Fructose and non-fructose sugar intakes in the US population and their associations with indicators of metabolic syndrome
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Relationships of sugar intakes with indicators of metabolic syndrome are important concerns for public health and safety. For individuals, dietary intake data for fructose and other sugars are limited. METHOD: Descriptive statistics. The data from 25,506 subjects, aged 12-80 yr, contained in the NHANES 1999-2006 databases were analyzed for sugar intakes and health parameters. RESULTS: Dietary fructose was almost always consumed with other sugars. On average, fructose provided 37% of total simple sugar intake and 9% of energy intake. In more than 97% of individuals studied, fructose caloric contribution was lower than that of non-fructose sugars. Fructose and non-fructose sugar intakes had no positive association with blood concentrations of TG, HDL cholesterol, glycohemoglobin, uric acid, blood pressure, waist circumference, and BMI in the adults studied (aged 19 to 80 yr, n=17,749). CONCLUSION: Daily fructose intakes with the American diet averaged approximately 37% of total sugars and 9% of daily energy. Fructose was rarely consumed solely or in excess over non-fructose sugars. Fructose and non-fructose sugar ordinary consumption was not positively associated with indicators of metabolic syndrome, uric acid and BMI.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it