Response of Urinary Biomarkers of Systemic Oxidation to Oral Iron Supplementation in Healthy Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Urinary biomarkers are used in assessment of severe, clinical oxidative stress. Little is known, however, about their diagnostic value within the normative range. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the response of urinary thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) and 8-hydroxy-2-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) as indicators of systemic oxidation in response to short-term oral iron and antioxidant supplementation. METHODS: Five healthy adult men participated in the pilot study phase and 12 in the definitive intervention trial. For 7 days each, separated by 12-day washouts, the subjects received different treatment regimens, consisting of 120 mg of iron, 120 mg of iron in refined palm oil, and 120 mg of iron in palm oil combined with one of the two doses of Carotino Tocotrienol Carotene Mixed Concentrate (CTCMC). Creatinine-normalized urinary TBARS and 8-OHdG concentrations were quantified in samples taken from subjects with and without active supplementation. Temporal and correlative associations between TBARS and 8-OHdG were explored. RESULTS: Daily intake of supplemental iron failed to produce any increment in urinary excretion of TBARS or 8-OHdG. However, a significant within-individual correlation between the urinary biomarkers was observed (Spearman r = 0.697, p < .0001, n = 466). Both doses of CTCMC significantly lowered urinary excretion of both oxidation indicators. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of effect of oral iron on the biomarkers of systemic oxidation, they show a strong and significant mutual association within the nonpathological range of oxidative stress in healthy male adults.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".