Differences in Vitamin E and C Profile Between Infant Formula and Human Milk and Relative Susceptibility to Lipid Oxidation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The vitamin E isoforms and vitamin (vit) C content of infant formulas were compared to human milk and related to relative susceptibilities to lipid peroxidation. We report that a highly distinct vitamin E and C profile exists between formula and human milk. Whileα-tocopherol (α-Toc) is the dominant vit E isoform in human milk, formula contains a substantial amount of α-Toc and δ-Toc that was greater than the level found in human milk (12- and 32-fold, respectively). Vitamin C was also two- fold higher in infant formula compared to human milk. Despite the higher vitamin E and C content, we also observed higher rates of lipid oxidation in the formula when compared to human milk. Storing human milk for one day at refrigeration temperatures did not produce hexanal in human milk, but this storage resulted in an increase in hexanal in formulas. We conclude that the higher concentrations of γ-Toc and δ-Toc in infant formulas did not provide similar protection from lipid oxidation as human milk. We also observed that vit C content was reduced during storage in both infant formula and human milk, which did not occur with the Toc isoforms.
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 | 0.001 | 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".