Sex-specific differences in leg fat uptake are revealed with a high-fat meal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanism(s) by which sex specific differences in regional body fat distribution develop are not known. We assessed the effects of a high-fat (HF) meal on fatty acid oxidation and uptake into regional fat depots using isotopic tracers and adipose biopsies. Thirty men (BMI 23.6 +/- 0.3 kg/m(2)) and 29 women (BMI 22.4 +/- 0.3 kg/m(2)) received a meal containing [(3)H]triolein. Twelve of the men and 13 of the women received an additional 80 g of triolein in the meal (HF) and the remainder received a normal-fat (NF) meal. Adipose tissue lipoprotein lipase (LPL) activity was measured in the fed and fasted state. After 24 h, meal fatty acid uptake into subcutaneous adipose tissue was assessed. The efficiency of meal fat uptake into upper body subcutaneous fat was similar in both sexes, but women had a greater leg fat uptake, especially in response to a HF meal (P < 0.0001). A correlation between fed-state LPL activity and meal fat uptake was found in both upper and lower body fat (P < 0.0001, r = 0.69). These studies show that, in times of net fat storage, women preferentially increase uptake in leg adipose tissue, and this is likely mediated by fed-state LPL activity.
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".