Alcohol: Friend or FOE? Alcoholic Beverage Hormesis for Cataract and Atherosclerosis is Related to Plasma Antioxidant Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To correlate the oxidative state of postabsorptive blood plasma after consumption of one or three drinks of different beverages with known J-shaped epidemiological risk curves. DESIGN, INTERVENTIONS, AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Red wine, lager beer, stout (alcoholic and alcohol-free), with antioxidant activity, and an aqueous solution of alcohol were compared for the plasma antioxidant or pro-oxidant activity in human volunteers following consumption of one or three typical drinks containing equivalent amounts of alcohol (except for an alcohol-free stout used as a control for stout). RESULTS: One drink of red wine, lager beer, or stout (5% alcohol v/v, and alcohol-free) significantly increased the average antioxidant activity in plasma samples obtained from volunteers averaged over 240 min. Three drinks of red wine, lager beer, or stout (5% alcohol v/v, and alcohol-free) significantly increased the average pro-oxidant activity in plasma samples obtained from volunteers averaged over 360 min. For a solution of alcohol, three drinks resulted in pro-oxidant plasma on average, whereas while one drink did not significantly affect the plasma oxidative status. A preliminary experiment in which two volunteers showed a significantly increased time to metabolize ethanol after ingestion resulted in elevated antioxidant activity in plasma for lager beer and red wine. CONCLUSIONS: One drink of red wine, beer, or stout provided equivalent increases in plasma antioxidant activity. Three drinks of red wine, beer, or stout provided equivalent increases in plasma pro-oxidant activity. This may explain, at least in part, the decreased risk of cataract and atherosclerosis from daily consumption of one drink of different types of alcoholic beverages as well as the increased risk from daily consumption of three drinks of alcoholic beverages. The plasma pro-oxidant activity appears to be due to ethanol metabolism, whereas the antioxidant activity may be due to the absorption of polyphenols in the beverages.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".