- Poster presentation
- Open Access
Nutrition coupled with high-load or low-load blood flow restricted exercise during human limb suspension
https://doi.org/10.1186/1550-2783-9-S1-P8
© Hackney et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
- Published: 19 November 2012
Keywords
- Training Load
- Cuff Inflation
- Chocolate Milk
- Blood Flow Restricted
- Skeletal Muscle Adaptation
Background
High-load resistance exercise (HRE) and low-load blood flow restricted (BFR) exercise have demonstrated efficacy for attenuating unloading related muscle atrophy and dysfunction. Protein consumption immediately before and/or after exercise has been shown to increase the skeletal muscle anabolic response to resistance training. The purpose of this study was to compare the skeletal muscle adaptations when chocolate milk intake was coupled with HRE or low-load BFR exercise during simulated lower limb weightlessness.
Methods
Eleven subjects were counterbalanced to HRE (31 ± 14 yr, 170 ± 13 cm, 71 ± 18 kg) or low-load BFR exercise (31 ± 12 yr, 169 ± 13 cm, 66 ± 14 kg) during 30 days of unilateral lower limb suspension (ULLS); a ground based space flight analog. Both HRE and BFR completed 3 sets of supine, single leg press and calf raise exercise during ULLS. BFR exercise intensity was 20% of repetition maximum (1RM) with a cuff inflation pressure of 1.3 × systolic blood pressure (143 ± 4 mmHg). Cuff pressure was maintained during all 3 sets including rest intervals (90s). HRE intensity was 75% 1RM and was performed without cuff inflation. Immediately (<10 min) before and after exercise 8 fl oz of chocolate milk (150 kcal, 2.5g total fat, 22g CHO, 8g protein) was consumed to optimize acute exercise responses in favor of muscle anabolism. Muscle cross-sectional area (CSA), 1RM strength, and muscular endurance were determined pre and post-ULLS. Data were analyzed with condition x time (between-within) ANOVA with repeated measures using alpha of 0.05.
Results
Table 1
HRE (N=5) | BFR (N=6) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pre-ULLS | Post-ULLS | %Change | Pre-ULLS | Post-ULLS | %Change | |
KE CSA (cm2) | 59.2 ± 9 | 60.3 ± 9 | +1.8 | 55.1 ± 4 | 53.7 ± 9* | -2.3 |
PF CSA (cm2) | 40.1 ± 4 | 40.3 ± 3 | +0.4 | 37.8 ± 2 | 36.0 ± 2* | -4.8 |
LP 1RM (kg) | 57.0 ± 9 | 66.0 ± 12 | +15.1 | 49.0 ± 6 | 43.0 ± 6* | -11.9 |
CR 1RM (kg) | 101 ± 5 | 110 ± 5 | +9.0 | 86.0 ± 7 | 80.0 ± 3 | -6.6 |
LP Endurance (reps) | 44.0 ± 8 | 39.0 ± 6 | -10.0 | 36.0 ± 3 | 42.0 ± 3 | +14.0 |
CR Endurance (reps) | 30 ± 4 | 34 ± 5 | +13.0 | 31 ± 2 | 47 ± 5*† | +51.8 |
Conclusions
When HRE is optimized for muscle anabolism during unloading muscle size and strength are preserved (or enhanced) at the expense of muscle endurance. In contrast, when BFR exercise is optimized for muscle anabolism during unloading muscle endurance is preserved (or enhanced) at the expense of muscle size and strength.
Authors’ Affiliations
Copyright
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
