Increase in the Thermic Effect of Food in Women by Adrenergic Amines Extracted from Citrus Aurantium
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the thermic response to a meal between men and women of varied body composition and to determine whether adrenergic amines extracted from citrus aurantium (CA) induce an increase in metabolic rate and enhance the thermic response to the meal. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: In 30 healthy weight-stable subjects (17 women, 13 men; BMI: 20 to 42 kg/m2), body composition was determined by bioimpedance analysis followed by resting energy expenditure for 20 minutes, and the thermic effect of food (TEF) of a 1.7-MJ, 30-gram protein meal was determined intermittently for 300 minutes by indirect calorimetry. In a subset of 22 subjects, the TEFs of CA alone and when added to the same 1.7-MJ meal were determined. Blood pressure and pulse before and throughout the studies and catecholamine excretion were determined. RESULTS: TEF was significantly lower in women than men (152 +/- 7 vs. 190 +/- 12 kJ and 8.8 +/- 0.4% vs. 11.0 +/- 0.7% of meal), independently of age and magnitude of adiposity. The thermic response to CA alone was higher in men, but, when added to the meal, CA increased TEF only in women and to values no longer different from men. CA had no effect on blood pressure and pulse rate but increased epinephrine excretion by 2.4-fold. DISCUSSION: A 20% lower TEF in women suggests a diminished sympathetic nervous system response to meals, because with CA, TEF increased by 29% only in women. However, this acute response may not translate into a chronic effect or a clinically significant weight loss over time.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it