4.4 Article

Time-restricted feeding in young men performing resistance training: A randomized controlled trial

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SPORT SCIENCE
卷 17, 期 2, 页码 200-207

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2016.1223173

关键词

Intermittent fasting; time-restricted feeding; body composition; resistance training; muscular strength; energy intake

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A randomized controlled trial was conducted to examine eight weeks of resistance training (RT) with and without timerestricted feeding (TRF) in order to assess nutrient intake and changes in body composition and muscular strength in young recreationally active males. The TRF programme consisted of consuming all calories within a four-hour period of time for four days per week, but included no limitations on quantities or types of foods consumed. The RT programme was performed three days per week and consisted of alternating upper and lower body workouts. For each exercise, four sets leading to muscular failure between 8 and 12 repetitions were employed. Research visits were conducted at baseline, four, and eight weeks after study commencement. Measurements of total body composition by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and muscle cross-sectional area by ultrasound were obtained. Upper and lower body strength and endurance were assessed, and four-day dietary records were collected. TRF reduced energy intake by similar to 650 kcal per day of TRF, but did not affect total body composition within the duration of the study. Cross-sectional area of the biceps brachii and rectus femoris increased in both groups. Effect size data indicate a gain in lean soft tissue in the group that performed RT without TRF (+2.3 kg, d= 0.25). Upper and lower body strength and lower body muscular endurance increased in both groups, but effect sizes demonstrate greater improvements in the TRF group. Overall, TRF reduced energy intake and did not adversely affect lean mass retention or muscular improvements with short-term RT in young males.

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

4.4
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