Effect of Creatine Supplementation and Resistance-Exercise Training on Muscle Insulin-Like Growth Factor in Young Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare changes in muscle insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) content resulting from resistance-exercise training (RET) and creatine supplementation (CR). Male (n=24) and female (n=18) participants with minimal resistance-exercise-training experience (=1 year) who were participating in at least 30 min of structured physical activity (i.e., walking, jogging, cycling) 3-5 x/wk volunteered for the study. Participants were randomly assigned in blocks (gender) to supplement with creatine (CR: 0.25 g/kg lean-tissue mass for 7 days; 0.06 g/kg lean-tissue mass for 49 days; n=22, 12 males, 10 female) or isocaloric placebo (PL: n=20, 12 male, 8 female) and engage in a whole-body RET program for 8 wk. Eighteen participants were classified as vegetarian (lacto-ovo or vegan; CR: 5 male, 5 female; PL: 3 male, 5 female). Muscle biopsies (vastus lateralis) were taken before and after the intervention and analyzed for IGF-I using standard immunohistochemical procedures. Stained muscle cross-sections were examined microscopically and IGF-I content quantified using image-analysis software. Results showed that RET increased intramuscular IGF-I content by 67%, with greater accumulation from CR (+78%) than PL (+54%; p=.06). There were no differences in IGF-I between vegetarians and nonvegetarians. These findings indicate that creatine supplementation during resistance-exercise training increases intramuscular IGF-I concentration in healthy men and women, independent of habitual dietary routine.
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".