| Title |
Influence of a 3.5 day fast on physical performance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Applied Physiology, July 1987
|
| DOI | 10.1007/bf00417770 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joseph J. Knapik, Bruce H. Jones, Carol Meredith, William J. Evans |
| Abstract |
Eight young men were tested for strength, anaerobic capacity and aerobic endurance in a post absorptive state and after a 3.5 day fast. Strength was tested both isokinetically (elbow flexors, 0.52 rad x s-1 and 3.14 rad x s-1) and isometrically. Anaerobic capacity was evaluated by having subjects perform 50 rapidly repeated isokinetic contractions of the elbow flexors at 3.14 rad x s-1. Aerobic endurance was measured as time to volitional fatigue during a cycle ergometer exercise at 45% VO2max. Measures of VO2, VE, heart rate, and ratings of perceived exertion were obtained prior to and during the cycle exercise. The 3.5 day fast did not influence isometric strength, anaerobic capacity or aerobic endurance. Isokinetic strength was significantly reduced (approximately 10%) at both velocities. VO2, VE and perceived exertion were not affected by fasting. Fasting significantly increased heart rate during exercise but not at rest. It was concluded that there are minimal impairments in physical performance parameters measured here as a result of a 3.5 day fast. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 4 | 33% |
| France | 1 | 8% |
| Mexico | 1 | 8% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 9% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 23% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 18% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 8 | 36% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 23% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 October 2023.
All research outputs
#3,789,447
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#1,104
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#705
of 11,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 11,501 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.