Caffeine ingestion does not impede the resynthesis of proglycogen and macroglycogen after prolonged exercise and carbohydrate supplementation in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of caffeine (Caf) ingestion on pro- (PG) and macroglycogen (MG) resynthesis in 10 healthy men. Subjects completed two trials, consisting of a glycogen-depleting exercise, while ingesting either Caf or placebo capsules. Throughout recovery, biopsies were taken at 0 (exhaustion), 30, 120, and 300 min, and 75 g of carbohydrate were ingested at 0, 60, 120, 180, and 240 min. Whereas Caf ingestion resulted in a higher blood glucose concentration and decreased glycogen synthase fractional velocity ( P ≤ 0.05), no effect was observed in either the amount or rate of PG and MG resynthesis. PG concentration increased significantly at each time point during recovery, whereas MG concentration remained unchanged until 120 min. The net rate of PG resynthesis was 115 mmol·kg dw-1·h-1 during the first 30 min of recovery, and then it significantly decreased by 62% throughout the remaining 4.5 h of recovery. The net rate of MG resynthesis was 77% lower than the net rate of PG resynthesis during the first 30 min of recovery and remained constant throughout 5 h of recovery despite increasing levels of insulin. In conclusion, Caf ingestion does not impede the resynthesis of PG or MG after an extensive depletion of muscle glycogen and with the provision of exogenous dietary carbohydrate.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".