Effects of repeated use of a commercial topical lotion on subcutaneous fat thickness in resistance-trained male athletes.

This study tested whether subcutaneous fat loss is enhanced via application of a popular topical fat loss lotion. Twenty resistance-trained men (mean ± SD age of 26.3 ± 6.3 years and weight of 86.8 ± 11.1 kg) had a topical fat-loss lotion containing Coleus forskholii, Silybin, Eucommia ulmoides leaf, Paullinia cupana seed, caffeine, and black pepper essential oil applied twice daily for 8 weeks to the front and lateral thigh of one of the participant's leg, and a placebo control lotion was applied to the same sites on the other leg. After 8 weeks, there were no significant differences between the placebo and treatment legs for the change in subcutaneous fat thickness of the front thigh (p = 0.73) or for leg fat percentage (p = 0.52). However, there was a slight, yet significant difference in the change in subcutaneous fat thickness of the lateral thigh favoring the treatment leg (-0.42 vs +0.75 mm, p = 0.029), but with this difference disappearing depending on the statistical tests being used. Only 2/19 participants perceived a difference in fat loss in response to each condition. Although the topical lotion tested here resulted in statistically significantly greater subcutaneous fat loss at the lateral but not front thigh, this effect was very small, contingent upon the statistical test being used, and unperceivable by the participants themselves.

Early adoption of heated tobacco products resembles that of e-cigarettes.

BACKGROUND: Heated tobacco products (HTP) generate nicotine-containing aerosol by heating tobacco rather than burning it. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently authorised the sale of one HTP brand, iQOS, in the USA. This study examined the awareness, use and risk perceptions of HTP in the USA following FDA authorisation. METHODS: A national probability sample of 20 449 US adults completed an online survey between November 2019 and February 2020. In addition to assessing awareness and use of HTP, two ratios were calculated: the ratio of those who experimented with HTP given that they had heard about it (E/H) and the ratio of those who currently used HTP given experimentation (C/E). These ratios for HTP were compared against those for e-cigarettes from a similar national survey in 2012. RESULTS: Overall, 8.1% of respondents had heard of HTP. Only 0.55% had tried and 0.10% were current users. The rate of experimentation among those who heard about HTP and the rate of current use among experimenters were, however, similar to those for e-cigarettes in 2012: E/H and C/E for HTP were 6.8% and 18.2%, respectively; and 10.7% and 17.8%, respectively for e-cigarettes. The majority of respondents considered HTP either less harmful than (11.6%), or equally harmful as e-cigarettes (42.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Only a small fraction of US population in 2020 have tried any HTP. However, the similarity in early adoption rates following awareness, suggests that future adoption for HTP may be similar to that for e-cigarettes, if HTP are marketed more aggressively.

Continuous versus Intermittent Dieting for Fat Loss and Fat-Free Mass Retention in Resistance-trained Adults: The ICECAP Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Can intermittent energy restriction (IER) improve fat loss and fat-free mass retention compared with continuous energy restriction (CER) in resistance-trained adults? METHODS: Sixty-one adults (32 women) with a mean (SD) age of 28.7 (6.5) yr, body weight of 77.2 (16.1) kg, and body fat of 25.5% (6.1%) were randomized to 12 wk of 1) 4 × 3 wk of moderate (m) energy restriction interspersed with 3 × 1 wk of energy balance (mIER; n = 30; 15 wk total) or 2) 12 wk of continuous moderate energy restriction (mCER; n = 31). Analyses of all outcome measures were by intention-to-treat. RESULTS: After accounting for baseline differences, mIER did not result in lower fat mass or body weight, or greater fat-free mass, compared with mCER after energy restriction. Mean (and 97.5% confidence interval for fat mass at the end of mIER versus mCER was 15.3 (12.5-18.0) kg versus 18.0 (14.3-21.7) kg (P = 0.321), that for fat-free mass was 56.7 (51.5-61.9) kg versus 56.7 (51.4-62.0) kg (P = 0.309), and that for body weight (with 95% confidence interval) was 72.1 (66.4-77.9) versus 74.6 (69.3-80.0) (P = 0.283). There were no differences between interventions in muscle strength or endurance or in resting energy expenditure, leptin, testosterone, insulin-like growth factor-1, free 3,3',5-triiodothyronine or active ghrelin, or in sleep, muscle dysmorphia, or eating disorder behaviors. However, participants in mIER exhibited lower hunger (P = 0.002) and desire to eat (P = 0.014) compared with those in mCER, and greater satisfaction (P = 0.016) and peptide YY (P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Similar fat loss and fat-free mass retention are achieved with mIER and mCER during 12 wk of energy restriction; however, mIER is associated with reduced appetite.

Prospective randomised study to evaluate the use of DERMABOND ProPen (2-octylcyanoacrylate) in the closure of abdominal wounds versus closure with skin staples in patients undergoing elective colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Topical 2-octylcyanoacrylate tissue (OCA) adhesive has been used as an alternative to close wounds with a comparable cosmetic outcome. The use of 2-OCA in the closure of abdominal laparotomy wounds has not been thoroughly evaluated. Our aim was to compare 2-OCA with conventional skin stapling devices in colorectal surgery. METHODS: A prospective randomised study was conducted in which 74 consecutive patients above the age of 21 undergoing open elective colectomies for benign or malignant indications were allocated to skin closure with 2-OCA or skin staples. Cosmetic outcome as assessed with the Hollander Cosmesis Scale with a single assessor, complication rates, and patient satisfaction were recorded at discharge (4-10POD) 2 weeks after discharge and then at 3 months. RESULTS: Of the 74 patients, 38 were randomised to skin staples and 36 to 2-OCA. There was no significant difference in cosmetic outcomes between the two groups as assessed with a visual analogue scale or the Hollander Cosmesis Scale but showed a trend to better cosmetic outcomes in the 2-OCA group. Patient satisfaction scores were higher but did not reach statistical significance. The time taken to close a wound with 2-OCA was significantly longer than with skin staples. There was no statistical difference in rates of wound infection. CONCLUSION: 2-OCA is a safe and effective means of skin closure in patients undergoing elective colectomies with a good and at least equivalent outcome to traditional methods of closure.