Avocado (Persea americana) pulp improves cardiovascular and autonomic recovery following submaximal running: a crossover, randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Previous studies have demonstrated that regular avocado consumption presents advantageous effects on cardiovascular system. However, little attention has been paid to the use of avocado as a dietary supplement, in particular, for individuals involved in physical exercise training. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the effect of acute avocado pulp intake on cardiovascular and autonomic recovery subsequent to moderate exercise. Using a crossover, randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled trial design, 16 healthy female adults underwent two protocols: Avocado pulp (600 mg in capsule) and placebo (600 mg starch in capsule). After the ingestion of Avocado pulp or placebo, the subjects were seated for 60 min at rest, followed by running on a treadmill at a submaximal level and then remained seated for 60 min during recovery from the exercise. Heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV) [rMSSD, SD1, HF (ms 2 )] and skin conductance were evaluated before and during exercise, as well as during recovery. HR, systolic blood pressure, HRV and skin conductance recovered faster when subjects were given avocado pulp prior to exercise. In conclusion, avocado pulp improved cardiovascular and autonomic recovery after exercise, suggesting a reduced risk of cardiovascular events after exertion. The current results support the beneficial effects of ingestion of avocado prior to submaximal treadmill running.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".