Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Sep 20;8(10):418.
doi: 10.3390/antiox8100418.

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

Hamid Arazi  1 , Behzad Taati  2 , Forough Rafati Sajedi  3 , Katsuhiko Suzuki  4
Affiliations

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

Hamid Arazi et al. Antioxidants (Basel). .

Abstract

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.

Keywords: DPPH; free radicals; hookah; peroxidase; saliva; uric acid.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the study from assessment of eligibility to data analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Saliva flow rate (FR) following a bout of exhaustive aerobic exercise for WPT smokers and non-smokers; * p < 0.05 vs. pre, † p < 0.05 vs. non-smokers.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Salivary peroxidase (POX) activity following a bout of exhaustive aerobic exercise in WPT smokers and non-smokers; ** p < 0.01 vs. pre, ## p < 0.01 vs. immediately after, †† p < 0.01 vs. non-smokers.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Salivary uric acid (UA) concentrations following a bout of exhaustive aerobic exercise in WPT smokers and non-smokers; * p < 0.05 vs. pre, ** p < 0.01 vs. pre, ## p < 0.01 vs. immediately after.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Salivary 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl-hydrate (DPPH) activity following a bout of exhaustive aerobic exercise in WPT smokers and non-smokers; ** p < 0.01 vs. pre, ## p < 0.01 vs. immediately after, †† p < 0.01 vs. non-smokers.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Mackay J., Eriksen M. The Tobacco Atlas. World Health Organization; Geneva, Switzerland: 2002.
    1. Nemati S., Rafei A., Freedman N.D., Fotouhi A., Asgary F., Zendehdel K. Cigarette and water-pipe use in Iran: Geographical distribution and time trends among the adult population; A pooled analysis of national STEPS surveys, 2006–2009. Arch. Iran. Med. 2017;20:295–301. - PubMed
    1. Khabour O.F., Alzoubi K.H., Bani-Ahmad M., Dodin A., Eissenberg T., Shihadeh A. Acute exposure to waterpipe tobacco smoke induces changes in the oxidative and inflammatory markers in mouse lung. Inhal. Toxicol. 2012;24:667–675. doi: 10.3109/08958378.2012.710918. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nemes R., Koltai E., Taylor A., Suzuki K., Gyori F., Radak Z. Reactive oxygen and nitrogen species regulate key metabolic, anabolic, and catabolic pathways in skeletal muscle. Antioxidants. 2018;7:85. doi: 10.3390/antiox7070085. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Goel R., Bitzer Z., Reilly S., Trushin N., Reinhart L., Elias R., Richie J.P. Tobacco Smoke Free Radicals and Related Biomarkers of Oxidative Stress. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2017;112:130–131. doi: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2017.10.197. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources

-