English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Here, we address the question of why some people have a greater chance of surviving and/or better resistance to cold-related-injuries in prolonged exposure to acute cold environments than do others, despite similar physical characteristics. The main aim of this study was to compare physiological and psychological reactions between people who exhibited fast cooling (FC; n = 20) or slow cooling (SC; n = 20) responses to cold water immersion. Individuals in whom the T re  decreased to a set point of 35.5°C before the end of the 170-min cooling time were indicated as the FC group; individuals in whom the T re  did not decrease to the set point of 35.5°C before the end of the 170-min cooling time were classified as the SC group. Cold stress was induced using intermittent immersion in bath water at 14°C. Motor (spinal and supraspinal reflexes, voluntary and electrically induced skeletal muscle contraction force) and cognitive (executive function, short term memory, short term spatial recognition) performance, immune variables (neutrophils, leucocytes, lymphocytes, monocytes, IL-6, TNF-α), markers of hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis activity (cortisol, corticosterone) and autonomic nervous system activity (epinephrine, norepinephrine) were monitored. The data obtained in this study suggest that the response of the FC group to cooling vs the SC group response was more likely an insulative–hypothermic response and that the SC vs the FC group displayed a metabolic–insulative response. The observations that an exposure time to 14°C cold water—which was nearly twice as short (96-min vs 170-min) with a greater rectal temperature decrease (35.5°C vs 36.2°C) in the FC group compared with the SC group—induces similar responses of motor, cognitive, and blood stress markers were novel. The most important finding is that subjects with a lower cold-strain-index (SC group) showed stimulation of some markers of innate immunity and suppression of markers of specific immunity.

Two Strategies for Response to 14°C Cold-Water Immersion: Is there a Difference in the Response of Motor, Cognitive, Immune and Stress Markers?