No effect of ascorbate on cutaneous vasodilation and sweating in older men and those with type 2 diabetes exercising in the heat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aging and chronic disease such as type 2 diabetes (T2D) are associated with impairments in the body's ability to dissipate heat. To reduce the risk of heat-related injuries in these heat vulnerable individuals, it is necessary to identify interventions that can attenuate this impairment. We evaluated the hypothesis that intradermal administration of ascorbate improves cutaneous vasodilation and sweating in older adults via nitric oxide synthase (NOS)-dependent mechanisms during exercise in the heat and whether these improvements, if any, are greater in individuals with T2D. Older males with (n = 12, 61 ± 9 years) and without (n = 12, 64 ± 7 years) T2D performed two 30-min bouts of cycling at a fixed rate of metabolic heat production of 500 W (~70% peak oxygen uptake) in the heat (35°C); each followed by a 20- and 40-min recovery, respectively. Cutaneous vascular conductance (CVC) and sweat rate were measured at four intradermal microdialysis sites treated with either (1) lactated Ringer (Control), (2) 10 mmol/L ascorbate (an antioxidant), (3) 10 mmol/L L-NAME (non-selective NOS inhibitor), or (4) a combination of ascorbate + L-NAME. In both groups, ascorbate did not modulate CVC or sweating during exercise relative to Control (all P > 0.05). In comparison to Control, L-NAME alone or combined with ascorbate attenuated CVC during exercise (all P ≤ 0.05) but had no influence on sweating (all P > 0.05). We show that in both healthy and T2D older adults, intradermal administration of ascorbate does not improve cutaneous vasodilation and sweating during exercise in the heat. However, NOS plays an important role in mediating cutaneous vasodilation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".