scholarly journals Changes in Fat Mass Following Creatine Supplementation and Resistance Training in Adults ≥50 Years of Age: A Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Forbes ◽  
Candow ◽  
Krentz ◽  
Roberts ◽  
Young
Keyword(s):  
Resistance Training ◽  
Fat Mass ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Creatine Supplementation ◽  
Premature Mortality ◽  
Fat Percentage ◽  
Lean Tissue ◽  
Tissue Mass ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Creatine Metabolism

Aging is associated with an increase in fat mass which increases the risk for disease, morbidity and premature mortality. Creatine supplementation in combination with resistance training has been shown to increase lean tissue mass in adults ≥50 years of age; however, the synergetic effects of creatine and resistance training on fat mass in this population are unclear. Creatine metabolism plays an important role in adipose tissue bioenergetics and energy expenditure. Thus, the combination of creatine supplementation and resistance training may decrease fat mass more than resistance training alone. The purpose of this review is two-fold: (1) to perform meta-analyses on studies involving creatine supplementation during resistance training on fat mass in adults ≥50 years of age, and (2) to discuss possible mechanistic actions of creatine on reducing fat mass. Nineteen studies were included in our meta-analysis with 609 participants. Results from the meta-analyses showed that adults ≥50 years of age who supplemented with creatine during resistance training experienced a greater reduction in body fat percentage (0.55%, p = 0.04) compared to those on placebo during resistance training. Despite no statistical difference (p = 0.13), adults supplementing with creatine lost ~0.5 kg more fat mass compared to those on placebo. Interestingly, there are studies which have linked mechanism(s) explaining how creatine may influence fat mass, and these data are also discussed.

scholarly journals Meta-Analysis Examining the Importance of Creatine Ingestion Strategies on Lean Tissue Mass and Strength in Older Adults

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1912
Author(s):  
Scott C. Forbes ◽  
Darren G. Candow ◽  
Sergej M. Ostojic ◽  
Michael D. Roberts ◽  
Philip D. Chilibeck
Keyword(s):  
Resistance Training ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Creatine Supplementation ◽  
Strength Increase ◽  
Lean Tissue ◽  
Tissue Mass ◽  
Resistance Training Program ◽  
Lean Tissue Mass ◽  
Leg Press ◽  
Meta Analyses

Creatine supplementation in conjunction with resistance training (RT) augments gains in lean tissue mass and strength in aging adults; however, there is a large amount of heterogeneity between individual studies that may be related to creatine ingestion strategies. Therefore, the purpose of this review was to (1) perform updated meta-analyses comparing creatine vs. placebo (independent of dosage and frequency of ingestion) during a resistance training program on measures of lean tissue mass and strength, (2) perform meta-analyses examining the effects of different creatine dosing strategies (lower: ≤5 g/day and higher: >5 g/day), with and without a creatine-loading phase (≥20 g/day for 5–7 days), and (3) perform meta-analyses determining whether creatine supplementation only on resistance training days influences measures of lean tissue mass and strength. Overall, creatine (independent of dosing strategy) augments lean tissue mass and strength increase from RT vs. placebo. Subanalyses showed that creatine-loading followed by lower-dose creatine (≤5 g/day) increased chest press strength vs. placebo. Higher-dose creatine (>5 g/day), with and without a creatine-loading phase, produced significant gains in leg press strength vs. placebo. However, when studies involving a creatine-loading phase were excluded from the analyses, creatine had no greater effect on chest press or leg press strength vs. placebo. Finally, creatine supplementation only on resistance training days significantly increased measures of lean tissue mass and strength vs. placebo.

Strategic creatine supplementation and resistance training in healthy older adults

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
pp. 689-694 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren G. Candow ◽  
Emelie Vogt ◽  
Sarah Johannsmeyer ◽  
Scott C. Forbes ◽  
Jonathan P. Farthing
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Fat Mass ◽  
Creatine Supplementation ◽  
Lean Tissue ◽  
Tissue Mass ◽  
Lean Tissue Mass ◽  
Leg Press ◽  
Repeated Measures Design

Creatine supplementation in close proximity to resistance training may be an important strategy for increasing muscle mass and strength; however, it is unknown whether creatine supplementation before or after resistance training is more effective for aging adults. Using a double-blind, repeated measures design, older adults (50–71 years) were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: creatine before (CR-B: n = 15; creatine (0.1 g/kg) immediately before resistance training and placebo (0.1 g/kg cornstarch maltodextrin) immediately after resistance training), creatine after (CR-A: n = 12; placebo immediately before resistance training and creatine immediately after resistance training), or placebo (PLA: n = 12; placebo immediately before and immediately after resistance training) for 32 weeks. Prior to and following the study, body composition (lean tissue, fat mass; dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry) and muscle strength (1-repetition maximum leg press and chest press) were assessed. There was an increase over time for lean tissue mass and muscle strength and a decrease in fat mass (p < 0.05). CR-A resulted in greater improvements in lean tissue mass (Δ 3.0 ± 1.9 kg) compared with PLA (Δ 0.5 ± 2.1 kg; p < 0.025). Creatine supplementation, independent of the timing of ingestion, increased muscle strength more than placebo (leg press: CR-B, Δ 36.6 ± 26.6 kg; CR-A, Δ 40.8 ± 38.4 kg; PLA, Δ 5.6 ± 35.1 kg; chest press: CR-B, Δ 15.2 ± 13.0 kg; CR-A, Δ 15.7 ± 12.5 kg; PLA, Δ 1.9 ± 14.7 kg; p < 0.025). Compared with resistance training alone, creatine supplementation improves muscle strength, with greater gains in lean tissue mass resulting from post-exercise creatine supplementation.

