UNLABELLED: Mental work may promote caloric intake, whereas exercise may offset positive energy balance by decreasing energy intake and increasing energy expenditure. PURPOSE: This study aimed to replicate previous findings that mental work increases caloric intake compared with a rest condition and assess whether exercise after mental work can offset this effect. METHODS:Thirty-eight male and female university students were randomly assigned to mental work + rest (MW + R) or mental work + exercise (MW + E). Participants also completed a baseline rest (BR) visit consisting of no mental work or exercise. Visit order was counterbalanced. During the MW + R or MW + E visit, participants completed a 20-min mental task and either a 15-min rest (MW + R) or a 15-min interval exercise (MW + E). Each visit ended with an ad libitum pizza lunch. A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA was used to compare eating behavior between groups. RESULTS: Participants in the MW + R condition consumed an average of 100 more kilocalories compared with BR (633.3 ± 72.9 and 533.9 ± 67.7, respectively, P = 0.02), and participants in MW + E consumed an average of 25 kcal less compared with BR (432.3 ± 69.2 and 456.5 ± 64.2, respectively, P > 0.05). When including the estimated energy expenditure of exercise in the MW + E conditions, participants were in negative energy balance by an average of 98.5 ± 41.5 kcal, resulting in a significant difference in energy balance between the two groups (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: An acute bout of interval exercise after mental work resulted in significantly decreased food consumption compared with a nonexercise condition. These results suggest that an acute bout of exercise may be used to offset positive energy balance induced by mental tasks.
RCT Entities:
UNLABELLED: Mental work may promote caloric intake, whereas exercise may offset positive energy balance by decreasing energy intake and increasing energy expenditure. PURPOSE: This study aimed to replicate previous findings that mental work increases caloric intake compared with a rest condition and assess whether exercise after mental work can offset this effect. METHODS: Thirty-eight male and female university students were randomly assigned to mental work + rest (MW + R) or mental work + exercise (MW + E). Participants also completed a baseline rest (BR) visit consisting of no mental work or exercise. Visit order was counterbalanced. During the MW + R or MW + E visit, participants completed a 20-min mental task and either a 15-min rest (MW + R) or a 15-min interval exercise (MW + E). Each visit ended with an ad libitum pizza lunch. A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA was used to compare eating behavior between groups. RESULTS:Participants in the MW + R condition consumed an average of 100 more kilocalories compared with BR (633.3 ± 72.9 and 533.9 ± 67.7, respectively, P = 0.02), and participants in MW + E consumed an average of 25 kcal less compared with BR (432.3 ± 69.2 and 456.5 ± 64.2, respectively, P > 0.05). When including the estimated energy expenditure of exercise in the MW + E conditions, participants were in negative energy balance by an average of 98.5 ± 41.5 kcal, resulting in a significant difference in energy balance between the two groups (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: An acute bout of interval exercise after mental work resulted in significantly decreased food consumption compared with a nonexercise condition. These results suggest that an acute bout of exercise may be used to offset positive energy balance induced by mental tasks.
Authors: J Swart; R P Lamberts; M I Lambert; A St Clair Gibson; E V Lambert; J Skowno; T D Noakes Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2008-12-03 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: M Hollmann; L Hellrung; B Pleger; H Schlögl; S Kabisch; M Stumvoll; A Villringer; A Horstmann Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2011-06-28 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Fawzi Boumezbeur; Kitt F Petersen; Gary W Cline; Graeme F Mason; Kevin L Behar; Gerald I Shulman; Douglas L Rothman Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2010-10-20 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Edward Archer; Robin P Shook; Diana M Thomas; Timothy S Church; Peter T Katzmarzyk; James R Hébert; Kerry L McIver; Gregory A Hand; Carl J Lavie; Steven N Blair Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-02-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Carmen D Tekwe; Mengli Zhang; Raymond J Carroll; Yuanyuan Luan; Lan Xue; Roger S Zoh; Stephen J Carter; David B Allison; Marco Geraci Journal: Biostatistics Date: 2022-10-14 Impact factor: 5.279