EVIDENCE FOR DISTINCT GENETIC EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH RESPONSE TO 35% CO<sub>2</sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Carbon dioxide (CO2 ) hypersensitivity represents an individual difference response to breathing CO2 enriched air. People with a history of panic attacks or panic disorder are particularly prone to anxious response, suggesting that CO2 hypersensitivity is a robust risk marker of panic spectrum vulnerability. METHODS: Twin pairs (n = 346) from the general population-based Norwegian NIPH Mental Health Study completed a measure of anxiety before and after vital capacity inhalation of 35% CO2 air and before and after inhalation of regular air. Three hypotheses regarding genetic factors for CO2 hypersensitivity were examined: (1) a single set of genetic risk factors impacts anxiety before exposure to CO2 and these same genes constitute the only genetic influences on anxiety in response to CO2 , (2) the genetic effects on pre-CO2 anxiety are entirely different from the genetic effects on anxiety in response to exposure to CO2 (i.e., new genetic effects), and (3) pre-CO2 anxiety influences anxiety in response to CO2 as well as unique genetic factors that become activated by respiratory stimulation. RESULTS: Our results support the latter hypothesis for response to 35% CO2 , with additive genetic and unique environmental factors best fitting the data. Evidence of new genetic effects was observed, accounting for 20% unique variance in post 35% CO2 anxiety response. New genetic effects were not observed for anxiety ratings made post regular air where only preregular air anxiety ratings explained significant variance in this outcome. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that there are distinct genetic factors associated with responsivity to respiratory stimulation via 35% CO2 .
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".