Sorbitol increases muscle glucose uptake ex vivo and inhibits intestinal glucose absorption ex vivo and in normal and type 2 diabetic rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have suggested that sorbitol, a known polyol sweetener, possesses glycemic control potentials. However, the effect of sorbitol on intestinal glucose absorption and muscle glucose uptake still remains elusive. The present study investigated the effects of sorbitol on intestinal glucose absorption and muscle glucose uptake as possible anti-hyperglycemic or glycemic control potentials using ex vivo and in vivo experimental models. Sorbitol (2.5% to 20%) inhibited glucose absorption in isolated rat jejuna (IC50 = 14.6% ± 4.6%) and increased glucose uptake in isolated rat psoas muscle with (GU50 = 3.5% ± 1.6%) or without insulin (GU50 = 7.0% ± 0.5%) in a concentration-dependent manner. Furthermore, sorbitol significantly delayed gastric emptying, accelerated digesta transit, inhibited intestinal glucose absorption, and reduced blood glucose increase in both normoglycemic and type 2 diabetic rats after 1 h of coingestion with glucose. Data of this study suggest that sorbitol exhibited anti-hyperglycemic potentials, possibly via increasing muscle glucose uptake ex vivo and reducing intestinal glucose absorption in normal and type 2 diabetic rats. Hence, sorbitol may be further investigated as a possible anti-hyperglycemic sweetener.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".