Effects of a polysaccharide-based multi-ingredient supplement on salivary immunity in non-elite marathon runners.
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition. 2019;16(1):14
Plain language summary
Competing in very strenuous events such as marathons imposes severe metabolic stress and causes acute responses that may negatively alter the immune system. The aim of this study is to determine the impact of Advanced Ambrotose© complex powder (AA) on the levels of salivary secretory Immunoglobulin A (sIgA) [an antibody that plays a critical role in mucosal immunity], pro-inflammatory chemokines and anti-inflammatory proteins before and after running a marathon in non-elite marathoners. The study recruited 41 male participants which were randomly assigned to one of the two groups. Twenty participants (48%) received AA supplementation prior to the race (AA group), whilst the rest did not receive AA supplementation. Supplementation was received for 15 days prior to the marathon. Results indicate that there were no significant differences in age, weight, height, and training were found between runners who received AA supplementation and those who did not. However, findings show significant changes in salivary biomarkers of immune function in healthy, non-elite athletes before and after a strenuous exercise. Authors conclude that AA supplementation produces changes in salivary immunity that may have a positive effect on immunity before and after a marathon.
BACKGROUND Extreme exercise may alter the innate immune system. Glycans are involved in several biological processes including immune system regulation. However, limited data regarding the impact of glycan supplementation on immunological parameters after strenuous exercise are available. We aimed to determine the impact of a standardized polysaccharide-based multi-ingredient supplement, Advanced Ambrotose© complex powder (AA) on salivary secretory Immunoglobulin A (sIgA) and pro- and anti-inflammatory protein levels before and after a marathon in non-elite runners. METHODS Forty-one male marathon runners who completed the 42.195 km of the 2016 Barcelona marathon were randomly assigned to two study groups. Of them, n = 20 (48%) received the AA supplement for 15 days prior the race (AA group) and n = 21 (52%) did not receive any AA supplement (non-AA group). Saliva and blood samples were collected the day before the marathon and two days after the end of the race. Salivary IgA, pro-inflammatory chemokines (Gro-alpha, Gro-beta, MCP-1) and anti-inflammatory proteins (Angiogenin, ACRP, Siglec 5) were determined using commercially ELISA kits in saliva supernatant. Biochemical parameters, including C-reactive protein, cardiac biomarkers, and blood hemogram were also evaluated. RESULTS Marathon runners who did not receive the AA supplement experienced a decrease of salivary sIgA and pro-inflammatory chemokines (Gro-alpha and Gro-beta) after the race, while runners with AA supplementation showed lower levels of anti-inflammatory chemokines (Angiogenin). Gro-alpha and Gro-beta salivary levels were lower before the race in the AA group and correlated with blood leukocytes and platelets. CONCLUSIONS Changes in salivary sIgA and inflammatory chemokines, especially Gro-alfa and Gro-beta, were observed in marathon runners supplemented with AA prior to the race. These findings suggested that AA may have a positive effect on immune response after a strenuous exercise.
Impact of Experimentally Induced Cognitive Dietary Restraint on Eating Behavior Traits, Appetite Sensations, and Markers of Stress during Energy Restriction in Overweight/Obese Women.
Journal of obesity. 2018;2018:4259389
Plain language summary
The treatment of obesity has become a public health priority given the negative impact of this condition on physical and mental health. The aim of this study was to compare the eﬀects of energy restriction alone or in combination with induced cognitive dietary restraint (CDR) on eating behaviour traits, appetite sensations, and markers of stress in overweight and obese premenopausal women. The study is a single-blinded randomised clinical study which recruited premenopausal women aged between 26 and 50 years. The participants were randomised to either an energy-restriction-plus-induced CDR condition (CDR+group) or an energy-restriction-without induced CDR condition (CDR−group). Results indicate that inducing CDR in a context of energy restriction had no further eﬀects on eating behaviour traits, appetite sensations, and markers of stress in the short term as well as in the longer term than energy restriction alone. Authors conclude that increasing CDR has no negative impact on factors regulating energy balance in the context of energy restriction.
undefined: Weight loss has been associated with changes in eating behaviors and appetite sensations that favor a regain in body weight. Since traditional weight loss approaches emphasize the importance of increasing cognitive dietary restraint (CDR) to achieve negative energy imbalance, it is difficult to untangle the respective contributions of energy restriction and increases in CDR on factors that can eventually lead to body weight regain. The present study aimed at comparing the effects of energy restriction alone or in combination with experimentally induced CDR on eating behavior traits, appetite sensations, and markers of stress in overweight and obese women. We hypothesized that the combination of energy restriction and induced CDR would lead to more prevalent food cravings, increased appetite sensations, and higher cortisol concentrations than when energy restriction is not coupled with induced CDR. A total of 60 premenopausal women (mean BMI: 32.0 kg/m ; mean age: 39.4 y) were provided with a low energy density diet corresponding to 85% of their energy needs during a 4-week fully controlled period. At the same time, women were randomized to either a condition inducing an increase in CDR (CDR+ group) or a condition in which CDR was not induced (CRD- group). Eating behavior traits (Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire and Food Craving Questionnaire), appetite sensations (after standardized breakfast), and markers of stress (Perceived Stress Scale; postawakening salivary cortisol) were measured before ( = 0 week) and after ( = 4 weeks) the 4-week energy restriction, as well as 3 months later. There was an increase in CDR in the CDR+ group while no such change was observed in the CDR- group ( =0.0037). No between-group differences were observed for disinhibition, hunger, cravings, appetite sensations, perceived stress, and cortisol concentrations. These results suggest that a slight increase in CDR has no negative impact on factors regulating energy balance in the context of energy restriction.