Next Article in Journal
Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Activities of Potato Cultivars with White, Yellow, Red and Purple Flesh
Previous Article in Journal
Biological and Chemical Insights of Beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) Bark: A Source of Bioactive Compounds with Functional Properties
Previous Article in Special Issue
Linking What We Eat to Our Mood: A Review of Diet, Dietary Antioxidants, and Depression
Open AccessArticle

Salivary Antioxidants Status Following Progressive Aerobic Exercise: What Are the Differences between Waterpipe Smokers and Non-Smokers?

1
Department of Exercise Physiology, Faculty of Sports Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht 4199843653, Iran
2
Department of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Humanities Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Rasht Branch, Rasht 4147654919, Iran
3
Faculty of Sport Sciences, Waseda University, Tokorozawa 359-1192, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antioxidants 2019, 8(10), 418; https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox8100418
Received: 29 August 2019 / Accepted: 16 September 2019 / Published: 20 September 2019
Waterpipe tobacco (WPT) smoking is a public health problem with similar or even stronger effects than cigarette smoking. Although it appears to be associated with extensive oxidative stress, there is a limited number of studies on the oxidative effects of WPT smoking in stressful conditions. We, therefore, compared the responses of salivary flow rate (SFR), uric acid (UA) concentration, and peroxidase (POX) and 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl-hydrate (DPPH) activities between WPT smokers and non-smokers following a bout of exhaustive aerobic exercise (AE). Twenty-three sedentary young women (age: 22.95 ± 2.83 years) participated in this study, including 11 smokers (7.00 ± 1.41 uses/week) and 12 non-smokers. All participants were required to perform the Bruce protocol treadmill test at an initial gradient of 10% at 1.7 mph, with increases of these parameters every 3 min until exhaustion. Unstimulated saliva samples were collected before, immediately after, and 1 hour after AE. WPT smokers showed lower SFR compared with non-smokers at all time points (p < 0.05). In comparison to WPT smokers, a larger increase in POX activity (approximately 23% vs. 14%; p = 0.009) and a smaller decline in DPPH activity (approximately −8% vs. −15%; p = 0.004) were found in non-smokers compared with WPT smokers. While these changes were slowly compensated within 1 hour after exhaustion, the activity of both markers was different from the pre-exercise values (p < 0.001). There was also a trend for UA concentration in non-smokers to be higher during the recovery period, with no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). It seems that WPT smoking is associated with negative effects on important human antioxidants and a diminished antioxidative response following acute exercise. View Full-Text
Keywords: uric acid; peroxidase; DPPH; saliva; hookah; free radicals uric acid; peroxidase; DPPH; saliva; hookah; free radicals
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Arazi, H.; Taati, B.; Rafati Sajedi, F.; Suzuki, K. Salivary Antioxidants Status Following Progressive Aerobic Exercise: What Are the Differences between Waterpipe Smokers and Non-Smokers? Antioxidants 2019, 8, 418.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop