Cited by 404Physical Activity and HealthCardiovascular and exercise physiologyDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 15 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Adverse Metabolic Response to Regular Exercise: Is It a Rare or Common Occurrence?

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Individuals differ in the response to regular exercise. Whether there are people who experience adverse changes in cardiovascular and diabetes risk factors has never been addressed. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: An adverse response is defined as an exercise-induced change that worsens a risk factor beyond measurement error and expected day-to-day variation. Sixty subjects were measured three times over a period of three weeks, and variation in resting systolic blood pressure (SBP) and in fasting plasma HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG), and insulin (FI) was quantified. The technical error (TE) defined as the within-subject standard deviation derived from these measurements was computed. An adverse response for a given risk factor was defined as a change that was at least two TEs away from no change but in an adverse direction. Thus an adverse response was recorded if an increase reached 10 mm Hg or more for SBP, 0.42 mmol/L or more for TG, or 24 pmol/L or more for FI or if a decrease reached 0.12 mmol/L or more for HDL-C. Completers from six exercise studies were used in the present analysis: Whites (N = 473) and Blacks (N = 250) from the HERITAGE Family Study; Whites and Blacks from DREW (N = 326), from INFLAME (N = 70), and from STRRIDE (N = 303); and Whites from a University of Maryland cohort (N = 160) and from a University of Jyvaskyla study (N = 105), for a total of 1,687 men and women. Using the above definitions, 126 subjects (8.4%) had an adverse change in FI. Numbers of adverse responders reached 12.2% for SBP, 10.4% for TG, and 13.3% for HDL-C. About 7% of participants experienced adverse responses in two or more risk factors. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Adverse responses to regular exercise in cardiovascular and diabetes risk factors occur. Identifying the predictors of such unwarranted responses and how to prevent them will provide the foundation for personalized exercise prescription.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Adverse metabolic responses to regular exercise—worsening of systolic blood pressure, HDL-cholesterol, triglycerides, or fasting insulin beyond measurement error—occur in a nontrivial minority of adults across six exercise studies. The paper estimates prevalences of roughly 8%–13% per risk factor and about 7% for two or more risk factors.

Key findings

  • Across six exercise studies (maximum N = 1,687), adverse responder prevalence was 8.3% for fasting insulin (abstract states 8.4%), 13.3% for HDL-C, 10.3% for triglycerides, and 12.2% for systolic blood pressure.
  • In HERITAGE, 6%–9% of Blacks and Whites experienced adverse responses for each of the four risk factors, with no substantive differences between ethnic groups.
  • About 7% of participants experienced adverse responses in two or more risk factors; Table 8 reports 6% with exactly two and 0.8% with three or four.
  • Adverse response traits appeared independent of cardiorespiratory fitness improvement: only 2 of 56 tested differences in VO2max gain between adverse and non-adverse responders reached p ≤ 0.05, far from a Bonferroni-adjusted p = 0.0009. DREW showed no substantive differences in adverse response prevalence across 4, 8, or 12 kcal/kg/week exercise doses.

Methods

  • Secondary analysis of completers from six exercise intervention studies: HERITAGE (473 Whites, 250 Blacks), DREW (326), INFLAME (70), STRRIDE (303), MARYLAND (160), and JYVASKYLA (105), for a maximum of 1,687 men and women.
  • Adverse response was defined as an exercise-induced change at least 2× the technical error (TE) in an adverse direction: increase ≥10 mm Hg for systolic BP, ≥0.42 mmol/L for triglycerides, ≥24 pmol/L for fasting insulin, or decrease ≤0.12 mmol/L for HDL-C. TE was derived from 60 subjects measured three times over 3 weeks, except fasting insulin, for which assays were performed twice and TE was estimated using other HERITAGE data plus literature.
  • Analyses included prevalence tabulations, paired t tests for within-cohort mean changes, general linear models comparing VO2max gains between adverse and non-adverse responders with age, sex, and baseline VO2max as covariates, and a DREW dose comparison.

