Effects of testosterone and estradiol on cutaneous vasodilation during local warming in older men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microvascular vasodilation in humans can become impaired with age, leading to cardiovascular diseases ranging from mild to life-threatening. Reproductive hormones may confer some protection on the vascular system in women; however, it is unclear whether the same is true in men. Our goal was to evaluate the impact of four hormonal conditions (testosterone only, estradiol only, testosterone and estradiol, no testosterone and no estradiol) on microvascular vasodilator responsiveness in the skin of older men. We hypothesized that in older healthy men estradiol promotes cutaneous microvascular dilation during local warming of the skin and that testosterone inhibits this dilation. We measured skin blood flow using laser Doppler flowmetry during 35 min of cutaneous local warming to 42 degrees C in 52 healthy men (average age 67 +/- 1 yr). Subjects were randomized to one of the four hormonal conditions and were studied before and after hormone treatments. The endothelium-dependent vasodilator response to local warming was not different among groups either before or after hormone treatment. For example, with testosterone-only treatment this vasodilator response was 220 +/- 13 AU, and with estrogen only the response averaged 246 +/- 12 AU (P > 0.05). We conclude that, within the doses employed in the present study, testosterone and estradiol did not consistently alter cutaneous vasodilator responsiveness in healthy older men.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".