Ems Exercise Training Kit

ems exercise training kit TO HELP YOUR BUSINESS SUCCEED

The discussion of ems exercise training kit

The present study is the first clinical trial to evaluate the effect of WB-EMS on bodycomposition in this highly relevant cohort of elderly females at risk for/or withprevalent (Table 1) sarcopenia and corresponding risk of independence (Bauer etal. 2008). With respect to muscle mass and function (maximum isometric strength), we clearly verify our primary hypothesis that WB-EMS training significantly impactstotal and regional muscle mass compared with a semi-active control group performing similar slight movements during their classes. Despite positive results, the effect of WB-EMS was borderline non-significant (p = 0.069) for abdominal body fat and almost completely absent for total body fat mass; thus, our secondary hypothesis was rejected. Although we did not primarily address the “sarcopenic obesity” phenomena (Stenholm et al. 2008; Zamboni et al. 2008), we did expect to significantly impact both muscle and (abdominal) fat in view of the positive findings of our pilot trials (Kemmler et al. 2010a, b) and a cross-sectional study that specifically focused on energy expenditure during WB-EMS (Kemmler et al. 2012). However, the fundamental difference between these pilot studies with elderly subjects either with osteopenia (women, 65 ± 6 years) or the metabolic syndrome (men, 65 ± 6 years) may be, that both cohorts were less lean (BMI, 25.9 ± 4.1 and 27.8 ± 3.5 kg/m2) compared with the subjects of the present study. Nevertheless, the fact that we included “lean” elderly females only did not necessarily exclude the possibility of a high proportion of (abdominal) fat mass in these subjects. Indeed, although our cohort ranged in the lowest quartile of sex and age with respect to BMI (22.1 ± 1.4) compared with German peers (Benecke et al. 2003; DESTATIS 2012), waist circumference averaged 84 ± 7 cm in this population of lean elderly females. In other words, the majority (73 %) of our subjects would fulfill the criteria of “abdominal adiposity” (WC > 80 cm) specified for “europid” females according to the MetSyn-Definition of the IDF (Alberti et al. 2006) and 27 % exceeded the more generalized WHO (2000) criteria of abdominal adiposity (88 cm) for women. Thus, even in this cohort of elderly women in the lowest BMI quartile, the prevalence of abdominal adiposity and the corresponding relevance of abdominal fat reduction are far from trivial.