Limitations

  • The paper states that the causes of adverse responses are unknown, that exercise-drug interactions cannot be directly tested with available data, and that it is unknown whether some adverse responders would revert with different exercise doses or modalities; findings also need extension to other risk factors such as LDL-cholesterol, inflammation markers, and adiposity traits.
  • Evident from the text: this is a secondary analysis of completers from heterogeneous studies with differing protocols and health statuses, some trait data are unavailable (e.g., STRRIDE systolic BP is N/A), and the fasting insulin TE was not based on three repeated measurements but estimated from other data and literature.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0037887

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 15 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 20 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 6
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 1
8 of 8
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Completers of the six exercise studies are representative of sedentary adults generally.

    “Approximately 7% of sedentary adults experienced ARs for at least two common cardiometabolic and diabetes risk factors following exposure to regular exercise.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The technical error estimates derived from the HERITAGE ancillary study apply to the other five exercise studies.

    “An ancillary study designed to quantify TE for several biological traits was undertaken in HERITAGE.”
    “These AR definitions are used in the remainder of this report.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The six exercise studies are sufficiently comparable to pool for estimating overall prevalence of adverse responses.

    “Based on a maximum of 1687 subjects, the prevalence of an AR reached 8.3% for the changes in FI, 13.3% for the changes in fasting HDL-C, 10.3% for TG, and 12.2% for resting SBP.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Attrition in the six studies did not bias the prevalence estimates of adverse responses.

    “Completers from six exercise studies were used in the present analysis”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The four risk factors (systolic blood pressure, fasting insulin, HDL-cholesterol, and triglycerides) are valid indicators of cardiovascular and diabetes risk.

    “with a focus on exercise-induced changes in resting systolic blood pressure (SBP), fasting insulin (FI), HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides (TG).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Medication use reported in the cohorts is accurate and does not confound the comparison of adverse response prevalence.

    “many subjects in DREW, INFLAME, MARYLAND, and STRRIDE were taking medications for high blood pressure, hyperglycemia, or dyslipoproteinemia. Yet substantial numbers of subjects with or without medication in these cohorts experienced one or more ARs.”
6 of 6

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Fasting-insulin adverse-response prevalence differs

    Minor

    The abstract reports 8.4% for fasting insulin, while the Results and Table 5 report 8.3% for the same 126 adverse responders.

  • Triglyceride adverse-response prevalence differs

    Minor

    The abstract reports 10.4% for triglycerides, while the Results and Table 5 report 10.3%.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 33 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 382

Metadata

Authors
Bouchard, C., Blair, S. N., Church, T. S., Earnest, C. P., Hagberg, J. M., Häkkinen, K., Jenkins, N. T., Karavirta, L., Kraus, W. E., Leon, A. S., Rao, D. C., Sarzynski, M. A., Skinner, J. S., Slentz, C. A., & Rankinen, T.
Affiliations
  • Pennington Biomedical Research Center (US)
  • University of South Carolina (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
  • University of Jyväskylä (FI)
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
Corresponding author
Bouchard, Claude
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2012-05-30
Volume
7
Issue
5
Pages
e37887
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2085568044
Cited by
404
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 6
FWCI
34.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion)
  • Jyväskylä University Digital Archive (University of Jyväskylä) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Scholar Commons (University of South Carolina) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (NIH T32)
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG017474, R01AG015389, NIH T32 AG00068)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL047327, R01HL047317, R01HL057354, R01HL066262, R01HL047323, R01HL045670, R01HL047321)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (T32AR048523)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
diabetes risk factors, fasting insulin, systolic blood pressure, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, within-person variability, exercise prescription, racial differences, HERITAGE Family Study
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Basal Metabolism, Blood Pressure, Cardiovascular Diseases, Diabetes Mellitus, Exercise Therapy, Fasting, Female, Humans, Insulin, Cholesterol, HDL, Male, Metabolism, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Triglycerides, Exercise, Epidemiologic Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-12, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-12 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review