MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967684178 · doi:10.1254/jphs.95.9

A New Paradigm for Diabetes and Obesity: the Hepatic Insulin Sensitizing Substance (HISS) Hypothesis

2004· review· en· W1967684178 on OpenAlexafffund
W. Wayne Lautt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacological Sciences · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet, Metabolism, and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversidade de LisboaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsInsulin resistanceEndocrinologyInternal medicineInsulinMedicineDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The glucose disposal effect of insulin after a meal is accounted for in approximately equal measure by the direct action of insulin and the action of HISS (hepatic insulin sensitizing substance) released from the liver and acting on skeletal muscle to stimulate glucose storage as glycogen. The ability of insulin to cause HISS release is determined by hepatic parasympathetic nerves. Eliminating the parasympathetic signal by surgical denervation of the liver or by blockade of hepatic muscarinic receptors, hepatic nitric oxide synthase, or hepatic cyclooxygenase results in insulin resistance that can be accounted for by the absence of HISS action and is referred to as HISS-dependent insulin resistance (HDIR). Animal models in which the insulin resistance has been shown to be HDIR includes the spontaneously hypertensive rat, sucrose fed rats, animals with liver disease, adult offspring of fetal alcohol exposure, acute stress, and ageing. We suggest that HDIR accounts for the major metabolic disturbances in type 2 diabetes, including the postprandial hyperglycemia that results in the majority of pathologies related to diabetes. The observation of meal-induced insulin sensitization (MIS) and the role of HISS allows for consideration of a new paradigm relating meal processing, diabetes, obesity, and insulin resistance. New diagnostic approaches and therapeutic targets are described.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations73
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacological SciencesSame topicDiet, Metabolism, and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207