ .05) in males than females. Absolute force was higher in males during the concentric phase, but not significantly different (p ≥ .05) when normalised to body mass. Significance was found in absolute concentric impulse between sexes, but not when analysed relative to body mass. Rate of force development, rate of power development, relative peak force, and work were not significantly different between sexes. Males had significantly greater impulse during the eccentric phase as well as peak power (PP) during the concentric phase of the CMJ than did females in both absolute and relative terms. It is concluded that sex differences are not a determining factor in measured force during a CMJ when normalised to body mass between strength-matched subjects. However, eccentric phase impulse and concentric phase PP appear to be influenced by sex differences independent of matching strength levels. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The purpose of this investigation was to compare external work and net energy expenditure during a bout of repetitive stretch-shortening cycles between competitive and recreational long-distance runners. Participants were divided into either competitive or recreational runners based on their maximal oxygen consumption and self-reported 1600 m times. The stretch-shortening cycle involved a repetitive hopping protocol on a force plate while measuring oxygen consumption and lactate accumulation for a total of 10 min. External work and net energy expenditure were calculated for 3 min after steady state was achieved and the ratio between these variables was utilised as an index of mechanical efficiency. Lower extremity stiffness was calculated during this interval as well. Net energy expenditure was significantly lower in competitive runners (152.6 ± 33.3 kJ) in comparison to recreational runners (200.6 ± 41.4 kJ) (P = 0.02) given similar amounts of external work performed in both groups (competitive runners = 65.6 ± 20.1 kJ, recreational runners = 68.8 ± 12.1 kJ) (P = 0.67). Index of mechanical efficiency was significantly different between competitive runners (43.2 ± 9.0%) and recreational runners (34.8 ± 5.3%) (P = 0.03). No significant differences were found in lower extremity stiffness (P = 0.64). Competitive distance runners can perform similar levels of external work with lower net energy expenditure and thus a higher index of mechanical efficiency during repetitive stretch-shortening cycles in comparison to recreational runners with similar values of lower extremity stiffness. This ability could possibly be due differences in muscle–tendon length changes, muscle pre-activation, cross-bridge potentiation and short-latency reflex responses as a result of training which should be considered for future investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The purpose of this investigation was to examine how load would affect peak power (PP) of the bar, body and system (bar + body) during the deadlift. Eight healthy males (age = 22.00 ± 2.38 years; height = 1.80 ± 0.05 m; body mass = 88.97 ± 14.88 kg; deadlift one repetition maximum [1RM] = 203.44 ± 21.59 kg, 1RM/BM = 2.32 ± 0.31) with a minimum of 2 years' resistance training experience and a deadlift 1RM over 1.5 times their bodyweight participated in the investigation. During the first session, anthropometric data were recorded and a 1RM deadlift was obtained from the participants. During the second session, participants performed two repetitions at intensities of 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90% of their 1RM in a randomized order. Three-dimensional videography with a force plate was used for data collection and analysis. Peak force (PF), peak velocity (PV), an d PP were calculated for the bar, body, and system (bar + body) during the deadlift. PP occurred at 50%, 30%, and 70% of 1RM for the bar, body, and system, respectively. The optimal loading for the deadlift exercise may vary depending on the desired stimulus and whether the bar, body, or system variables are of most interest. Key pointsPeak power of the bar, body and system vary depending upon load.Loading should be chosen according to desired training effect, with considerations for sport specificity.Additional exercises should be investigated concerning the effect of various loads on power.