4.7 Article

Aerobic Exercise Alone Results in Clinically Significant Weight Loss for Men and Women: Midwest Exercise Trial 2

期刊

OBESITY
卷 21, 期 3, 页码 E219-E228

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/oby.20145

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [R01-DK049181]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Exercise is recommended by public health agencies for weight management; however, the role of exercise is generally considered secondary to energy restriction. Few studies exist that have verified completion of exercise, measured the energy expenditure of exercise, and prescribed exercise with equivalent energy expenditure across individuals and genders. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate aerobic exercise, without energy restriction, on weight loss in sedentary overweight and obese men and women. Design and Methods: This investigation was a randomized, controlled, efficacy trial in 141 overweight and obese participants (body mass index, 31.0 +/- 4.6 kg/m(2); age 22.6 +/- 3.9 years). Participants were randomized (2:2:1 ratio) to exercise at either 400 kcal/session or 600 kcal/session or to a nonexercise control. Exercise was supervised, 5 days/week, for 10 months. All participants were instructed to maintain usual ad libitum diets. Because of the efficacy design, completion of >= 90% of exercise sessions was an a priori definition of per protocol, and these participants were included in the analysis. Results: Weight loss from baseline to 10 months for the 400 and 600 kcal/session groups was 3.9 +/- 4.9 kg (4.3%) and 5.2 +/- 5.6 kg (5.7%), respectively, compared with weight gain for controls of 0.5 +/- 3.5 kg (0.5%) (P < 0.05). Differences for weight loss from baseline to 10 months between the exercise groups and differences between men and women within groups were not statistically significant. Conclusions: Supervised exercise, with equivalent energy expenditure, results in clinically significant weight loss with no significant difference between men and women.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据