A randomized controlled crossover trial of the effect of ginseng consumption on the immune response to moderate exercise in healthy sedentary men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ginseng is a popular herbal remedy that is reputed to increase resistance to stress and improve immune function. Regular exercise results in acute physiologic stress that affects the immune response. This study was conducted to investigate the effects of daily consumption of a standardized ginsenoside-containing North American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius) extract on immune function before, during, and after a moderate-exercise protocol in healthy sedentary men. Ten healthy males were randomized to receive either ginseng (1125 mg.d-1) or placebo for 35 days. After a 3 month washout period, subjects received the opposite treatment for another 35 days. An exercise test and blood collection were performed at the end of each treatment period. Immune parameters and blood hormone levels were measured before, during, and after the exercise stress protocol. Ginseng treatment reduced the peripheral blood concentration of CD8+ T cells and increased mitogen-stimulated T cell production of interleukin-2 ex vivo. Ginseng had no effect on total white blood cell counts; on concentrations of neutrophils, monocytes, or lymphocytes (CD3+, CD4+, CD16+, CD20+); on lymphocyte proliferation; or on neutrophil oxidative burst. Ginseng did not significantly affect exercise-induced changes in plasma concentrations of lactate, insulin, cortisol, or growth hormone. The consumption of ginseng for 5 weeks had a limited effect on the immune response to an acute exercise protocol.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".