Search

Background Thermogenic fitness drink formulas (TFD) have been shown to increase energy expenditure and markers of lipid metabolism. The purpose of the current study was to compare TFD formulas containing different caffeine concentrations versus a placebo drink on energy expenditure and lipid metabolism at rest and during exercise. Methods Thirty-two recreationally active participants (22.9 ± 0.7 y, 167.1 ± 1.4 cm, 68.8 ± 2.0 kg, 24.0 ± 1.2% fat) who were regular caffeine consumers, participated in this randomized, double-blind, crossover design study. Participants reported to the laboratory on three occasions, each of which required consumption of either a TFD containing 140 mg or 100 mg of caffeine or a placebo. Baseline measurements of resting energy expenditure (REE) and resting fat oxidation (RFO) were assessed using indirect calorimetry as well as measurements of serum glycerol concentration. Measurements were repeated at 30, 60, 90 min post-ingestion. Following resting measures, participants completed a graded exercise test to determine maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O2max), maximal fat oxidation (MFO) and the exercise intensity that elicits MFO (Fatmax), and total energy expenditure (EE). Results A significant interaction was shown for REE (p

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to compare the contributions of the anaerobic pathway as determined by two different methods and energy expenditure during a typical high-intensity intermittent exercise (HIIE) protocol.Methods: A descriptive research design was utilized in which thirteen physically active men performed six experimental sessions consisting of an incremental test (session 1), submaximal tests at 40, 50, 60, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90% of velocity associated with maximum oxygen uptake (vV˙O2max) with two intensities per session (sessions 2–5), and the HIIE protocol (session 6; 10 efforts of 1 min at vV˙O2max interspersed by 1 min of passive recovery). The estimation of anaerobic energy system contribution was calculated by: (a) the excess post-exercise oxygen consumption plus delta lactate method and (b) the accumulated oxygen deficit method using the difference between predicted oxygen demand from the submaximal tests of varying intensities and accumulated oxygen uptake during HIIE. Estimation of aerobic energy system contribution was calculated through the measurement of oxygen consumption during activity. Total EE during the entire HIIE protocol (efforts + recovery) and for the efforts only were calculated from each method.Results: For efforts + recovery and efforts only, anaerobic contribution was similar for both methods, and consequently total EE was also equivalent (p = 0.230 for both comparisons). During efforts + recovery, aerobic:anaerobic energy system contribution was (68 ± 4%: 32 ± 4%), while efforts only was (54 ± 5%: 46 ± 5%) with both situations demonstrating greater aerobic than anaerobic contribution (p < 0.001 for both).Conclusion: Anaerobic contribution seems to be relevant during HIIE and must to be taken into account during total EE estimation; however, the type of method employed did not change the anaerobic contribution or total EE estimates.

Purpose: To compare the acute and chronic effects of high intensity intermittent training (HIIT) and steady state training (SST) on the metabolic profile and inflammatory response in physically active men.Methods: Thirty recreationally active men were randomly allocated to a control group (n = 10), HIIT group (n = 10), or SST group (n = 10). For 5 weeks, three times per week, subjects performed HIIT (5 km 1-min at 100% of maximal aerobic speed interspersed by 1-min passive recovery) or SST (5 km at 70% of maximal aerobic speed) while the control group did not perform training. Blood samples were collected at fasting (~12 h), pre-exercise, immediately post, and 60 min post-acute exercise session (pre- and post-5 weeks training). Blood samples were analyzed for glucose, non-ester fatty acid (NEFA), and cytokine (IL-6, IL-10, and TNF-α) levels through a three-way analysis (group, period, and moment of measurement) with repeated measures in the second and third factors.Results: The results showed an effect of moment of measurement (acute session) with greater values to TNF-α and glucose immediately post the exercise when compared to pre exercise session, independently of group or training period. For IL-6 there was an interaction effect for group and moment of measurement (acute session) the increase occurred immediately post-exercise session and post-60 min in the HIIT group while in the SST the increase was observed only 60 min post, independently of training period. For IL-10, there was an interaction for training period (pre- and post-training) and moment of measurement (acute session), in which in pre-training, pre-exercise values were lower than immediately and 60 min post-exercise, in post-training period pre-exercise values were lower than immediately post-exercise and immediately post-exercise lower than 60 min post, it was also observed that values immediately post-exercise were lower pre- than post-training, being all results independently of intensity (group).Conclusion: Our main result point to an interaction (acute and chronic) for IL-10 showing attenuation post-training period independent of exercise intensity.