Physiological Changes at Altitude in Nonasthmatic and Asthmatic Subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercised-induced asthma is not due to exercise itself per se, but rather is due to cooling and/or drying of the airway because of the increased ventilation that accompanies exercise. Travel to high altitudes is accompanied by increased ventilation of cool, often dry, air, irrespective of the level of exertion, and by itself, this could represent an 'exercise' challenge for asthmatic subjects. Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction was measured at sea level and at various altitudes during a two-week trek through the Himalayas in a group of nonasthmatic and asthmatic subjects. The results of this study showed that in mild asthmatics, there was a significant reduction in peak expiratory flow at very high altitudes. Contrary to the authors' hypothesis, there was not a significant additional decrease in peak expiratory flow after exercise in the asthmatic subjects at high altitude. However, there was a significant fall in arterial oxygen saturation postexercise in the asthmatic subjects, a change that was not seen in the nonasthmatic subjects. These data suggest that asthmatic subjects develop bronchoconstriction when they go to very high altitudes, possibly via the same mechanism that causes exercise-induced asthma.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".