AJCN EB Program 2010
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
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
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ballor, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Poehlman, E. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ballor, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Poehlman, E. T.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Ballor, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Poehlman, E. T.

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol 56, 968-974, Copyright © 1992 by The American Society for Clinical Nutrition, Inc

ORIGINAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS

Resting metabolic rate and coronary-heart-disease risk factors in aerobically and resistance-trained women

DL Ballor and ET Poehlman
College of Education, Department of Human Development Studies, University of Vermont, Burlington 05405-0117.

This cross-sectional study compared physical characteristics, cardiovascular risk factors, and resting metabolic rate (RMR) in a cohort of 82 young women separated into three groups: sedentary (SED, n = 48), aerobically trained (AT, n = 21), and resistance trained (RT, n = 13). Body mass and fat-free mass (FFM) were not different between groups whereas percent body fat was lower in the AT (16.2 +/- 0.7%) and RT (14.7 +/- 0.8%) groups than in the SED group (21.8 +/- 0.8%). There were no between-group differences for blood pressure or blood lipids. RMRs (kJ/min) for the AT (4.31 +/- 0.06) and RT (4.25 +/- 0.09) groups were significantly greater than those for the SED group (3.99 +/- 0.05). When adjusted for differences in FFM, RMRs for the AT group (4.24 +/- 0.05) were different from those of both the RT (4.13 +/- 0.05) and SED (4.05 +/- 0.03) groups; RMRs for the RT and SED groups were not different from each other. No differences were found in cardiovascular risk in young nonobese women of differing exercise status. Aerobic training in young women seems to increase the rate of metabolic activity of resting tissues whereas resistance training does not.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
E. T. Poehlman, W. F. Denino, T. Beckett, K. A. Kinaman, I. J. Dionne, R. Dvorak, and P. A. Ades
Effects of Endurance and Resistance Training on Total Daily Energy Expenditure in Young Women: A Controlled Randomized Trial
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., March 1, 2002; 87(3): 1004 - 1009.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Appl. Physiol.Home page
B. A. Dolezal and J. A. Potteiger
Concurrent resistance and endurance training influence basal metabolic rate in nondieting individuals
J Appl Physiol, August 1, 1998; 85(2): 695 - 700.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Appl. Physiol.Home page
D. A. Smith, J. Dollman, R. T. Withers, M. Brinkman, J. P. Keeves, and D. G. Clark
Relationship between maximum aerobic power and resting metabolic rate in young adult women
J Appl Physiol, January 1, 1997; 82(1): 156 - 163.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1992 by The American Society for Nutrition