Effects of testosterone supplementation on body composition and lower-body muscle function during severe exercise- and diet-induced energy deficit: A proof-of-concept, single centre, randomised, double-blind, controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Severe energy deficits during military operations, produced by significant increases in exercise and limited dietary intake, result in conditions that degrade lean body mass and lower-body muscle function, which may be mediated by concomitant reductions in circulating testosterone. METHODS: We conducted a three-phase, proof-of-concept, single centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (CinicalTrials.gov, NCT02734238) of non-obese men: 14-d run-in, free-living, eucaloric diet phase; 28-d live-in, 55% exercise- and diet-induced energy deficit phase with (200 mg testosterone enanthate per week, Testosterone, n = 24) or without (Placebo, n = 26) exogenous testosterone; and 14-d recovery, free-living, ad libitum diet phase. Body composition was the primary end point; secondary endpoints included lower-body muscle function and health-related biomarkers. FINDINGS: Following energy deficit, lean body mass increased in Testosterone and remained stable in Placebo, such that lean body mass significantly differed between groups [mean difference between groups (95% CI), 2.5 kg (3.3, 1.6); P < .0001]. Fat mass decreased similarly in both treatment groups [0.2 (-0.4, 0.7), P = 1]. Change in lean body mass was associated with change in total testosterone (r = 0.71, P < .0001). Supplemental testosterone had no effect on lower-body muscle function or health-related biomarkers. INTERPRETATION: Findings suggest that supplemental testosterone may increase lean body mass during short-term severe energy deficit in non-obese, young men, but it does not appear to attenuate lower-body functional decline. FUNDING: Collaborative Research to Optimize Warfighter Nutrition projects I and II, Joint Program Committee-5, funded by the US Department of Defence.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".