OBJECTIVE: Capitalizing on these therapeutic effects, this study investigated for the first time the potential of VCO on memory improvement in vivo.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty male Wistar rats (7-8 weeks old) were randomly assigned to five groups (n = six per group). Treatment groups were administered with 1, 5 and 10 g/kg VCO for 31 days by oral gavages. The cognitive function of treated-rats were assessed using the Morris Water Maze Test. Brains were removed, homogenized and subjected to biochemical analyses of acetylcholine (ACh) and acetylcholinesterase (AChE), antioxidants [superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), glutathione (GSH), glutathione peroxidase (GPx) and glutathione reductase (GRx)], lipid peroxidase [malondialdehyde (MDA)] as well as nitric oxide (NO). α-Tocopherol (αT; 150 mg/kg) was also included for comparison purposes.
RESULTS: VCO-fed Wistar rats exhibited significant (p 33%) and NO (≥ 34%). Overall, memory improvement by VCO was comparable to αT.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: VCO has the potential to be used as a memory enhancer, the effect of which was mediated, at least in part, through enhanced cholinergic activity, increased antioxidants level and reduced oxidative stress.
METHODS: Baseline and sixth month data from the MyBFF@home study were used for this purpose. A total of 169 of overweight and obese respondents answered the IPAQ-SF and were asked to use a pedometer for 7 days. Data from IPAQ-SF were categorised as inactive and active while data from pedometer were categorised as insufficiently active and sufficiently active by standard classification. Data on sociodemographic and anthropometry were also obtained. Cohen's kappa was applied to measure the agreement of IPAQ-SF and pedometer in determining the physical activity level. Pre-post cross tabulation table was created to evaluate the changes in physical activity over 6 months.
RESULTS: From 169 available respondents, 167 (98.8%) completed the IPAQ-SF and 107 (63.3%) utilised the pedometer. A total of 102 (61.1%) respondents were categorised as active from the IPAQ-SF. Meanwhile, only 9 (8.4%) respondents were categorised as sufficiently active via pedometer. Cohen's κ found there was a poor agreement between the two methods, κ = 0.055, p > 0.05. After sixth months, there was + 9.4% increment in respondents who were active when assessed by IPAQ-SF but - 1.3% reductions for respondents being sufficiently active when assessed by pedometer. McNemar's test determined that there was no significant difference in the proportion of inactive and active respondents by IPAQ-SF or sufficiently active and insufficiently active by pedometer from the baseline and sixth month of intervention.
CONCLUSION: The IPAQ-SF and pedometer were both able to measure physical activity. However, poor agreement between these two methods were observed among overweight and obese women.