Whey protein hydrolysate supplementation accelerates recovery from exercise-induced muscle damage in females
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of different forms of protein and their analogues have been investigated for their efficacy in ameliorating exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) and recovery. Preliminary data regarding whey protein hydrolysate (WPH) supplementation are promising. However, its efficacy beyond acute eccentric/resistance exercise bouts or longer term training programmes are limited and all investigations have been conducted in male or mixed-sex groups. This study sought to elucidate whether the benefits of WPH previously reported can be demonstrated in females following repeated-sprint exercise. Twenty physically active females were assigned to consume 2 doses of 70 mL WPH or isoenergetic carbohydrate (CHO) for 4 days post-EIMD. Measures of muscle soreness, limb girth, flexibility, muscle function, and creatine kinase were collected before, immediately after, and 24, 48, and 72 h postexercise. Time effects were observed for all variables (p < 0.05) except limb girth, which is indicative of EIMD. Flexibility improved beyond baseline measures following WPH by 72 h, but had failed to recover in the CHO group (p = 0.011). Reactive strength index was higher throughout recovery in the WPH group compared with CHO (p = 0.016). Reductions in creatine kinase were greater following WPH compared with CHO at 48 h post-EIMD (p = 0.031). The findings suggest that 4-day supplementation of WPH is beneficial for reducing symptoms of EIMD and improving recovery of muscle function in physically active females.
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".