Does bright light have an anxiolytic effect? - an open trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aim of this open trial was to examine the influence of acute bright light exposure on anxiety in older and young adults.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This study was ancillary to a complex 5-day laboratory experiment testing phase-responses to light at all times of the day. On 3 consecutive days, participants were exposed to bright light (3,000 lux) for 3 hours. The Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Form Y1) was administered 5 minutes before and 20 minutes after each treatment. Mean state anxiety before and after treatment were analyzed by age, sex, and time ANOVA. To avoid floor effects, only participants with baseline STAI levels of ≥ 25 were included.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A significant anxiolytic effect of bright light was found for the mean data, as well as for each of the three days. No significant main effect of age, sex, or interaction of these factors with STAI change were found.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The results show consistent and significant (albeit modest) anxiolytic effects following acute bright light exposure in low anxiety adults. Further randomized, controlled trials in clinically anxious individuals are needed.</p

Feeling of pleasure to high-intensity interval exercise is dependent of the number of work bouts and physical activity status

Objectives: To examine the affective responses during a single bout of a low-volume HIIE in active and insufficiently active men. Materials and methods: Fifty-eight men (aged 25.3 ± 3.6 years) volunteered to participate in this study: i) active (n = 29) and ii) insufficiently active (n = 29). Each subject undertook i) initial screening and physical evaluation, ii) maximal exercise test, and iii) a single bout of a low-volume HIIE. The HIIE protocol consisted of 10 x 60s work bouts at 90% of maximal treadmill velocity (MTV) interspersed with 60s of active recovery at 30% of MTV. Affective responses (Feeling Scale, -5/+5), rating of perceived exertion (Borg's RPE, 6-20), and heart rate (HR) were recorded during the last 10s of each work bout. A two-factor mixed-model repeated measures ANOVA, independent-samples t test, and chi-squared test were used to data analysis. Results: There were similar positive affective responses to the first three work bouts between insufficiently active and active men (p > 0.05). However, insufficiently active group displayed lower affective responses over time (work bout 4 to 10) than the active group (p 0.05). Conclusions: Insufficiently active and active men report feelings of pleasure to few work bouts (i.e., 3-4) during low-volume HIIE, while the affective responses become more unpleasant over time for insufficiently active subjects. Investigations on the effects of low-volume HIIE protocols including a fewer number of work bouts on health status and fitness of less active subjects would be interesting, especially in the first training weeks

The physiological strain index does not reliably identify individuals at risk of reaching a thermal tolerance limit

Purpose The physiological strain index (PSI) was developed to assess individuals' heat strain, yet evidence supporting its use to identify individuals at potential risk of reaching a thermal tolerance limit (TTL) is limited. The aim of this study was to assess whether PSI can identify individuals at risk of reaching a TTL. Methods Fifteen females and 21 males undertook a total of 136 trials, each consisting of two 40-60 minute periods of treadmill walking separated by ~ 15 minutes rest, wearing permeable or impermeable clothing, in a range of climatic conditions. Heart rate (HR), skin temperature (T sk), rectal temperature (T re), temperature sensation (TS) and thermal comfort (TC) were measured throughout. Various forms of the PSI-index were assessed including the original PSI, PSI fixed , adaptive-PSI (aPSI) and a version comprised of a measure of heat storage (PSI HS). Final physiological and PSI values and their rate of change (ROC) over a trial and in the last 10 minutes of a trial were compared between trials completed (C, 101 trials) and those terminated prematurely (TTL, 35 trials). Results Final PSI original , PSI fixed , aPSI, PSI HS did not differ between TTL and C (p > 0.05). However, differences between TTL and C occurred in final T sk , T re-T sk , TS, TC and ROC in PSI fixed , T re , T sk and HR (p < 0.05). Conclusion These results suggest the PSI, in the various forms, does not reliably identify individuals at imminent risk of reaching their TTL and its validity as a physiological safety index is therefore questionable. However, a physiological-perceptual strain index may provide a more valid measure

Moderate exercise and chronic stress produce counteractive effects on different areas of the brain by acting through various neurotransmitter receptor subtypes: A hypothesis

