Hyperinsulinemia superimposed on insulin resistance does not elevate blood pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance in the development of hypertension is an area of much current interest. A central question that remains unanswered is whether exogenous hyperinsulinemia can elevate blood pressure (BP) in the presence of pre-existing insulin resistance. To examine this proposition, we studied the effects of chronic fructose feeding on plasma insulin levels and BP in insulin-resistant Zucker fatty rats and in lean (insulin-sensitive) controls. In addition, vascular responses to norepinephrine in aortae and mesenteric arteries were compared between groups. Zucker fatty rats were hyperinsulinemic, insulin-resistant, yet normotensive when compared with age-matched lean controls. Long term fructose feeding increased plasma insulin levels and BP in the lean group. Strikingly, the fatty rats remained refractory to fructose-induced increases in BP despite exaggeration of hyperinsulinemia. Vascular reactivity assessed in aortae and mesenteric arteries was comparable between groups. These data suggest that, in vivo, the mechanisms of hyperinsulinemia-induced hypertension are not operative in the face of pre-existing insulin resistance in obese Zucker rats.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".