Effect of Whey and Soy Protein Supplementation Combined with Resistance Training in Young Adults

2006 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren G. Candow ◽  
Natalie C. Burke ◽  
T. Smith-Palmer ◽  
Darren G. Burke
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Whey Protein ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Soy Protein ◽  
Protein Supplementation ◽  
Protein Catabolism ◽  
Lean Tissue ◽  
Tissue Mass ◽  
Lean Tissue Mass

The purpose was to compare changes in lean tissue mass, strength, and myof-brillar protein catabolism resulting from combining whey protein or soy protein with resistance training. Twenty-seven untrained healthy subjects (18 female, 9 male) age 18 to 35 y were randomly assigned (double blind) to supplement with whey protein (W; 1.2 g/kg body mass whey protein + 0.3 g/kg body mass sucrose power, N = 9: 6 female, 3 male), soy protein (S; 1.2 g/kg body mass soy protein + 0.3 g/kg body mass sucrose powder, N = 9: 6 female, 3 male) or placebo (P; 1.2 g/kg body mass maltodextrine + 0.3 g/kg body mass sucrose powder, N = 9: 6 female, 3 male) for 6 wk. Before and after training, measurements were taken for lean tissue mass (dual energy X-ray absorptiometry), strength (1-RM for bench press and hack squat), and an indicator of myofbrillar protein catabolism (urinary 3-methylhistidine). Results showed that protein supplementation during resistance training, independent of source, increased lean tissue mass and strength over isocaloric placebo and resistance training (P < 0.05). We conclude that young adults who supplement with protein during a structured resistance training program experience minimal beneficial effects in lean tissue mass and strength.

Lean Tissue Mass And Fat Mass Changes In HIV-infected Persons Following Moderate Intensity Exercise Training

2005 ◽  
Vol 37 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. S127
Author(s):  
Wesley D. Dudgeon ◽  
Kenneth D. Phillips ◽  
Stephanie E. Burgess ◽  
J. Larry Durstine ◽  
Gregory A. Hand
Keyword(s):  
Exercise Training ◽  
Fat Mass ◽  
Moderate Intensity ◽  
Moderate Intensity Exercise ◽  
Lean Tissue ◽  
Tissue Mass ◽  
Lean Tissue Mass

scholarly journals Eating versus skipping breakfast has no discernible effect on obesity-related anthropometric outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 140
Author(s):  
Michelle M. Bohan Brown ◽  
Jillian E. Milanes ◽  
David B. Allison ◽  
Andrew W. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Fat Mass ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Fat Percentage ◽  
Anthropometric Measures ◽  
Discernible Effect ◽  
Statistical Heterogeneity ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Leave One Out ◽  
Skipping Breakfast

Background: Eating or skipping breakfast for weight interests scientific and lay communities. Our objective was to systematically review and meta-analyze causal effects of eating versus skipping breakfast on obesity-related anthropometric outcomes in humans. Methods: Six databases were searched for obesity- and breakfast-related terms (final search: 02 JAN 2020). Studies needed to isolate eating versus skipping breakfast in randomized controlled trials. Mean differences were synthesized using inverse variance random effects meta-analysis for each outcome. Positive estimates indicate higher outcomes in breakfast conditions (e.g., weight gain). Leave-one-out sensitivity analysis, secondary baseline habit-by-breakfast assignment analysis, and study duration cumulative analysis were performed. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results: Ten articles (12 comparisons; 6d-12wk) were included. Conditions included recommendations to eat versus skip breakfast, or provision of some or all meals. 95% confidence intervals of all main analyses included the null value of no difference for each outcome: body weight (0.17 kg [-0.40,0.73], k=12, n=487, I 2=74.5), BMI (0.07 kg/m 2 [-0.10,0.23, k=8, n=396, I 2=54.1), body fat percentage (-0.27% [-1.01,0.47], k=6, n=179, I 2=52.4), fat mass (0.24 kg [-0.21,0.69], k=6, n=205, I 2=0.0), lean mass (0.18 kg [-0.08,0.44], k=6, n=205, I 2=6.7), waist circumference (0.18 cm [-1.77,2.13], k=4, n=102, I 2=78.7), waist:hip ratio (0.00 [-0.01,0.01], k=4, n=102, I 2=8.0), sagittal abdominal diameter (0.19 cm [-2.35,2.73], k=2, n=56, I 2=0.0), and fat mass index (0.00 kg/m 2 [-0.22,0.23], k=2, n=56, I 2=0.0). Subgroup analysis showed only one statistically significant result. The interaction effect for BMI (–0.36[-0.65,-0.07]) indicates assignment to conditions consistent with baseline habits had lower BMI. Leave-one-out analysis did not indicate substantial influence of any one study. Conclusions: There was no discernible effect of eating or skipping breakfast on obesity-related anthropometric measures when pooling studies with substantial design heterogeneity and sometimes statistical heterogeneity. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42016033290.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document