Search

Background: Metabolic abnormalities are more associated with central obesity than peripheral obesity, but the underlying mechanisms are largely unknown. The present study was to identify serum metabolic biomarkers which distinguish metabolically unhealthy centrally obese (MUCO) from metabolically healthy peripherally obese (MHPO) individuals. Methods: A two-stage case-control study design was employed. In the discovery stage, 20 individuals (10 MHPO and 10 MUCO) were included and in the following validation stage, 79 individuals (20 normal weight (NW), 30 MHPO, 29 MUCO) were utilized. Study groups were matched for age, sex, physical activity and total dietary calorie intake with MHPO and MUCO additionally matched for BMI. Metabolic abnormality was defined as: 1) HOMA-IR>4.27 (90th percentile), 2) high-density lipoprotein cholesterol < 1.03 mmol/L in men and < 1.30 mmol/L in women, 3) fasting blood glucose ≥ 5.6 mmol/L, and 4) waist circumference > 102 cm in men and > 88 cm in women. MUCO individuals had all of these abnormalities whereas MHPO and NW individuals had none of them. A targeted metabolomics approach was performed on fasting serum samples, which can simultaneously identify and quantify 186 metabolites. Results: In the discovery stage, serum leucine, isoleucine, tyrosine, valine, phenylalanine, alpha-aminoadipic acid, methioninesulfoxide and propionylcarnitine were found to be significantly higher in MUCO, compared with MHPO group after multiple testing adjustment. Significant changes of five metabolites (leucine, isoleucine, valine, alpha-aminoadipic acid, propionylcarnitine) were confirmed in the validation stage. Conclusions: Significantly higher levels of serum leucine, isoleucine, valine, alpha-aminoadipic acid, propionylcarnitine are characteristic of metabolically unhealthy centrally obese patients. The finding provides novel insights into the pathogenesis of metabolic abnormalities in obesity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Many cold-water scenarios cause the head to be partially or fully immersed (e.g., ship wreck survival, scuba diving, cold-water adventure swim racing, cold-water drowning, etc.). However, the specific effects of head cold exposure are minimally understood. This study isolated the effect of whole-head submersion in cold water on surface heat loss and body core cooling when the protective shivering mechanism was intact., Methods: Eight healthy men were studied in 17 degrees C water under four conditions: the body was either insulated or exposed, with the head either out of the water or completely submersed under the water within each insulated/exposed subcondition., Results: Submersion of the head (7% of the body surface area) in the body-exposed condition increased total heat loss by 11% (P < 0.05). After 45 min, head-submersion increased core cooling by 343% in the body-insulated subcondition (head-out: 0.13 +/- 0.2 degree C, head-in: 0.47 +/- 0.3 degree C; P < 0.05) and by 56% in the body-exposed subcondition (head-out: 0.40 +/- 0.3 degree C and head-in: 0.73 +/- 0.6 degree C; P < 0.05)., Discussion: In both body-exposed and body-insulated subconditions, head submersion increased the rate of core cooling disproportionally more than the relative increase in total heat loss. This exaggerated core-cooling effect is consistent with a head cooling induced reduction of the thermal core, which could be stimulated by cooling of thermosensitive and/or trigeminal receptors in the scalp, neck, and face. These cooling effects of head submersion are not prevented by shivering heat production.

Introduction: Firefighters experience significant heat stress while working with heavy gear in a hot, humid environment. This study compared the cooling effectiveness of immersing the forearms and hands in 10 and 20 degrees C water., Methods: Six men (33 +/- 10 yr; 180 +/- 4 cm; 78 +/- 9 kg; 19 +/- 5% body fat) wore firefighter 'turn-out gear' (heavy clothing and breathing apparatus weighing 27 kg) in a protocol including three 20-min exercise bouts (step test, 78 W, 40 degrees C air, 40% RH) each followed by a 20-min rest/cooling (21 degrees C air); i.e., 60 min of exercise, 60 min of cooling. Turn-out gear was removed during rest/cooling periods and subjects either rested (Control), immersed their hands in 10 or 20 degrees C water (H-10, H-20), or immersed their hands and forearms in 10 or 20 degrees C water (HF-10, HF-20)., Results: In 20 degrees C water, hand immersion did not reduce core temperature compared with Control; however, including forearm immersion decreased core temperature below Control values after both the second and final exercise periods (p < 0.001). In 10 degrees C water, adding forearm with hand immersion produced a lower core temperature (0.8 degrees C above baseline) than all other conditions (1.1 to 1.4 degrees C above baseline) after the final exercise period (p < 0.001). Sweat loss during Control (1458 g) was greater than all active cooling protocols (1146 g) (p < 0.001), which were not different from each other., Discussion: Hand and forearm immersion in cool water is simple, reduces heat strain, and may increase work performance in a hot, humid environment. With 20 degrees C water, forearms should be immersed with the hands to be effective. At lower water temperatures, forearm and/or hand immersion will be effective, although forearm immersion will decrease core temperature further.