Oral supplementation with glycine reduces oxidative stress in patients with metabolic syndrome, improving their systolic blood pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reactive oxygen species derived from abdominal fat and uncontrolled glucose metabolism are contributing factors to both oxidative stress and the development of metabolic syndrome (MetS). This study was designed to evaluate the effects of daily administration of an oral glycine supplement on antioxidant enzymes and lipid peroxidation in MetS patients. The study included 60 volunteers: 30 individuals that were supplemented with glycine (15 g/day) and 30 that were given a placebo for 3 months. We analysed thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) and S-nitrosohemoglobin (SNO-Hb) in plasma; the enzymatic activities of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD), superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), and glutathione peroxidase (GPX) in erythrocytes; and the expression of CAT, GPX, and SOD2 in leukocytes. Individuals treated with glycine showed a 25% decrease in TBARS compared with the placebo-treated group. Furthermore, there was a 20% reduction in SOD-specific activity in the glycine-treated group, which correlated with SOD2 expression. G6PD activity and SNO-Hb levels increased in the glycine-treated male group. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) also showed a significant decrease in the glycine-treated men (p = 0.043). Glycine plays an important role in balancing the redox reactions in the human body, thus protecting against oxidative damage in MetS patients.
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) | 0.001 | 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".