MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048059139 · doi:10.3390/nu12082391

A Five-Ingredient Nutritional Supplement and Home-Based Resistance Exercise Improve Lean Mass and Strength in Free-Living Elderly

2020· article· en· W3048059139 on OpenAlexafffund
Mats I. Nilsson, Andrew I. Mikhail, Lucy Lan, Alessia Di Carlo, Bethanie Hamilton, Kristin Barnard, Bart P. Hettinga, Erin Hatcher, Milla G. Tarnopolsky, Joshua P. Nederveen, Adam L. Bujak, Linda May, Mark A. Tarnopolsky

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersAstellas Pharma USCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsSarcopeniaLean body massMedicinePlaceboInternal medicineAnabolismLeg pressCreatineEndocrinologyNutritional SupplementationGrip strengthCrossover studyPhysical therapyVitamin D and neurologyMuscle massResistance training

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations103
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207