Dietary Antioxidants as Modifiers of Physiologic Adaptations to Exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Adaptive responses to exercise training (ET) are crucial in maintaining physiologic homeostasis and health span. Exercise-induced aerobic bioenergetic reactions in the mitochondria and cytosol increase production of reactive oxygen species, where excess of reactive oxygen species can be scavenged by enzymatic and nonenzymatic antioxidants (AO) to protect against deleterious oxidative stress. Free radicals, however, have recently been recognized as crucial signaling agents that promote adaptive mechanisms to ET, such as mitochondrial biogenesis, AO enzyme activity defense system upregulation, insulin sensitivity, and glucose uptake in the skeletal muscle. Commonly used nonenzymatic AO supplements, such as vitamins C and E, α-lipoic acid, and polyphenols, in combination with ET, have been proposed as ways to prevent exercise-induced oxidative stress and hence improve adaptation responses to endurance training. METHODS: During the PubMed search, we selected studies that examined and compared ET effects with and without administration of commonly used AO supplements. RESULTS: Preclinical and clinical studies to date have shown inconsistent results indicating either positive or negative effects of endurance training combined with different blends of AO supplements (mostly vitamins C and E and α-lipoic acid) on redox status, mitochondrial biogenesis pathways, and insulin sensitivity. Preclinical reports on ET combined with resveratrol, however, have shown consistent positive effects on exercise performance, mitochondrial biogenesis, and insulin sensitivity, with clinical trials reporting mixed effects. Relevant clinical studies have been few and have used inconsistent results and methodology (types of compounds, combinations, and supplementation time). CONCLUSIONS: The future studies should investigate the effects of specific AO and other popular supplements, such as α-lipoic acid and resveratrol, on training effects in humans. Of particular importance are older adults who may be at higher risk of age-related increased oxidative stress, an impaired AO enzyme defense system, and comorbidities such as hypertension, insulin resistance, and diabetes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".