Limits...
Effects of easy-to-use protein-rich energy bar on energy balance, physical activity and performance during 8 days of sustained physical exertion.

Tanskanen MM, Westerterp KR, Uusitalo AL, Atalay M, Häkkinen K, Kinnunen HO, Kyröläinen H - PLoS ONE (2012)

Bottom Line: Water deficit associated to higher PA.Furthermore, URTI symptoms and negative mood state associated negatively with energy availability and PA.An easy-to-use protein-rich energy bars did not prevent energy deficit nor influence PA during an 8-day TC.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Biology of Physical Activity, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland. minna.m.tanskanen@jyu.fi

ABSTRACT

Background: Previous military studies have shown an energy deficit during a strenuous field training course (TC). This study aimed to determine the effects of energy bar supplementation on energy balance, physical activity (PA), physical performance and well-being and to evaluate ad libitum fluid intake during wintertime 8-day strenuous TC.

Methods: Twenty-six men (age 20±1 yr.) were randomly divided into two groups: The control group (n = 12) had traditional field rations and the experimental (Ebar) group (n = 14) field rations plus energy bars of 4.1 MJ•day(-1). Energy (EI) and water intake was recorded. Fat-free mass and water loss were measured with deuterium dilution and elimination, respectively. The energy expenditure was calculated using the intake/balance method and energy availability as (EI/estimated basal metabolic rate). PA was monitored using an accelerometer. Physical performance was measured and questionnaires of upper respiratory tract infections (URTI), hunger and mood state were recorded before, during and after TC.

Results: Ebar had a higher EI and energy availability than the controls. However, decreases in body mass and fat mass were similar in both groups representing an energy deficit. No differences were observed between the groups in PA, water balance, URTI symptoms and changes in physical performance and fat-free mass. Ebar felt less hunger after TC than the controls and they had improved positive mood state during the latter part of TC while controls did not. Water deficit associated to higher PA. Furthermore, URTI symptoms and negative mood state associated negatively with energy availability and PA.

Conclusion: An easy-to-use protein-rich energy bars did not prevent energy deficit nor influence PA during an 8-day TC. The high content of protein in the bars might have induced satiation decreasing energy intake from field rations. PA and energy intake seems to be primarily affected by other factors than energy supplementation such as mood state.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Changes in body composition during the 8-day training course in the control and Ebar groups.*** P<0.001, significant change during the training course.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3475712&req=5

pone-0047771-g001: Changes in body composition during the 8-day training course in the control and Ebar groups.*** P<0.001, significant change during the training course.

Mentions: The Ebar group consumed 58±15% and the controls 57±10% of the provided energy during TC. The estimated energy intake from the field ration did not differ between the groups (Ebar 10.0±1.0 MJ·d−1, P = 0.23 vs. control 10.9±1.7 MJ·d−1). However, the estimated total energy intake and energy availability were higher (P  = 0.038 and P  = 0.028, respectively) in Ebar compared to the controls (Table 3). Intake of protein was also higher among Ebar (P<0.001) than in the controls (Table 3). Energy balance was negative among all participants and energy balance (Ebar −10.1±3.7 MJ·d−1, −43± −12%, P  = 0.056; control −9.2±6.4 MJ·d−1, −40± −25%) and estimated energy expenditure (Ebar 23.3±3.2 MJ·d−1, P  = 0.060; control 20.2±5.7 MJ·d−1) did not differ between the groups. BM and FM decreased in both groups (−2.1% and −16.5%, respectively, P<0.001) during TC while FFM (Figure 1) and TBW remained the same (Ebar 44.9±4.7 L; control 43.4±4.7 L). The estimated fluid intake (control 2.3±0.5 L·d−1; Ebar 2.1±0.6 Ld−1) and total water intake were similar in both groups, and there was no significant water deficit (Table 3).


Effects of easy-to-use protein-rich energy bar on energy balance, physical activity and performance during 8 days of sustained physical exertion.

Tanskanen MM, Westerterp KR, Uusitalo AL, Atalay M, Häkkinen K, Kinnunen HO, Kyröläinen H - PLoS ONE (2012)

Changes in body composition during the 8-day training course in the control and Ebar groups.*** P<0.001, significant change during the training course.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3475712&req=5

pone-0047771-g001: Changes in body composition during the 8-day training course in the control and Ebar groups.*** P<0.001, significant change during the training course.
Mentions: The Ebar group consumed 58±15% and the controls 57±10% of the provided energy during TC. The estimated energy intake from the field ration did not differ between the groups (Ebar 10.0±1.0 MJ·d−1, P = 0.23 vs. control 10.9±1.7 MJ·d−1). However, the estimated total energy intake and energy availability were higher (P  = 0.038 and P  = 0.028, respectively) in Ebar compared to the controls (Table 3). Intake of protein was also higher among Ebar (P<0.001) than in the controls (Table 3). Energy balance was negative among all participants and energy balance (Ebar −10.1±3.7 MJ·d−1, −43± −12%, P  = 0.056; control −9.2±6.4 MJ·d−1, −40± −25%) and estimated energy expenditure (Ebar 23.3±3.2 MJ·d−1, P  = 0.060; control 20.2±5.7 MJ·d−1) did not differ between the groups. BM and FM decreased in both groups (−2.1% and −16.5%, respectively, P<0.001) during TC while FFM (Figure 1) and TBW remained the same (Ebar 44.9±4.7 L; control 43.4±4.7 L). The estimated fluid intake (control 2.3±0.5 L·d−1; Ebar 2.1±0.6 Ld−1) and total water intake were similar in both groups, and there was no significant water deficit (Table 3).

Bottom Line: Water deficit associated to higher PA.Furthermore, URTI symptoms and negative mood state associated negatively with energy availability and PA.An easy-to-use protein-rich energy bars did not prevent energy deficit nor influence PA during an 8-day TC.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Biology of Physical Activity, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland. minna.m.tanskanen@jyu.fi

ABSTRACT

Background: Previous military studies have shown an energy deficit during a strenuous field training course (TC). This study aimed to determine the effects of energy bar supplementation on energy balance, physical activity (PA), physical performance and well-being and to evaluate ad libitum fluid intake during wintertime 8-day strenuous TC.

Methods: Twenty-six men (age 20±1 yr.) were randomly divided into two groups: The control group (n = 12) had traditional field rations and the experimental (Ebar) group (n = 14) field rations plus energy bars of 4.1 MJ•day(-1). Energy (EI) and water intake was recorded. Fat-free mass and water loss were measured with deuterium dilution and elimination, respectively. The energy expenditure was calculated using the intake/balance method and energy availability as (EI/estimated basal metabolic rate). PA was monitored using an accelerometer. Physical performance was measured and questionnaires of upper respiratory tract infections (URTI), hunger and mood state were recorded before, during and after TC.

Results: Ebar had a higher EI and energy availability than the controls. However, decreases in body mass and fat mass were similar in both groups representing an energy deficit. No differences were observed between the groups in PA, water balance, URTI symptoms and changes in physical performance and fat-free mass. Ebar felt less hunger after TC than the controls and they had improved positive mood state during the latter part of TC while controls did not. Water deficit associated to higher PA. Furthermore, URTI symptoms and negative mood state associated negatively with energy availability and PA.

Conclusion: An easy-to-use protein-rich energy bars did not prevent energy deficit nor influence PA during an 8-day TC. The high content of protein in the bars might have induced satiation decreasing energy intake from field rations. PA and energy intake seems to be primarily affected by other factors than energy supplementation such as mood state.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus