Exercise and Newer Insulins: How Much Glucose Supplement to Avoid Hypoglycemia?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the glucose supplement required to prevent hypoglycemia during moderate-intensity exercise in Type 1 diabetic patients using newer analog insulins. METHODS: Nine subjects performed 60 min of ergocycle exercise (50% VO2max), 3 h after a standard breakfast in three different conditions. Subjects were randomly assigned to preexercise liquid glucose supplement of 0 g of glucose (0G), 15 g of glucose (15G), and 30 g of glucose (30G). Blood glucose (BG) was measured before, during, and following the exercise. All subjects used Humulin N (N) and analog insulin Humalog (Lispro). A dextrose infusion was initiated when BG fell below 5 mmol x L(-1). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the magnitude of the decrease in BG exercise-induced when comparing the three experimental conditions. However, the quantity of dextrose infused was significantly higher in the 0G (10.5 +/- 3.2 g) than in the 15G (3.5 +/- 1.8 g) or the 30G conditions (1.6 +/- 1.0 g). The addition of a glucose supplement (15G or 30G) significantly prolonged the delay before the need for dextrose infusion (31.7 +/- 7.5, 51.3 +/- 4.2, and 55.6 +/- 2.6 min; 0G, 15G, and 30G, respectively). The quantity of dextrose infusion was plotted against the three preexercise glucose supplements and a regression equation obtained. Solving this equation, a glucose supplement of 40 g was estimated in order to maintain BG levels within the normal range during and after exercise. CONCLUSION: For 60 min of late postprandial exercise followed by 60 min of recovery, an estimated 40 g of a liquid glucose supplement, ingested 15 min prior exercise, would seem likely to help maintain safe BG levels in subjects using N-Lispro.
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) | 0.001 | 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".