This longitudinal, controlled clinical study was conducted to compare the effects of resistance exercise (RE) and aerobic exercise (AE) on body mass index (BMI), weight, fat mass (FM), serum lipid profile, and insulin resistance in obese women who cannot adhere to energy-restricted diets. A total of 60 obese women with severe eating disorders were evaluated. Patients were randomly divided into 3 groups: control group with no exercise (n=20), group 1 with AE (n=20), and group 2 with RE (n=20). Demographic and anthropometric measurements were taken. Serum lipid fractions and fasting (FGlc) and postprandial glucose insulin (PGlc) levels were measured. Insulin resistance was calculated with use of homeostasis model assessment (HOMA-IR). Total body FM was measured by bioelectric impedance analysis. After 12 wk of exercise, significant decreases in BMI, waist and weight measurements, and FGlc, PGlc, triglyceride, and total cholesterol levels were noted in each of the study groups. Reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level and FM and HOMA-IR measurements were observed only in group 1 (with AE). This study indicated that AE and RE training induces improvement in body fat composition and has a favorable metabolic effect in obese women with severe eating disorders.
"are the effects on fat during exercise and these effects support by activation of certain enzymes in the oxidative pathway, supports this process. Aerobic exercise activates lipoprotein lipase and increased lipoprotein lipase (LPL) activity may play an important role in reducing insulin resistance during exercise (Irving et al., 2008; Fenkci et al., 2006 "
"Indeed, the reduction in cholesterol and triacylglycerol levels in the current study was of the same magnitude as that reported in the long duration HICT study . Our findings support previous investigations reporting exercise induced decreases in lipids in the absence of dietary restrictions [16, 47, 48]. The results show that only twelve 30 min HICT sessions over a 4-week period can significantly attenuate insulin resistance in nondiabetic adult obese males, a finding that was not replicated in a longer duration low-frequency HICT program for type 2 diabetic patients . "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to determine how a high-intensity circuit-training (HICT) program affects key physiological health markers in sedentary obese men. Eight obese (body fat percentage >26%) males completed a four-week HICT program, consisting of three 30-minute exercise sessions per week, for a total of 6 hours of exercise. Participants' heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), rating of perceived exertion, total work (TW), and time to completion were measured each exercise session, body composition was measured before and after HICT, and fasting blood samples were measured before throughout, and after HICT program. Blood sample measurements included total cholesterol, triacylglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, glucose, and insulin. Data were analyzed by paired t-tests and one-way ANOVA with repeated measures. Statistical significance was set to P < 0.05. Data analyses revealed significant (P < 0.05) improvements in resting HR (16% decrease), systolic BP (5.5% decrease), TW (50.7%), fat tissue percentage (3.6%), lean muscle tissue percentage (2%), cholesterol (13%), triacylglycerol (37%), and insulin (18%) levels from before to after HICT program. Overall, sedentary obese males experienced a significant improvement in biochemical, physical, and body composition characteristics from a HICT program that was only 6 hours of the total exercise.
": RT : 9 Ex , 3 S / MG / W , AET : 60 – 75% VO 2 max , 150 min / wk ; CT : QBW a , b , WC a , FM a , b ; q VO 2 max a , b * compared with control a , RT b , Donges et al . 2010 [ 34 ] 76 n . d 2 . 5 RT vs . RT : 6 Ex , 75% 1RM , dose : 3 S / MG / W ; RT : Q WC q BW , LBM 27 . 8 58% AET AET : 75% MHR , 150 min / wk ; AET : QBW , WC , FM ; q LBM 42% Fenkci et al . 2006 [ 37 ] Sarsan et al . 2006 [ 47 ] 40 42 . 85 4 RT vs . RT : 6 Ex , 75 – 80% 1 RM , 10 R , dose : 9 S / MG / W ; RT : Q BW , FM ; q LBMAET : Q BW , FM 35 100% AET AET : 50 – 85% HRR ; 45 – 225 min / wk ; AET : Q BW , FM 0% Fisher et al . 2011 [ 40 ] 97 30 . 5 until BMI , 25 kg / m RT + CR vs . RT : 10 Ex , 80% 1 RM , 10 R , dose : 6 S / "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The aim of this systematic review of randomized controlled trials was to compare the effects of aerobic training (AET), resistance training (RT), and combined aerobic and resistance training (CT) on anthropometric parameters, blood lipids, and cardiorespiratory fitness in overweight and obese subjects.
Electronic searches for randomized controlled trials were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Trial Register. Inclusion criteria were: Body Mass Index: ≥25 kg/m(2), 19+ years of age, supervised exercise training, and a minimum intervention period of 8 weeks. Anthropometric outcomes, blood lipids, and cardiorespiratory fitness parameters were included. Pooled effects were calculated by inverse-variance random effect pairwise meta-analyses and Bayesian random effects network meta-analyses.
15 trials enrolling 741 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to RT, AET resulted in a significantly more pronounced reduction of body weight [mean differences (MD): -1.15 kg, p = 0.04], waist circumference [MD: -1.10 cm, p = 0.004], and fat mass [MD: -1.15 kg, p = 0.001] respectively. RT was more effective than AET in improving lean body mass [MD: 1.26 kg, p<0.00001]. When comparing CT with RT, MD in change of body weight [MD: -2.03 kg, p<0.0001], waist circumference [MD: -1.57 cm, p = 0.0002], and fat mass [MD: -1.88 kg, p<0.00001] were all in favor of CT. Results from the network meta-analyses confirmed these findings.
Evidence from both pairwise and network meta-analyses suggests that CT is the most efficacious means to reduce anthropometric outcomes and should be recommended in the prevention and treatment of overweight, and obesity whenever possible.
PLoS ONE 12/2013; 8(12):e82853. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0082853 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.