Only Two Weeks of Physical Inactivity Induces Insulin Resistance and Impairs Glycemic Control in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Periods of physical inactivity are known to result in deleterious consequences for skeletal muscle mass, strength, and insulin sensitivity. We propose that even transient periods of reduced activity likely have a greater impact in older individuals who often fail to fully recover. We aimed to examine the impact of two weeks of step reduction (SR), as a model of physical inactivity akin to that occurring during illness, on indices of glycemic control and muscle strength in thirteen healthy older adults (7 men, 6 women, 68 ± 3yr [all data mean±SD]). Participants underwent 7 d of monitored normal activity (pre‐SR) immediately before reducing their daily step‐count from 7379 ± 3809 to 967 ± 79 steps . d −1 for 14 d (SR), and then returning to their habitual step count for a period of 14 d (post‐SR). The HOMA‐IR and MATSUDA models of insulin resistance, and insulin sensitivity as well as glucose and insulin area under the curve GAUC and IAUC in response to an oral glucose tolerance test were assessed pre‐SR, SR, and post‐SR. Peak isometric maximal voluntary contraction (ISO‐MVC peak ), peak rate of torque development (RTD peak ) number of sit‐to‐stand cycles in 30 s, and total distance walked in 6 min were also assessed at these time points. HOMA‐IR increased from pre‐SR to SR (2.8 ± 0.3 to 3.6 ± 0.6, p<0.05) and MATSUDA decreased (3.7 ± 0.5 to 3.0 ± 0.1, p < 0.05), neither recovered at post‐SR. GAUC was not significantly different between pre‐SR (435 ± 121) and SR (467 ± 136) but was marginally lower at post‐SR (386 ± 140, p=0.05). IAUC increased from pre‐SR to SR (3796 ± 579 to 4329 ± 833, p<0.05) and, was still elevated at post‐SR (4051 ± 768, p<0.05). There was no change from pre‐SR to SR in either ISO‐MVC peak (146 ± 34 to 148 ± 41 N.m, p>0.05), RTD peak (2142 ± 1527 to 1956 ± 894 N.m . s −1 , p>0.05), sit‐to‐stand cycles in 30 s (17 ± 5 to 16 ± 5, p>0.05) or total distance walked in 6 min (561 ± 108 to 563 ± 110 m, p>0.05). These data indicate that two weeks of SR negatively impacts indices of glycemic control in older adults that are not fully recovered after 14 d of return to habitual step count. However, indices of muscle function remained unaltered. Support or Funding Information Supported by the Canadian Diabetes Association
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".