From a practical standpoint, we measured muscle performance by

calculating total work performed during the final 3 sets of knee extension exercise. Despite some positive findings for our non-exercise performance measures, we failed to note any difference in exercise performance between pre and post intervention. In fact, values were actually lower following MSM supplementation as compared to before supplementation. We have no explanation for these findings other than recognizing TPX-0005 research buy our small sample size and the potential for day-to-day variance in knee extension “muscle endurance” performance, as has been noted for isokinetic testing [24]. Also noteworthy, motivation is paramount when asking subjects to perform repetitions to exhaustion. In retrospect we believe that find more our chosen protocol may not have been ideal to discern performance differences between groups and across time. Although subjects performed a total of 18 sets of knee extension exercise, the first 15 sets were standardized in terms of repetition number. Hence, subjects were only provided a total of 3 performance

sets (16–18) to generate usable data for performance comparison. Future work may include a different exercise protocol, with the possible addition of isometric and dynamic force, as well as power data as done previously [25], in addition to actual volume load (reps x load). This would provide for a more complete assessment of muscle performance—as well as greater potential for observed differences in muscle soreness and oxidative stress related parameters. Moreover, the “damaging” exercise protocol may be altered to include a more robust model for inducing damage (e.g., pure eccentric loading using 1-RM

values that are RANTES far greater than those used in the present design) [16]. In addition to performance, we used two distinct questionnaires to determine the extent of either muscle soreness or fatigue, before and following exercise, both pre and post intervention. Although preliminary, MSM did provide some evidence of effect at attenuating both muscle soreness and fatigue (Figures 1 and 2, respectively). As with other measures, additional larger scale studies are needed to corroborate these findings. If future work agrees with these initial findings, MSM may serve a useful purpose in enhancing post-exercise recovery. Conclusion Our data indicate that supplementation with MSM, specifically at a daily dosage of 3.0 grams, may favorably influence selected BVD-523 markers of exercise recovery. In particular, to our knowledge, this was the first study to observe an effect of MSM on antioxidant capacity, as measured by blood TEAC. While this study was small in scope, it is suggested that more research be done to extend these findings. Specifically, future studies should include a larger sample size, a placebo group for comparison, the inclusion of additional markers of recovery and exercise performance (e.g.