The Relation between Age and Sex on Whole-Body Heat Loss during Exercise-Heat Stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Increasing age is associated with decrements in sweat rate that compromise whole-body total heat loss (evaporative + dry heat exchange) in both men and women during moderate-to-vigorous exercise in dry heat. Similarly, young women also display reductions in sweating (that lower evaporative heat loss) relative to young men in such conditions. Nevertheless, it remained unclear whether these effects act synergistically to exacerbate the age-related decline in whole-body total heat loss in women relative to men. We therefore assessed the interrelation between age and sex on whole-body total heat loss during light, moderate, and vigorous exercise in dry heat. METHODS: To achieve this, we used direct and indirect calorimetry to assess whole-body total heat loss and metabolic heat production (respectively) in 46 men and 34 women age between 18 and 70 yr. Participants performed three, 30-min bouts of cycling at metabolic heat productions of 150 (light), 200 (moderate), and 250 (vigorous) W·m, each separated by 15-min recovery in dry heat (40°C, ~15% relative humidity). RESULTS: Whole-body total heat loss was ~5% lower in women relative to men during moderate and vigorous exercise (both, P < 0.01), irrespective of age. Total heat loss declined with age during moderate and vigorous exercise in both men and women (all, P < 0.050), although the rate of that decline (~4% per decade) was similar between men and women across all exercise bouts (all, P > 0.050). CONCLUSIONS: We show that, when assessed in dry heat, whole-body total heat loss is lower in women relative to men, irrespective of age. Furthermore, total heat loss declines with increasing age in both men and women during moderate-to-vigorous exercise, albeit the rate of that decline is not appreciably modified by sex.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".