Intranasal Insulin Suppresses Endogenous Glucose Production in Humans Compared With Placebo in the Presence of Similar Venous Insulin Concentrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intranasal insulin (INI) has been shown to modulate food intake and food-related activity in the central nervous system in humans. Because INI increases insulin concentration in the cerebrospinal fluid, these effects have been postulated to be mediated via insulin action in the brain, although peripheral effects of insulin cannot be excluded. INI has been shown to lower plasma glucose in some studies, but whether it regulates endogenous glucose production (EGP) is not known. To assess the role of INI in the regulation of EGP, eight healthy men were studied in a single-blind, crossover study with two randomized visits (one with 40 IU INI and the other with intranasal placebo [INP] administration) 4 weeks apart. EGP was assessed under conditions of an arterial pancreatic clamp, with a primed, constant infusion of deuterated glucose and infusion of 20% dextrose as required to maintain euglycemia. Between 180 and 360 min after administration, INI significantly suppressed EGP by 35.6% compared with INP, despite similar venous insulin concentrations. In conclusion, INI lowers EGP in humans compared with INP, despite similar venous insulin concentrations. INI may therefore be of value in treating excess liver glucose production in diabetes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".