A randomised crossover placebo-controlled trial investigating the effect of brown seaweed (<i>Ascophyllum nodosum</i> and <i>Fucus vesiculosus</i>) on postchallenge plasma glucose and insulin levels in men and women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the impact of brown seaweed on post-load plasma glucose and insulin concentrations in men and women. Twenty-three participants (11 men, 12 women) aged 19-59 years were recruited in this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover study. The test product consisted of a commercially available blend of brown seaweed (Ascophyllum nodosum and Fucus vesiculosus) with known inhibitory action on α-amylase and α-glucosidase activities (InSea²). Two 250 mg seaweed capsules and 2 placebo capsules were consumed on each occasion 30 min prior to the consumption of 50 g of carbohydrates from bread. Plasma glucose and insulin concentrations were measured over a period of 3 h postcarbohydrate ingestion at predetermined time points. Both treatments were separated by a 1-week washout period. Data were analysed using mixed models for repeated measures. Compared with placebo, consumption of seaweed was associated with a 12.1% reduction in the insulin incremental area under the curve (p = 0.04, adjusted for baseline) and a 7.9% increase in the Cederholm index of insulin sensitivity (p < 0.05). The single ingestion of 500 mg of brown seaweed had no significant effect on the glucose response (p = 0.24, adjusted for baseline). Glucose and insulin responses were similar between men and women. Consumption of the seaweed capsules was not associated with any adverse event. These data suggest that brown seaweed may alter the insulin homeostasis in response to carbohydrate ingestion.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".