Blood flow restriction impairs the inflammatory adaptations of strength training in overweight men: a clinical randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of high-intensity strength training (ST) or low-intensity strength training with blood flow restriction (ST-BFR) on monocyte subsets, the expression of C-C chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5), and CD16 on monocytes, and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) production of overweight men. Thirty overweight men were randomly assigned to conventional ST or ST-BFR. Both groups performed exercises of knee extension and biceps curl with equal volume (3 sessions/week) over 8 weeks, and the peripheral frequency of monocytes (CD14+CD16−, classical monocytes; CD14+CD16+, intermediate monocytes; CD14−CD16+, nonclassical monocytes), the mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of CCR5 and CD16 on CD14+ monocytes; and the production of TNF-α by lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated cells were quantified. Eight weeks of ST increased the frequency of CD14+CD16− monocytes (p = 0.04) and reduced the percentage of CD14−CD16+ (p = 0.02) and the production of TNF-α by LPS-stimulated cells (p = 0.03). The MFI of CD16 on CD14+ monocytes decreased after the ST intervention (p = 0.02). No difference in monocyte subsets, CCR5 or CD16 expression, and TNF-α production were identified after ST-BFR intervention (p > 0.05). The adoption of ST promotes anti-inflammatory effects on monocyte subsets of overweight men, but this effect was lost when BFR was adopted. Novelty High-intensity strength training reduces the production of TNF-α and the peripheral frequency of CD16+ monocytes in overweight men. Blood flow restriction method blunts the strength training adaptations on monocyte subsets and pro-inflammatory TNF-α production in overweight men.
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 | 0.001 | 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".