rHuEpo treatment increases exercise performance exclusively by increasing Hb mass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was performed to test the hypothesis that administration with recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEpo) increases exercise performance by augmenting maximal oxygen transport. For this purpose eight subjects were hemodiluted isovolumic following 13 weeks of rHuEpo treatment. Oxygen delivery was increased at maximal exercise from 1777.0 ± 102.0 before rHuEpo treatment to 2079.8 ± 120.7 ml.min −1 after treatment. Following hemodilution oxygen delivery was decreased to the pre value (1710.3 ± 138.1 ml.min −1 ). The a‐vO 2 difference was increased following rHuEpo treatment at maximal exercise, the values being 166.4 ± 8.0 ml before treatment, 182.2 ± 6.7 after rHuEpo administration, and then decreased to 161.7 ml after hemodilution. At maximal exercise intensity leg VO 2 increased from 1511.0 ± 130.1 ml.min −1 before treatment to 1793.0 ± 148.7 ml.min −1 with rHuEpo, and decreased after hemodilution to 1428.0 ± 111.6 ml.min −1 . VO 2 max increased from 3950.0 ± 160.7 before administration to 4254.5 ± 178.4 ml.min −1 with rHuEpo, and decreased to 4059.0 ± 161.1 ml.min −1 with hemodilution (P=0.22 compared to pre rHuEpo). The main finding in the present study is that rHuEpo exerts its main effects on performance through an increase in red cell mass. In addition the data demonstrate that mean arterial pressure increases because of increased blood viscosity and that this does not limit maximal cardiac output.
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".