PMID 30279345

Research
All papers

Post-Exercise Appetite and Ad Libitum Energy Intake in Response to High-Intensity Interval Training versus Moderate- or Vigorous-Intensity Continuous Training among Physically Inactive Middle-Aged Adults

Poon ET, Sun FH, Chung AP, Wong SH

Question

Does a single practical HIIT treadmill session change post-exercise appetite or ad libitum energy intake differently than moderate- or vigorous-intensity continuous training in inactive middle-aged men?

Summary

This randomized crossover lab study tested one HIIT, one moderate continuous, and one vigorous continuous treadmill session in 11 physically inactive middle-aged men. HIIT used 10 x 1-minute runs at 100% VO2max with 1-minute active recovery. Post-exercise buffet intake and subjective appetite did not differ between exercise types, even though MICT used more exercise energy and HIIT/VICT produced higher lactate. All participants completed the study without adverse events.

Methodology

  • Eleven healthy physically inactive middle-aged men aged 40-59 years.
  • 11 participants.
  • Treadmill running.
  • Work intervals: 10 x 1 minute at 100% VO2max.
  • Recovery: 1 minute active recovery at 50% VO2max.
  • Intensity: 100% VO2max work bouts.
  • 20-minute interval protocol plus 2-minute warm-up and 2-minute cool-down.
  • Single acute trial.
  • One session.
  • Randomized crossover acute exercise trial with three treadmill conditions.
  • Ad libitum energy intake, Subjective appetite, Energy expenditure, and Blood lactate were tracked.

Outcomes

Ad libitum energy intake

Post-exercise buffet energy intake did not differ between HIIT, MICT, and VICT.

HIIT 645 +/- 262.9 kcal; MICT 614.7 +/- 271.2; VICT 623.1 +/- 249.0; p > 0.05.

No clear change

Subjective appetite

Appetite changed over time but did not differ by exercise protocol.

Main effect of time p < 0.01; no protocol or interaction effects, p > 0.05.

No clear change

Energy expenditure and lactate

MICT used more exercise energy; HIIT and VICT were energy matched and produced higher lactate than MICT.

EE MICT 365 +/- 43 kcal > HIIT 216 +/- 29 and VICT 222 +/- 32, p < 0.01; lactate HIIT and VICT 5.1 mmol/L > MICT 1.7 mmol/L, p < 0.05.

Mixed

Safety/completion

All participants completed the study and no adverse events were reported.

11/11 completed all trials.

Improved

Insights

  • This practical HIIT session did not acutely suppress appetite compared with continuous exercise.
  • HIIT also did not increase immediate buffet intake.
  • Weight-management claims should not rely on appetite suppression from standard HIIT alone.

Limitations

  • Small sample.
  • Male-only and healthy inactive sample.
  • No appetite hormone measurement.
  • Only acute post-exercise period measured.
  • Large individual variability in energy intake.

Safety

  • No adverse events were reported.
  • Participants were screened for high cardiovascular risk.