Journal of Applied Physiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Appl Physiol (January 10, 2008). doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00534.2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
104/3/724    most recent
00534.2007v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stokes, K. A.
Right arrow Articles by Gilbert, K. L.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stokes, K. A.
Right arrow Articles by Gilbert, K. L.
Submitted on May 16, 2007
Accepted on January 2, 2008

The growth hormone response to repeated bouts of sprint exercise with and without suppression of lipolysis in men

Keith A. Stokes1*, Christopher Tyler1, and Kate L. Gilbert1

1 School for Health, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: k.stokes{at}bath.ac.uk.

A single 30-s sprint is a potent physiological stimulus for growth hormone (GH) release. However, repeated bouts of sprinting attenuates the GH response, possibly due to negative feedback via elevated systemic free fatty acids (FFA). The aim of the study was to use nicotinic acid (NA) to suppress lipolysis in order to investigate whether serum FFA can modulate the GH response to exercise. Seven non-obese, healthy men performed two trials, consisting of two maximal 30-s cycle ergometer sprints separated by 4 h of recovery. In one trial (NA), participants ingested NA (1 g 60 min before, and 0.5 g 60 and 180 min after, sprint 1); the other was a control (Con) trial. Serum FFA was not significantly different between trials prior to sprint 1, but was significantly lower in the NA trial immediately before sprint 2 (NA vs. Con; mean (SD); 0.08 (0.05) vs. 0.75 (0.34) mmol/l, P<0.05). Peak and integrated GH were significantly greater following sprint 2 compared to sprint 1 in the NA trial (peak GH, 23.3 (7.0) vs. 7.7 (11.9) µg/l, P<0.05; integrated GH, 1076 (350) vs. 316 (527) µg/l/60 min, P<0.05) and compared to sprint 2 in the Con trial (peak GH, 23.3 (7.0) vs. 5.2 (2.3) µg/l, P<0.05; integrated GH, 1076 (350) vs. 206 (118) µg/l/60 min, P<0.05). In conclusion, suppressing lipolysis resulted in a significantly greater GH response to the second of two sprints, suggesting a potential role for serum FFA in negative feedback control of the GH response to repeated exercise.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 1948 by the American Physiological Society.