Ghrelin, GLP-1, and leptin responses during exposure to moderate hypoxia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Severe hypoxia has been indicated to cause acute changes in appetite-related hormones, which attenuate perceived appetite. However, the effects of moderate hypoxia on appetite-related hormonal regulation and perceived appetite have not been elucidated. Therefore, we examined the effects of moderate hypoxia on appetite-related hormonal regulation and perceived appetite. Eight healthy males (21.0 ± 0.6 years; 173 ± 2.3 cm; 70.6 ± 5.0 kg; 23.4 ± 1.1 kg/m(2)) completed two experimental trials on separate days: a rest trial in normoxia (FiO2 = 20.9%) and a rest trial in hypoxia (FiO2 = 15.0%). The experimental trials were performed over 7 h in an environmental chamber. Blood samples and scores of subjective appetite were collected over 7 h. Standard meals were provided 1 h (745 kcal) and 4 h (731 kcal) after initiating exposure to hypoxia or normoxia within the chamber. Although each meal significantly reduced plasma active ghrelin concentrations (P < 0.05), the response did not differ significantly between the trials over 7 h. No significant differences in the area under the curves for plasma active ghrelin concentrations over 7 h were observed between the two trials. No significant differences were observed in glucagon-like peptide 1 or leptin concentrations over 7 h between the trials. The subjective feeling of hunger and fullness acutely changed in response to meal ingestions. However, these responses were not affected by exposure to moderate hypoxia. In conclusion, 7 h of exposure to moderate hypoxia did not change appetite-related hormonal responses or perceived appetite in healthy males.
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) | 0.000 | 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".