Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Preserving fat-free mass (FFM) during weight loss is important in older adults. The purpose was to examine a low-fat diet (LFD) versus a carbohydrate-restricted diet (CRD) with and without progressive resistance exercise (PRE) on preservation of FFM in older men with metabolic syndrome.
Methods: A total of 42 men (59±7 years) were matched [body mass index (BMI)] and randomized to LFD, LFD&PRE, CRD, and CRD&PRE. PRE groups performed supervised strength training three times per week. Body weight, composition, metabolic syndrome criteria, and strength were measured at baseline and week 12. A 3-day diet record was kept at baseline and at weeks 1, 6, and 12.
Results: Attrition (24%) was similar between groups. Depicted as % carbohydrate:fat:protein, the intervention diet was: LFD=55:24:18, LFD&PRE=57:20:20, CRD=16:54:28, and CRD&PRE=12:56:31. Weight (lb) decreased similarly in all groups (LFD, -18.0±7.4; LFD&PRE, -19.8±12.8; CRD, -20.2±8.0; CRD&PRE, -22.7±6.0; P<0.001), and number of participants with metabolic syndrome decreased in all groups (-3, -6, -3, -4, respectively). Percent of weight loss from appendicular FFM was 27.5%, 15.9%, 15.7%, and 17.3% respectively. A trend was found when comparing LFD and LFD&PRE (P=0.068), and when comparing LFD&CRD (P=0.072). Triglycerides improved more for the LFD&PRE, CRD, and CRD&PRE groups compared to the LFD group (P<0.05). Improvements in high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol were better in the CRD&PRE group (4.1±5.1 mg/dL) versus the LFD group (-5.0±5.9 mg/dL; P<0.01).
Conclusions: LFD&PRE, CRD, and CRD&PRE preserve FFM similarly. PRE is an important component of a LFD during weight loss in this population.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/met.2011.0104 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!