SuppVersity - Nutrition and Exercise Science for Everyone

  This is what the Jan '17 Science Update has to offer? -11% HbA1c reduction per 30 minutes activity, new benefits of blood flow restricted tr., the bone protective effect of immediate post-workout whey plus carb ingestion, and a new overtraining gauge... It's almost, February... almost and that's why today's SuppVersity article still qualifies as a January '17 research update. One that is based on the latest (ahead of print) papers from the peer-reviewed journal "Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise" - papers about the large impact of short bouts of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) on the messed up glucose management of people with an increased T2DM risk, the bone-preserving effects of a mix of whey and dextrose and how this effect depends on timing, the belated and thus overlooked beneficial effects of blood flow restriction on muscular rapid force development and, last but not least, a potential new marker of overreaching...

Even though the study doesn't provide a straight-forward answer to the question "Which is the best activity tracker?", it is still revealing. I hope you don't rely on the data from your activity tracker as a basis to decide how much you can, should or may eat on a daily basis. Why? Well, the first and most important result of a recent study from the  Human Performance Laboratory at the Ball State University  is that "consumer-based PA [physical activity] monitors should be used cautiously for estimating EE [energy expenditure]" (Nelson. 2016) - and this goes for the data from all the devices that were tested by Nelson et al.: The BodyMedia FIT and the NikeFuel  armband, the DirectLife monitor, the Omron HJ-720IT , the Fitbit One , the Fitbit Zip , the Fitbit Flex ,   the Jawbone UP24 , the Basis B1 Band Monitor  and the ActiGraph . Don't tell me you use an activity tracker, but don't periodize your training! 30% More on the Big Three: Squa...

A longitudinal study (57 months)  published by the American Journal of Epidemiology on July 8, 2010 found that although there is a negative effect of increased TV-consumption on boys (12–13y), no such correlation exists for the girls: "Relative to that of steady-low screen-time trajectory group boys, percent body fat was 2.9 (95% confidence interval: 0.7, 5.0) and 2.4 (95% confidence interval: 0.5, 4.2) percentage units higher on average among "increasers" and "steady-high" trajectory group boys, respectively. There was no evidence that screen time has an effect on percent body fat in girls overall, although physical activity modified the association between screen time and percent body fat in both sexes." Despite these findings, the scientists conclusion, "Efforts to prevent obesity in youth should emphasize reducing screen time," unquestionably holds true, even if it is your daughter who is sitting in front of her TV-scree...