Differences in the Responses of the Pituitary β‐Endorphin and Cardiovascular System to Ethanol and Stress as a Function of Family History
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genetic and environmental factors, such as stress, are important for the initiation and maintenance of heavy drinking, whereas beta-endorphin may be important in controlling alcohol consumption. These studies investigated the response of pituitary beta-endorphin to stress and the effect of alcohol on the stress response in subjects at low (LR) and high (HR) risk of alcoholism, as determined from their family history. METHODS: Twenty LR and 20 HR subjects were exposed to stress 30 min after ingestion of either a placebo or an alcohol drink. Plasma beta-endorphin was measured before and for 4 hr after the drink. Changes in the concentration of plasma beta-endorphin after ingestion of the placebo or alcohol drink alone served as controls to compare the stress-induced changes. Pulse and diastolic and systolic blood pressure were also measured. RESULTS: HR subjects presented higher baseline values of pulse and systolic blood pressure and lower plasma beta-endorphin than LR subjects. Stress induced a small increase in cardiovascular activity, whereas alcohol induced a stronger stimulation. Alcohol before stress did not prevent the stress-induced increase in cardiovascular activity. Stress, but not alcohol, increased the plasma beta-endorphin concentration. LR subjects presented a higher stress-induced increase in plasma beta-endorphin and a faster recovery than HR subjects. Alcohol before stress attenuated the stress-induced increase in plasma beta-endorphin in both LR and HR subjects. This attenuation was stronger in LR subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, there are differences in the response of beta-endorphin to stress and the effect of ethanol on stress responses as a function of a family history of alcoholism.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".