Nutritional strategies to support concurrent training
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concurrent training (the combination of endurance exercise to resistance training) is a common practice for athletes looking to maximise strength and endurance. Over 20 years ago, it was first observed that performing endurance exercise after resistance exercise could have detrimental effects on strength gains. At the cellular level, specific protein candidates have been suggested to mediate this training interference; however, at present, the physiological reason(s) behind the concurrent training effect remain largely unknown. Even less is known regarding the optimal nutritional strategies to support concurrent training and whether unique nutritional approaches are needed to support endurance and resistance exercise during concurrent training approaches. In this review, we will discuss the importance of protein supplementation for both endurance and resistance training adaptation and highlight additional nutritional strategies that may support concurrent training. Finally, we will attempt to synergise current understanding of the interaction between physiological responses and nutritional approaches into practical recommendations for concurrent training.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it