European journal of applied physiology · 2024
Determination of the optimal dose and dosing strategy for effective L-menthol oral rinsing during exercise in hot environments.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jeffries Owen, Jibi Godi, Clark Joe, Barwood Martin, Waldron Mark
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This multi-study programme investigated the optimal concentration of L-menthol delivered as an oral mouth rinse to modulate thermo-behaviour during exercise in a hot environment (35 °C).
METHOD: In study 1, 38 participants completed a survey to establish an effective and tolerable range of L-menthol concentration. 31 participants completed an RPE-protocol examining 1. the dose-response effect of L-menthol mouth rinse on exercise performance (n = 16) and 2. the temporal effectiveness of administering L-menthol in an incremental and decremental dosing pattern (n = 15). Power output, heart rate, body core temperature and thermal sensation were reported throughout.
RESULTS: The optimal menthol concentration for peak power was between 0.01 and 0.1% (~ 6% increase, P < 0.05) and 0.5% (~ 9% increase, P < 0.05) with respect to control. Work completed was increased at 0.01% (~ 5%, P < 0.05), at 0.1% (~ 3%, P < 0.05) and had a detrimental effect at 0.5% (- 10% decrease, P < 0.05). There were no differences between an ascending dose protocol (0.01 to 0.5%), descending dose protocol (0.5-0.01%) or a constant 0.01% dose protocol. There were no reported differences in body core temperature or heart rate across trials (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The optimal dose of L-menthol when delivered via oral rinsing is between 0.01 and 0.1%. At lower concentrations, L-menthol appears to be less effective and at higher concentrations (> 0.5%) L-menthol appears to elicit greater irritation and may not positively modulate thermo-behaviour during exercise in a hot environment.
METHOD: In study 1, 38 participants completed a survey to establish an effective and tolerable range of L-menthol concentration. 31 participants completed an RPE-protocol examining 1. the dose-response effect of L-menthol mouth rinse on exercise performance (n = 16) and 2. the temporal effectiveness of administering L-menthol in an incremental and decremental dosing pattern (n = 15). Power output, heart rate, body core temperature and thermal sensation were reported throughout.
RESULTS: The optimal menthol concentration for peak power was between 0.01 and 0.1% (~ 6% increase, P < 0.05) and 0.5% (~ 9% increase, P < 0.05) with respect to control. Work completed was increased at 0.01% (~ 5%, P < 0.05), at 0.1% (~ 3%, P < 0.05) and had a detrimental effect at 0.5% (- 10% decrease, P < 0.05). There were no differences between an ascending dose protocol (0.01 to 0.5%), descending dose protocol (0.5-0.01%) or a constant 0.01% dose protocol. There were no reported differences in body core temperature or heart rate across trials (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The optimal dose of L-menthol when delivered via oral rinsing is between 0.01 and 0.1%. At lower concentrations, L-menthol appears to be less effective and at higher concentrations (> 0.5%) L-menthol appears to elicit greater irritation and may not positively modulate thermo-behaviour during exercise in a hot environment.