Rebuttal by Lars Nybo and Carsten Lundby

Change in Exercise Performance and Markers of Acute Kidney Injury Following Heat Acclimation with Permissive Dehydration

Implementing permissive dehydration (DEH) during short-term heat acclimation (HA) may accelerate adaptations to the heat. However, HA with DEH may augment risk for acute kidney injury (AKI). This study investigated the effect of HA with permissive DEH on time-trial performance and markers of AKI. Fourteen moderately trained men (age and VO_2max = 25 ± 0.5 yr and 51.6 ± 1.8 mL·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹) were randomly assigned to DEH or euhydration (EUH). Time-trial performance and VO_2max were assessed in a temperate environment before and after 7 d of HA. Heat acclimation consisted of 90 min of cycling in an environmental chamber (40 °C, 35% RH). Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) and kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) were assessed pre- and post-exercise on day 1 and day 7 of HA. Following HA, VO_2max did not change in either group (p = 0.099); however, time-trial performance significantly improved (3%, p < 0.01) with no difference between groups (p = 0.485). Compared to pre-exercise, NGAL was not significantly different following day 1 and 7 of HA (p = 0.113) with no difference between groups (p = 0.667). There was a significant increase in KIM-1 following day 1 and 7 of HA (p = 0.002) with no difference between groups (p = 0.307). Heat acclimation paired with permissive DEH does not amplify improvements in VO_2max or time-trial performance in a temperate environment versus EUH and does not increase markers of AKI.

Prolonged Heat Acclimation and Aerobic Performance in Endurance Trained Athletes

Heat acclimation (HA) involves physiological adaptations that directly promote exercise performance in hot environments. However, for endurance-athletes it is unclear if adaptations also improve aerobic capacity and performance in cool conditions, partly because previous randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies have been restricted to short intervention periods. Prolonged HA was therefore deployed in the present RCT study including 21 cyclists [38 ± 2 years, 184 ± 1 cm, 80.4 ± 1.7 kg, and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) of 58.1 ± 1.2 mL/min/kg; mean ± SE] allocated to either 5½ weeks of training in the heat [HEAT (n = 12)] or cool control [CON (n = 9)]. Training registration, familiarization to test procedures, determination of VO2max, blood volume and 15 km time trial (TT) performance were assessed in cool conditions (14°C) during a 2-week lead-in period, as well as immediately pre and post the intervention. Participants were instructed to maintain total training volume and complete habitual high intensity intervals in normal settings; but HEAT substituted part of cool training with 28 ± 2 sessions in the heat (1 h at 60% VO2max in 40°C; eliciting core temperatures above 39°C in all sessions), while CON completed all training in cool conditions. Acclimation for HEAT was verified by lower sweat sodium [Na+], reduced steady-state heart rate and improved submaximal exercise endurance in the heat. However, when tested in cool conditions both peak power output and VO2max remained unchanged for HEAT (pre 60.0 ± 1.5 vs. 59.8 ± 1.3 mL O2/min/kg). TT performance tested in 14°C was improved for HEAT and average power output increased from 298 ± 6 to 315 ± 6 W (P < 0.05), but a similar improvement was observed for CON (from 294 ± 11 to 311 ± 10 W). Based on the present findings, we conclude that training in the heat was not superior compared to normal (control) training for improving aerobic power or TT performance in cool conditions.

Once- and twice-daily heat acclimation confer similar heat adaptations, inflammatory responses and exercise tolerance improvements

This experiment aimed to investigate the efficacy of twice-daily, nonconsecutive heat acclimation (TDHA) in comparison to once-daily heat acclimation (ODHA) and work matched once- or twice-daily temperate exercise (ODTEMP, TDTEMP) for inducing heat adaptations, improved exercise tolerance, and cytokine (immune) responses. Forty males, matched biophysically and for aerobic capacity, were assigned to ODHA, TDHA, ODTEMP, or TDTEMP. Participants completed a cycling-graded exercise test, heat acclimation state test, and a time to task failure (TTTF) at 80% peak power output in temperate (TTTFTEMP : 22°C/40% RH) and hot conditions (TTTFHOT : 38°C/20% RH), before and after 10-sessions (60 min of cycling at ~2 W·kg-1 ) in 45°C/20% RH (ODHA and TDHA) or 22°C/40% RH (ODTEMP or TDTEMP). Plasma IL-6, TNF-α, and cortisol were measured pre- and postsessions 1, 5, and 10. ODHA and TDHA induced equivalent heat adaptations (P < 0.05) (resting rectal temperature [-0.28 ± 0.22, -0.28 ± 0.19°C], heart rate [-10 ± 3, -10 ± 4 b·min-1 ], and plasma volume expansion [+10.1 ± 5.6, +8.5 ± 3.1%]) and improved heat acclimation state (sweat set point [-0.22 ± 0.18, -0.22 ± 0.14°C] and gain [+0.14 ± 0.10, +0.15 ± 0.07 g·sec-1 ·°C-1 ]). TTTFHOT increased (P < 0.001) following ODHA (+25 ± 4%) and TDHA (+24 ± 10%), but not ODTEMP (+5 ± 14%) or TDTEMP (+5 ± 17%). TTTFTEMP did not improve (P > 0.05) following ODHA (+14 ± 4%), TDHA (14 ± 8%), ODTEMP (9 ± 10%) or TDTEMP (8 ± 13%). Acute (P < 0.05) but no chronic (P > 0.05) increases were observed in IL-6, TNF-α, or cortisol during ODHA and TDHA, or ODTEMP and TDTEMP. Once- and twice-daily heat acclimation conferred similar magnitudes of heat adaptation and exercise tolerance improvements, without differentially altering immune function, thus nonconsecutive TDHA provides an effective, logistically flexible method of HA, benefitting individuals preparing for exercise-heat stress.

Cross-Adaptation: Heat and Cold Adaptation to Improve Physiological and Cellular Responses to Hypoxia

To prepare for extremes of heat, cold or low partial pressures of oxygen (O₂), humans can undertake a period of acclimation or acclimatization to induce environment-specific adaptations, e.g. heat acclimation (HA), cold acclimation (CA), or altitude training. While these strategies are effective, they are not always feasible due to logistical impracticalities. Cross-adaptation is a term used to describe the phenomenon whereby alternative environmental interventions, e.g. HA or CA, may be a beneficial alternative to altitude interventions, providing physiological stress and inducing adaptations observable at altitude. HA can attenuate physiological strain at rest and during moderate-intensity exercise at altitude via adaptations allied to improved O₂ delivery to metabolically active tissue, likely following increases in plasma volume and reductions in body temperature. CA appears to improve physiological responses to altitude by attenuating the autonomic response to altitude. While no cross-acclimation-derived exercise performance/capacity data have been measured following CA, post-HA improvements in performance underpinned by aerobic metabolism, and therefore dependent on O₂ delivery at altitude, are likely. At a cellular level, heat shock protein responses to altitude are attenuated by prior HA, suggesting that an attenuation of the cellular stress response and therefore a reduced disruption to homeostasis at altitude has occurred. This process is known as cross-tolerance. The effects of CA on markers of cross-tolerance is an area requiring further investigation. Because much of the evidence relating to cross-adaptation to altitude has examined the benefits at moderate to high altitudes, future research examining responses at lower altitudes should be conducted, given that these environments are more frequently visited by athletes and workers. Mechanistic work to identify the specific physiological and cellular pathways responsible for cross-adaptation between heat and altitude, and between cold and altitude, is warranted, as is exploration of benefits across different populations and physical activity profiles.