Heat Loss Is Impaired in Older Men on the Day after Prolonged Work in the Heat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Prolonged work in the heat may exacerbate the rise in core temperature on the next work day, especially in older workers who display impairments in whole-body heat loss that increase body heat storage and core temperature relative to young adults during heat stress. We therefore evaluated whether whole-body heat loss in older adults was impaired on the day after prolonged work in the heat. METHODS: Whole-body heat exchange and heat storage were assessed in nine older (53-64 yr) men during three 30-min bouts of semirecumbent cycling at fixed rates of metabolic heat production (150 [Ex1], 200 [Ex2], 250 W·m [Ex3]), each separated by 15-min recovery, in hot-dry conditions (40°C, 20% relative humidity), immediately before (day 1), and on the day after (day 2) a prolonged, work simulation (~7.5 h) involving moderate-intensity intermittent exercise in hot-dry conditions (38°C, 34% relative humidity). Total heat loss (evaporative ± dry heat exchange) and metabolic heat production were measured using direct and indirect calorimetry, respectively. Body heat storage was quantified as the temporal summation of heat production and loss. RESULTS: Total heat loss (mean ± SD) during Ex1 did not differ between days 1 and 2 (151 ± 15 and 147 ± 14 W·m, respectively; P = 0.27), but was attenuated on day 2 during Ex2 (181 ± 15 W·m) and Ex3 (218 ± 16 W·m) relative to day 1 (192 ± 14 and 230 ± 19 W·m, respectively; both P < 0.01). Consequently, body heat storage throughout the protocol on day 2 (276 ± 114 kJ) was 31% greater than on day 1 (191 ± 87 kJ; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged work in the heat causes next-day impairments in whole-body heat loss, which exacerbate heat storage and may elevate the risk of heat injury on the following day in older workers.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".