Cholesterolaemic influence of palmitic acid in the<i>sn</i>-1, 3<i>v.</i>the<i>sn</i>-2 position with high or low dietary linoleic acid in healthy young men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Healthy young men were fed four diets for 2 weeks each providing natural fats containing palmitic acid (16 : 0) predominantly in the sn-1, 3 position of dietary TAG or containing 16 : 0 predominantly in the sn-2 position with low or high levels of linoleic acid (18 : 2n-6). Two treatments supplied 16 : 0 in the sn-1, 3 positions from palmstearin with low (3 % energy) or high (>7 % energy) 18 : 2n-6 and two treatments supplied 16 : 0 in the sn-2 position from lard with high or low levels of 18 : 2n-6. Diets contained 30-35 % energy as fat, 7-11 % energy as 16 : 0 and moderate levels of cholesterol. Fasting serum cholesterol and lipoprotein concentrations were measured. Cholesterol fractional synthesis rate (FSR) was determined by 2H incorporation. Diets providing 16 : 0 in the sn-2 position resulted in lower fasting serum total cholesterol (TC) and a lower TC:HDL ratio than diets providing 16 : 0 in the sn-1, 3 positions. Diets with high levels of 18 : 2n-6 significantly decreased the TC:HDL ratio, reaffirming the well-known cholesterol-reducing effect of 18 : 2n-6. A lower non-esterified cholesterol FSR was observed with low dietary levels of 18 : 2n-6. No differences between dietary treatments were found for serum HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol or TAG. It is concluded that dietary fats containing 16 : 0 in the sn-2 position may result in slightly lower fasting TC than diets providing 16 : 0 in the sn-1, 3 positions, while the level of n-6 polyunsaturated fat influences endogenous cholesterol synthesis.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".