High-intensity resistance training attenuates dexamethasone-induced muscle atrophy

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Short-term low-intensity blood flow restricted interval training improves both aerobic fitness and muscle strength

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

High-intensity interval training and hypertension: Maximizing the benefits of exercise?

Essential arterial hypertension is the most common risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Regular exercise is a well-established intervention for the prevention and treatment of hypertension. Continuous moderate-intensity exercise training (CMT) that can be sustained for 30 min or more has been traditionally recommended for hypertension prevention and treatment. On the other hand, several studies have shown that high-intensity interval training (HIT), which consists of several bouts of high-intensity exercise (~85% to 95% of HRMAX and/or VO2MAX lasting 1 to 4 min interspersed with intervals of rest or active recovery, is superior to CMT for improving cardiorespiratory fitness, endothelial function and its markers, insulin sensitivity, markers of sympathetic activity and arterial stiffness in hypertensive and normotensive at high familial risk for hypertension subjects. This compelling evidence suggesting larger beneficial effects of HIT for several factors involved in the pathophysiology of hypertension raises the hypothesis that HIT may be more effective for preventing and controlling hypertension.

Repeated sprint ability tests and intensity-time curvature constant to predict short-distance running performances

Anaerobic efforts are commonly required through repeated sprint during efforts in many sports, making the anaerobic pathway a target of training. Nevertheless, to identify improvements on such energetic way it is necessary to assess anaerobic capacity or power, which is usually complex. For this purpose, authors have postulated the use of short running performances to anaerobic ability assessment. Thus, the aim of this study was to find a relationship between running performances on anaerobic power, anaerobic capacity or repeated sprint ability. Methods Thirteen military performed maximal running of 50 (P50), 100 (P100) and 300 (P300) m on track, beyond of running-based anaerobic sprint test (RAST; RSA and anaerobic power test), maximal anaerobic running test (MART; RSA and anaerobic capacity test) and the W′ from critical power model (anaerobic capacity test). Results By RAST variables, peak and average power (absolute and relative) and maximum velocity were significantly correlated with P50 (r = −0.68, p = 0.03 and −0.76, p = 0.01; −0.83, p < 0.01 and −0.83, p < 0.01; and −0.78, p < 0.01), respectively. The maximum intensity of MART was negatively and significantly correlated with P100 (r = −0.59) and W′ was not statistically correlated with any of the performances. Conclusion MART and W′ were not correlated with short running performances, having a weak performance predicting probably due to its longer duration in relation to assessed performances. Observing RAST outcomes, we postulated that such a protocol can be used during daily training as short running performance predictor.

Intensity and interval of recovery in strength exercise influences performance: salivary lactate and alpha amylase as biochemical markers: a pilot study

Purpose The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of intensity and interval of recovery on performance in the bench press exercise, and the response of salivary lactate and alpha amylase levels. Methods Ten sportsman (aged 29 ± 4 years; body mass index 26 ± 2 kg/cm2 ) were divided in two groups: G70 (performing a bench press exercise at 70 % one repetition maximum—1RM), and G90 (performing a bench press exercise at 90 %—1RM). All groups were engaged in three intervals of recovery (30, 60 and 90 s). The maximum number of repetitions (MNR) and total weight lifted were computed, and saliva samples were collected 15 min before and after different intervals of recovery. For the comparison of the performance and biochemistry parameters, ANOVA tests for repeated measurements were conducted, with a significance level set at 5 %. Results In G70, the 30 s MNR was lower than the 60 and 90 s intervals of recovery (p\0.05) and the MNR with the 60 s interval of recovery was lower than the 90 s interval of recovery (p\0.041). Similarly, in G90 with the 30 s of interval of recovery, the sets were lower than observed with the 60 and 90 s (p\0.05), and MNR with the 60 s interval of recovery was lower than the 90 s interval of recovery (p\0.05). The salivary lactate showed an increase after exercise (p\0.05) when compared with the rest period for all groups, and no effects were observed for salivary alpha amylase. Conclusions Based on this result, the sets and reps can be modified to change the recovery time. This effect is very useful to improve the performance in relationship to different fitness levels.