Comparison of Heat Shock Protein Expression, Cognitive Performance, and Self-Reported Pain Following One Hour of Passive Heating or Walking in Older Adults: A Preliminary Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat shock proteins (HSP) are major components of the cellular chaperone network responsible for regulating protein amyloid aggregation, and may have a neuroprotective effect against certain diseases. PURPOSE: This study aims to observe the level of HSP expression following one hour of aerobic exercise or whole-body passive heating in older adults. METHODS: Twenty older adults (age: 68.5 + 4.23 years, BMI: 26.9 + 4.3 kg/m2, 11 female) participated in a randomized controlled trial, repeated for time. Participants completed either one hour of moderate intensity walking on a treadmill (TM; 65-75% of age-predicted maximum heart rate), one hour of seated passive heating (HEAT) in a controlled environmental heat chamber (35-40ºC, < 40% humidity), or one-hour of seated control (CON) in a neutral climate (21-24ºC). Participants were randomly assigned to an intervention (CON: n=6, HEAT: n=7, TM: n=7). HSP expression was measured via blood samples with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit for HSP70 (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Waltham, MA). Blood samples were collected immediately and 24 hours following each intervention. Cognitive performance was measured after each intervention using computerized software (Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics, ANAM, Vista LifeSciences, Inc.), including tasks such as reaction time, cognitive flexibility, and response inhibition. Pain was assessed via a self-reported pain scale questionnaire (McGill Pain Questionnaire) immediately following each intervention. RESULTS: Detectable amounts of HSP70 were analyzed for 6 participants. There were no statistical differences for HSP70 concentration between groups immediately or 24 hours following each intervention (p > 0.05). Reaction time improved following passive heating compared to control (p=0.027), but did not change from baseline to immediately following each intervention (pre- vs. post- HEAT: 1827.6±194.9 vs 1583.0±397.2 ms; CON: 2331.0±853.1 vs 2077.3±643.1 ms; TM: 1904.4±214.5 vs 1682.3±385.1 ms; p=0.107). Measures of cognitive flexibility were higher for the HEAT group (26.6±6.9) compared to the TM group (23.6±5.0, p=0.215) or CON (19.9±6.6, p=0.11). Response inhibition was greater for HEAT compared to CON (35.2±8.6 vs 25.2±9.9, p=0.004), but TM did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). Pain was perceived greater for TM and HEAT when compared to CON (TM: 28±21, p = 0.003; HEAT: 29±10, p=0.004; CON: 10±12) with no differences pre vs post (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: One bout of moderate intensity aerobic exercise or whole-body passive heating may not illicit changes in HSP70 expression or impair cognitive performance in older adults. There could be an anticipatory psychological affect resulting in different perceptions of pain for passive heating and exercise.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".