Is The Pressor And Leg Vascular Response To Sympathetic Stimulation A Function Of Maximal Aerobic Capacity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regular physical activity has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. A protective adaptation associated with regular physical activity and physical fitness may be an attenuated vascular response to physiological stress. PURPOSE: To determine if the blood pressure (BP) and leg vascular response to acute sympathetic stimulation are a function of maximal aerobic capacity (VO2max). It was hypothesized that VO2max would be inversely correlated with the BP and leg vascular response to acute sympathetic stimulation. METHODS: Young, healthy males (mean ± SD; Age: 25 ± 3 yrs; Height: 175 ± 4 cm; Body Mass: 76 ± 13 kg; n=6) reported to the laboratory on four separate occasions. Subjects performed ramp cycling exercise (30W·min-1) to volitional exhaustion to determine VO2max. On 3 separate days, subjects performed a cold-pressor test (CPT). Following a 5 min supine baseline period, subjects immersed their hand in -1°C water for 5 min, followed by 5 min of recovery. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) was calculated on a beat-by-beat basis from the blood pressure waveform using finger photoplethysmography (Finometer; Finapres Medical Systems). Cardiac output was determined by the Modelflow method and total peripheral resistance (TPR) was calculated. Femoral artery blood flow was measured continuously via Doppler ultrasound (Vivid-I; GE Medical) and femoral vascular resistance (FVR; mmHg·ml-1·min-1) was calculated. CPT trials were time-aligned and averaged and the peak response of each variable was calculated as a percent change from the supine baseline value. Relationships between VO2max and the peak response to the CPT were established by Pearson-product correlation. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Absolute and relative VO2max were 3.7 ± 0.5 L·min-1 (Range: 3.1 - 4.6 L·min-1) and 50 ± 12 ml·kg-1·min-1 (Range: 38 - 72 ml·kg-1·min-1), respectively. The peak increases in MAP (29 ± 9%), TPR (20 ± 7%) and FVR (133 ± 73%) were not correlated (p>0.05) with absolute or relative VO2max. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the BP and leg vascular response to cold-pressor stimulation are not a function of maximal aerobic capacity. Supported by NSERC, Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".