Carbohydrate Supplementation and Sex Differences in Fuel Selection during Exercise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the effects of a high-CHO diet (80% CHO) and glucose ingestion (2 g x kg(-1)) during exercise (120 min, 57% VO2max) on fuel selection in women taking (W+OC) or not (W-OC) oral contraceptives and in men (six in each group). METHODS: Substrate oxidation was measured using indirect respiratory calorimetry in combination with a tracer technique to compute the oxidation of exogenous (13C-glucose) and endogenous CHO. RESULTS: In the control situation (mixed diet with water ingestion during exercise), the percent contribution to the energy yield (%En) of CHO oxidation was higher in men than in women (62 vs 53 %En). The high-CHO diet and glucose ingestion during exercise separately increased the %En from CHO oxidation in both men (+12%) and women (+24%), and the sex difference observed in the control situation disappeared. However, the increase in the %En from total CHO oxidation observed when glucose was ingested during exercise and when combined with a high-CHO diet was larger in women than in men (+47 vs +17 %En). This was not attributable to a higher %En from exogenous glucose oxidation in women, for which no sex difference was observed (25 and 27 %En in men and women), but was attributable to a smaller decrease in endogenous glucose oxidation. No significant difference in fuel selection was observed between W+OC and W-OC. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in total CHO oxidation after the high-CHO diet was not different between sexes. Glucose ingestion during exercise, separately and combined to the high-CHO diet, had a greater effect in women than in men; this was mostly attributable to the smaller reduction in endogenous CHO oxidation.
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) | 0.002 | 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".