Age-related thermoregulatory differences during core cooling in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study assessed sympathetic neuronal and vasomotor responses, total body oxygen consumption, and sensory thermal perception to identify thermoregulatory differences in younger and older human subjects during core cooling. Cold fluid (40 ml/kg, 4 degrees C) was given intravenously over 30 min to decrease core temperature (Tc) in eight younger (age 18-23) and eight older (age 55-71) individuals. Compared with younger subjects, the older subjects had significantly lower Tc thresholds for vasoconstriction (35.5 +/- 0.3 vs. 36.2 +/- 0.2 degrees C, P = 0.03), heat production (35.2 +/- 0.4 vs. 35.9 +/- 0.1 degrees C, P = 0.04), and plasma norepinephrine (NE) responses (35.0 vs. 36.0 degrees C, P < 0.05). Despite a lower Tc nadir during cooling, the maximum intensities of the vasoconstriction (P = 0.03) and heat production (P = 0.006) responses were less in the older compared with the younger subjects, whereas subjective thermal comfort scores were similar. Plasma NE concentrations increased fourfold in the younger but only twofold in the older subjects at maximal Tc cooling. The vasomotor response for a given change in plasma NE concentration was decreased in the older group (P = 0.01). In summary, aging is associated with 1) a decreased Tc threshold and maximum response intensity for vasoconstriction, total body oxygen consumption, and NE release, 2) decreased vasomotor responsiveness to NE, and 3) decreased subjective sensory thermal perception.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".