Dietary Supplementation with Pressurized Whey in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cystic fibrosis (CF) is characterized by malnutrition, chronic pulmonary inflammation, and oxidative stress. Whey protein is rich in sulfhydryl groups and is recognized for its ability to increase glutathione and reduce oxidative stress. Previously, we have shown that supplementation with whey increased intracellular glutathione levels in patients with CF. We have subsequently shown that hyperbaric pressure treatment of whey protein promotes the release of novel peptides for absorption, increases intracellular glutathione in healthy subjects, and reduces in vitro production of interleukin (IL)-8. We hypothesized that pressurized whey supplementation in children and adults with CF could have significant nutritional and anti-inflammatory benefits. A pilot open-label study of 1-month dietary supplementation with pressurized whey in CF patients was undertaken to assess the effects. Twenty-seven patients with CF (nine children, 18 adults) were enrolled. The dose of pressurized whey was 20 g/day in patients less than 18 years of age and 40 g/day in older patients. Anthropometric measures, pulmonary function, serum C-reactive protein (CRP), whole blood glutathione, and whole blood IL-8 and IL-6 responses to phytohemagglutinin (PHA) stimulation were measured at baseline and at 1 month. Three adults withdrew (one with gastrointestinal side effects, two with acute infection). Both children and adults showed enhancements in nutritional status, as assessed by body mass index. Children showed improvement in lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second). The majority of patients with an initially elevated CRP showed a decrease. PHA-stimulated IL-8 responses tended to decrease in the adults. Whole blood glutathione levels did not change. Thus, oral supplementation with pressurized whey improves nutritional status and can have additional beneficial effects on inflammation in patients with CF.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".