Growth hormone responses to 3 different exercise bouts in 18- to 25- and 40- to 50-year-old men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercise is a potent stimulus for growth hormone (GH) release, although aging appears to attenuate this response. The aim of this study was to investigate GH responses to different exercise stimuli in young and early middle-aged men. Eight men aged 18-25 y and 8 men aged 40-50 y completed 3 trials, at least 7 days apart, in a random order: 30 s cycle-ergometer sprint (sprint), 30 min resistance exercise bout (resistance), 30 min cycle at 70% maximal oxygen consumption (endurance). Blood samples were taken pre-, during, and post-exercise, and area under the GH vs. time curve was calculated for a total of 120 min. Mean blood lactate concentrations and percentage heart rate maximum at which the participants were working were not different between groups in any of the trials. In both groups, blood lactate concentrations were significantly lower in the endurance trial than in the sprint and resistance trials. There were no significant differences in resting GH concentration between groups or trials. GH AUC was significantly greater in the young group than the early middle-aged group, in both sprint (531 (+/-347) vs. 81 (+/-54) microg.L-1 per 120 min, p = 0.003) and endurance trials (842 (+/-616) vs. 177 (+/-137) microg.L-1 per 120 min, p = 0.010). Endurance exercise elicits a greater GH response than sprint and resistance exercise; however, aging per se, factors associated with aging, or an inability to achieve a sufficient absolute exercise intensity results in a smaller GH response to an exercise stimulus in early middle-aged men.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".