A Five-Ingredient Nutritional Supplement and Home-Based Resistance Exercise Improve Lean Mass and Strength in Free-Living Elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Old age is associated with lower physical activity levels, suboptimal protein intake, and desensitization to anabolic stimuli, predisposing for age-related muscle loss (sarcopenia). Although resistance exercise (RE) and protein supplementation partially protect against sarcopenia under controlled conditions, the efficacy of home-based, unsupervised RE (HBRE) and multi-ingredient supplementation (MIS) is largely unknown. In this randomized, placebo-controlled and double-blind trial, we examined the effects of HBRE/MIS on muscle mass, strength, and function in free-living, older men. Thirty-two sedentary men underwent twelve weeks of home-based resistance band training (3 d/week), in combination with daily intake of a novel five-nutrient supplement (‘Muscle5’; M5, n = 16, 77.4 ± 2.8 y) containing whey, micellar casein, creatine, vitamin D, and omega-3 fatty acids, or an isocaloric/isonitrogenous placebo (PLA; n = 16, 74.4 ± 1.3 y), containing collagen and sunflower oil. Appendicular and total lean mass (ASM; +3%, TLM; +2%), lean mass to fat ratios (ASM/% body fat; +6%, TLM/% body fat; +5%), maximal strength (grip; +8%, leg press; +17%), and function (5-Times Sit-to-Stand time; −9%) were significantly improved in the M5 group following HBRE/MIS therapy (pre vs. post tests; p < 0.05). Fast-twitch muscle fiber cross-sectional areas of the quadriceps muscle were also significantly increased in the M5 group post intervention (Type IIa; +30.9%, Type IIx, +28.5%, p < 0.05). Sub-group analysis indicated even greater gains in total lean mass in sarcopenic individuals following HBRE/MIS therapy (TLM; +1.65 kg/+3.4%, p < 0.05). We conclude that the Muscle5 supplement is a safe, well-tolerated, and effective complement to low-intensity, home-based resistance exercise and improves lean mass, strength, and overall muscle quality in old age.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".