Effect of hyperthermia and physical activity on circulating growth hormone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to differentiate the effects of hyperthermia and physical activity on circulating growth hormone (GH) secretion. Nine healthy volunteer adults performed two 40 min exercise trials and two 50 min passive standing trials. The exercise was performed in either thermo-neutral (N-Ex: air temperature 18 degrees C, air humidity 40%, and wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) 17.7 degrees C) or hot environmental conditions (H-Ex: air temperature 33 degrees C, air humidity 30%, and WBGT 34.6 degrees C). The passive exposure trials were also performed in either a comfortable (N-P: air temperature 18 degrees C, air humidity 40%, and WBGT 17.7 degrees C) or a hot climatic chamber (H-P: air temperature 40 degrees C, air humidity 100%, and WBGT 97.1 degrees C). Plasma GH, plasma volume (PV), tympanic temperature (Tty), and body mass loss (BML) were measured before and after each trial. The decrease in PV was significantly higher during H-Ex and H-P sessions than during N-Ex and N-P sessions. Comparisons showed significantly lower BML in the N-Ex session (1.5% +/- 0.3%) than in the H-Ex and H-P sessions (2.1% +/- 0.3% and 1.9% +/- 0.2%, respectively) (p < 0.001). The rise in Tty was significantly higher during the H-P session (2.9 +/- 0.4 degrees C) (p < 0.001) when compared with the other sessions. Plasma GH concentration increased significantly during all the trials, particularly during the H-Ex session (45 +/- 7 ng.mL-1) (p < 0.01). Both exercise and heat exposure, separately, are sufficient to increase significantly the plasma GH concentration, and their combined effect induced a highly synergistic rise in GH.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".