Korean red ginseng extract does not cause embryo‐fetal death or abnormalities in mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ginseng has been used for a long time and is well tolerated in humans. However, recent studies have shown that ginsenosides Rb1, Rg1, and Re exert embryotoxicity in in vitro culture systems. We investigated the effects of Korean red ginseng extract (KRGE) on embryonic implantation and fetal development in mice. METHODS: Mice were orally administered KRGE (20, 200, or 2,000 mg/kg/day) from 2 weeks before mating to gestational day (GD) 18, and implantation rate, fetal mortality, body weights, as well as external, visceral, and skeletal abnormalities were determined by Caesarean section on GD18. Ginsenosides in KRGE and in the blood of dams were identified and quantified by HPLC analysis. RESULTS: KRGE did not affect embryonic implantation and mortality as well as fetal body weights up to 2,000 mg/kg/day (approximately 200 times clinical doses), the upper-limit dose recommended by the Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). Although the prevalence of supernumerary ribs increased at the medium dose (200 mg/kg/day), no dose-dependent increases in external, visceral, and skeletal abnormalities were observed. Major ginsenosides such as Rb1, Rg1, and Re were not detected in the blood of dams based on their chromatographic profiles. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable developmental toxicities of KRGE, even at the upper-limit dose, were not observed in mice. These results might be due to the negligible blood concentrations of ginsenosides in their original forms following oral administration, suggesting that in vitro experiments to assess the effects of ginsenosides on embryotoxicity may not reliably explain the risks of ginsenosides to in vivo embryo-fetal development.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".