Relationship of blood pressure, behavioral mood state, and physical activity following caffeine ingestion in younger and older women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the age-related differences in blood pressure, heart rate, and behavioral mood state after caffeine ingestion in younger and older women. Using a placebo-controlled, double-blind design, 10 younger (Y; 18-22 years) and 10 older (O; 50-67 years) healthy women who were moderate consumers of caffeine (self-reported mean intake: Y, 139 +/- 152 mg.day-1; O, 204 +/- 101 mg.day-1) were investigated. All volunteers were characterized for fasting plasma glucose, insulin, free-fatty acids and caffeine levels, body composition, cardiovascular fitness, physical activity, and energy intake. Before and after placebo and caffeine ingestion (5 mg.kg-1 fat-free mass; approximately 208-270 mg) test days, the following variables were measured in all subjects: plasma caffeine levels, heart rate, blood pressure, and behavioral mood state. Results showed that, following caffeine ingestion: (i) both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP, respectively) increased significantly (p < 0.05) in the older women (SBP, 128.4 +/- 14.2 vs. 132.1 +/- 13.0 mm Hg (3%); DBP, 80.2 +/- 6.9 vs. 83.4 +/- 7.5 mm Hg (4%), whereas only DBP increased in the younger women (67.1 +/- 4.7 vs. 69.9 +/- 5.4 mm Hg (4.2%); p < 0.05); (ii) heart rate decreased significantly (Y, 59.2 +/- 8.7 to 53.9 +/- 10.6 beats.min-1 (p < 0.05); O, 61.9 +/- 9.2 to 59.2 +/- 8.4 beats.min-1 (p < 0.05)) in both groups; and (iii) self-reported feelings of tension and vigor increased and feelings of fatigue decreased (p < 0.05) in younger women, whereas depression decreased (p < or = 0.05) in older women. Self-reported level of physical activity was inversely related to change in DBP following caffeine ingestion in younger women. In conclusion, blood pressure response is augmented and subjective feelings of behavioral mood state are attenuated to a greater degree in older than in younger women following acute caffeine ingestion. Less physically active younger women are more vulnerable to the pressor response to caffeine than more active younger women. It should be noted that these findings are limited to moderate consumers of caffeine who abstained for 48 h prior to testing, and who ingested caffeine in pill form (approximately 240 mg).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".