Creatine Monohydrate and Conjugated Linoleic Acid Improve Strength and Body Composition Following Resistance Exercise in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aging is associated with lower muscle mass and an increase in body fat. We examined whether creatine monohydrate (CrM) and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) could enhance strength gains and improve body composition (i.e., increase fat-free mass (FFM); decrease body fat) following resistance exercise training in older adults (>65 y). Men (N = 19) and women (N = 20) completed six months of resistance exercise training with CrM (5g/d)+CLA (6g/d) or placebo with randomized, double blind, allocation. Outcomes included: strength and muscular endurance, functional tasks, body composition (DEXA scan), blood tests (lipids, liver function, CK, glucose, systemic inflammation markers (IL-6, C-reactive protein)), urinary markers of compliance (creatine/creatinine), oxidative stress (8-OH-2dG, 8-isoP) and bone resorption (Nu-telopeptides). Exercise training improved all measurements of functional capacity (P<0.05) and strength (P<0.001), with greater improvement for the CrM+CLA group in most measurements of muscular endurance, isokinetic knee extension strength, FFM, and lower fat mass (P<0.05). Plasma creatinine (P<0.05), but not creatinine clearance, increased for CrM+CLA, with no changes in serum CK activity or liver function tests. Together, this data confirms that supervised resistance exercise training is safe and effective for increasing strength in older adults and that a combination of CrM and CLA can enhance some of the beneficial effects of training over a six-month period. Trial Registration. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00473902.
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".