Original Exercise intensity does diet- and exercise-induced Douglas

L Ballor,

John

ABSTRACT intake)

or low (Low)

with

(40-50%

high

and

ofpeak

restriction

VO2)

exercise

spect body fat

there

were

no differences

10%),

(- 16%).

and

This

sum

study

of five

suggests

free

mass,

Body mass

caloric

with

loss,

rates

on the

the groups

with

re-

measurements

during

the

rate

fat-

restriction

Introduction mass

fat and fat-free masses (1-3). intake is replaced by increased

loss

generally

includes

Ifa portion ofthe energy expenditure

low-intensity

as fat was for diet

greater

alone

fat mass

losses

if the

such

that

conservation may

occur.

D, 70%)

or women

to a diet

Exercise differentially mass loss.

program, effect

type, The

(DE,

(DE)

exercise

vs D, 89%).

thereby

increasing

of exercise

Thus,

affect the composition effect of exercise

mass

loss

incidence

and

for the adding

of maximum

142

As exercise oxygen

intensity uptake

increase the (DE, 69% vs

(work

rate)

body

increases

where carbohydrate exercise may

and increase

the loss of fat-free

appear the

be performed and

and

low-intensity

duced

of different

exercise

mass

with

injury Because (8) and

disease

for use with

and

less

a large portion has a relatively

(9), exercise

in the literature

intensities

minimal places

of low-

caloric-restriction

pro-

directly

of exercise

at the

comsame

of lost body mass. the effects of high-

expenditure on the composition of this study was to compare

body

/3-oxidation Furthermore,

daily

joint

system. is older

to be no studies

effects

stimulates

on the composition

of calorically

in-

loss.

from levels,

Am J C/in Nuir

and methods

Subjects Twenty-seven 7.4 kg (1±

SD);

sedentary % fat,

obese females [body mass, 78.6 36.7 ± 4.2; height, 167.6 ± 3.8 cm;

age, 3 1 .9 ± 5. 1 y] volunteered to participate in an 8-wk mass loss study. The study was approved by the University

body of

mass

be lost.

intensity

to maximal

a

carbohy-

is

may

of calorically induced body intensity on the composition

(VO2max)

can or muscle

be preferable

caloric purpose

±

of lost body mass is of particular interest, in part, because of the variance in the metabolic responses to high- and low-intensity exercise.

from

is suppressed.

of cardiovascular

may

total The

of lost

may

of VO2max),

re-

if exercise

the total

on fat-free frequency,

dietary

that

regimen did not as fat for obese men

to be

higher

as a percentage

et al (2) found

(> 80% is derived

exercise

stress on the cardiorespiratory of the overweight population

Subjects mass

inten-

thought

than

(3) found

body

79%

duration,

exercise

to a constant

mass

Hagan

to a caloric-restriction of body mass lost

example, mass lost

for D (79%).

of fat-free

not

the sparing

than

plus Golding

in a greater

exercise percentage

loss,

and

is added

it results

DE group,

added

for diet

Zuti

exercise

body

mass

vs 68%)

Likewise,

for DE (109%)

In contrast, striction

(79%

(D).

are

consequently

metabolism

of overtraining

paring

both

reduced caloric via exercise,

the percentage ofbody mass lost as fat increases. For Weltman et al (4) found that the percentage of body

in exercise

and

individuals, high-intensity

low-intensity

carbohydrate

high

body

pro-

concentra-

of glycolysis.

energy

and

lactate

increases

exercise

required

In dieting is limited,

In contrast, while

grams. There induced

with of VO2max)

high-intensity

increases

(6) and

for the stimulation

ofgluconeogenesis

intensity

Calorically

--50%

of the

drate sources. protein intake

risk diet,

exponentially

from

portion

via carbohydrates

catecholamine

responsible

Thus, large

of

for a diet and clinician and!

exertion,

(7) increase (starting

supplied

Blood

mass.

to conservation

exercise,

tions

(5).

partially

of combined groups) in fat mass(16%), percent regard

ofenergy

gressively sity

Low (n After

fat-free mass, the selection of an exercise intensity exercise regimen may be left to the preference ofthe or dieter. An J C/in Nutr l990;5 1:142-6.

KEY WORDS

VO2)

in 27 obese All subjects

skinfold-thickness that

percentage

kcal/d

14) and respectively.

=

between

to pre- to posUest changes (mean mass(-7%), fat-free mass(-10%), (-

(1200

work

of

Wilterdink

ofpeak

determined i ± SD).

trained 3 d/wk for 8 wk, with the High (n = 1 3) groups exercising for 25 and 50 min/d, posttesting

E Joan

(High)(80-90%

composition of lost body mass was women (percent fat, 36.7 ± 4.2%;

Communications-general

not affect the composition body mass 105513

P McCarthy,

The effect of caloric

in combination

Research

50% the

l990;5

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article-abstract/51/2/142/4695032 by Denise Hannibal user on 08 April 2018

From the Department of Physical Education and Dance, University of Wisconsin.-Madison, 2000 Observatory Drive, Madison. 2 Supported in part by a grant from the Graduate School of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Address reprint requests to D Ballor, Department cation and Dance, University of Wisconsin-Madison, tory Drive, Madison, WI 53706. Received November 7, 1988. Accepted for publication March 1, 1989.

1:142-6.

Printed

in USA.

© 1990 American

Society

of Physical Edu2000 Observa-

for Clinical

Nutrition

EXERCISE TABLE

I characteristics

Physical

INTENSITY

BODY

MASS

LOSS

143

of the subjects

Groupt

Pretest

High

79.1 ± 8.4 78.2 ± 6.4

73.1

± 8.2

Low

72.6

±

Fat-freemass

High

50.3±

48.8±3.8

Low High

48.8

± 3.5

47.9

Fat mass

28.8

±

29.4

±

High Low High

36.1

±

24.3 24.7 32.7

±

Low

6.6 4.3 5.0

135.4 ±43.6

115.9

Low

151.9±38.2

125.8±35.1

Body

mass

Percent

fat

Sum offiveskinfold-thicknessmeasurements(mm) Peak

V02 (L/min)

Peak VO2(mL.kg’

.min’)

Peak heart rate (beats/mm)

*

AND

Posttest

3.6

-6.0

± I .9

-5.6 -1.4±

±

± 3.2

-0.9

± I .2*

7.2 4.5

-4.5

± 2.1*

-4.7

± 1 .3

± 7.0

-3.4

± 2.6*

±

33.8±

37.5±3.2

High

2.3

± 0.4

Low High

2.3 29.5

Low

29.6

High Low

181.3 187.5

Difference

6.8

3.5

I .8* 1.1*

-3.7±

±44.7

1.4*

-19.5

±

-26.1

±

15.2*

0.4*11

12.5*

2.7

± 0.5

0.4

±

± 0.2

2.4

± 0.3

0.1

± 0.211

± 4.9

37.1

± 8.3

7.6

±

± 2.9

33.3

± 4.5

3.8

±

6.211

±

± 6.21!

8.111

179.6

±

188.5

± 7.21!

-1.7

5.1*11 3.0*11

± 5.1

1.1 ± 4.5

i± SD.

t High group, n 14; low group, n j Posttest value minus pretest value. =

13.

=

§ Pretest significantly different from postlest (within 1 High change (prepost) significantly different from #{182} High significantly different from low, p