BACKGROUND: Regular, "moderate", physical exercise is an established non-pharmacological form of treatment for depressive disorders. Brain lateralization has a significant role in the progress of depression. External stimuli such as various stressors or exercise influence the higher functions of the brain (cognition and affect). These effects often do not follow a linear course. Therefore, nonlinear dynamics seem best suited for modeling many of the phenomena, and putative global pathways in the brain, attributable to such external influences. HYPOTHESIS: The general hypothesis presented here considers only the nonlinear aspects of the effects produced by "moderate" exercise and "chronic" stressors, but does not preclude the possibility of linear responses. In reality, both linear and nonlinear mechanisms may be involved in the final outcomes. The well-known neurotransmitters serotonin (5-HT), dopamine (D) and norepinephrine (NE) all have various receptor subtypes. The article hypothesizes that 'Stress' increases the activity/concentration of some particular subtypes of receptors (designated nt(s)) for each of the known (and unknown) neurotransmitters in the right anterior (RA) and left posterior (LP) regions (cortical and subcortical) of the brain, and has the converse effects on a different set of receptor subtypes (designated nt(h)). In contrast, 'Exercise' increases nt(h )activity/concentration and/or reduces nt(s )activity/concentration in the LA and RP areas of the brain. These effects may be initiated by the activation of Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF) (among others) in exercise and its suppression in stress. CONCLUSION: On the basis of this hypothesis, a better understanding of brain neurodynamics might be achieved by considering the oscillations caused by single neurotransmitters acting on their different receptor subtypes, and the temporal pattern of recruitment of these subtypes. Further, appropriately designed and planned experiments will not only corroborate such theoretical models, but also shed more light on the underlying brain dynamics

WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO: AN EXPLORATION OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES FOR EXERCISE BEHAVIOR

Allyson G. Box, Jonathan R. North, Steven J. Petruzzello, FACSM. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL. BACKGROUND: Even with the well-known and well-advertised preventative and therapeutic benefits of regular exercise, only ~20-25% of adults self-report meeting exercise recommendations, and the prevalence decreases to ~10-15% when behavior is assessed using device-based recordings. With 75-90% of adults failing to engage in enough exercise to reap the health benefits, it is crucial to direct efforts towards understanding why individuals do or do not choose to engage in exercise behavior. PURPOSE: Determine the extent to which personality dispositions and exercise attitudes explain future exercise behavior. METHODS: Undergraduates (N=84, 20±2 yrs, 50 ♀, 73% regular exercisers) completed an online survey to assess Extraversion (E), Conscientiousness (C), and Neuroticism (N; via Big Five Inventory), as well as exercise attitudes (via Affective Exercise Experiences). 2-weeks following initial survey completion, participants completed a 7-day journal where exercise type, intensity, duration, and frequency were self-reported each day. Separate, stepwise regressions were performed to determine explained variance on average exercise intensity, average duration, and frequency. RESULTS: E, C, and N were not related to exercise intensity (rs = -0.15 - 0.00, Ps= .07-0.33), duration (rs = -0.14 - 0.02, Ps= 0.09-0.50), or frequency (rs = -0.16 - -0.04, Ps= 0.07-0.33) and were removed from subsequent regression models. Affective attitudes toward exercise explained significant variance in average exercise intensity (F(3,80)=7.85, P\u3c0.001, R2adj =0.20) and exercise frequency (F(3,80)=2.91, P=0.040, R2adj =0.07), but did not explain variance in average exercise duration (F(3,80)=1.99, P=0.122, R2adj=0.04). CONCLUSION: While E, C, and N were not related to self-reported exercise behavior, attitudes towards exercise (e.g., belief exercise will bring pleasure, preference for exercise over sedentary behavior, feeling empowered by, or a sense of competence, with exercise) explained 23% and 7% variance in average exercise intensity and frequency (i.e., d·wk-1), respectively. This suggests affective attitudes play an important role in how vigorous an individual exercises as well as provides some explanation for how frequently someone will exercise, which may result in greater health benefits