Evaluating the effect of fructose and glucose ingestion on arterial stiffness and the renin angiotensin system in healthy humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sugar, particularly fructose, consumption has increased exponentially and has been shown to adversely affect the kidney and cardiovascular systems. Animal studies suggest a role for the vascular renin angiotensin system (RAS) in response to fructose intake, activation of which is deleterious to cardiovascular outcomes, though the mechanism remains elusive in humans. A randomized, blinded, two-period crossover study will be performed to determine the effect of fructose ingestion on arterial stiffness in 30 healthy, normotensive men and women adults. Subjects will be studied in high-salt balance to ensure maximum RAS suppression. Arterial stiffness, expressed as pulse wave velocity and aortic augmentation index, will be measured by tonometry at baseline and in response to 60min of graded Angiotensin II infusion, an index of RAS activity. Participants will then be randomized to either a 2 week period of daily ingestion of 200g fructose or glucose and will undergo an identical study day to measure arterial stiffness. After a minimum 1 week washout period, subjects will then cross over to the other treatment for the second study period after which time they will undergo a third identical study day. Six subjects have been recruited and three have completed the study to date. Due to the blinded nature of the study, no preliminary data is available. Ingestion of fructose is expected to increase baseline arterial stiffness and result in a blunted arterial stiffness response to Angiotensin II infusion compared to glucose ingestion, implying a more activated RAS. This will suggest that the increased fructose-associated cardiorenal risk may be mediated, in part, by changes in vascular RAS activity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".