The effects of acute aerobic exercise on appetite‐regulating parameters and energy intake in males with obesity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective To investigate the effects of moderate‐intensity aerobic exercise on appetite control parameters, appetite perceptions, and energy intake in sedentary males with obesity. Design Eleven males with obesity (body fat percentage 36.5 ± 2.5%, body mass index 35.3 ± 4.2 kg/m 2 , V̇O 2peak 29 ± 3.1 mL·kg −1 ·min −1 ) completed two experimental sessions: (1) no exercise (CTRL) and (2) 60 min of moderate‐intensity cycling exercise at 60% V̇O 2peak (MICT) in a crossover design. Blood analysis included growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF‐15), total ghrelin, peptide tyrosine tyrosine 3–36 (PYY 3–36 ), total glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1), insulin, and glucose, as well as subjective appetite perceptions were measured in specific intervals. A standard breakfast at 0 h and an ad libitum meal postexercise was provided. Result GDF‐15 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [2.48–27.28] ng/L, p = 0.021) increased immediately following MICT compared to CTRL. However, there were no differences for PYY 3–36 ( p = 0.480, ), total ghrelin ( p = 0.646, ), and total GLP‐1 ( p = 0.451, ) between sessions. Appetite perceptions (95% CI: [(−20.38)–(−6.16)] mm, p = 0.001) were suppressed following MICT though energy intake was not different between the sessions (95% CI: [(−1904.9)–928.1] kJ, p = 0.480). Conclusion Sixty minutes of MICT increased GDF‐15 while suppressing appetite perceptions in individuals with obesity. There was no energy compensation postexercise.
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".