Emulsifying dietary fat modulates postprandial endotoxemia associated with chylomicronemia in obese men: a pilot randomized crossover study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postprandial hyperlipemia is recognized as a major cardio-metabolic risk factor, recently linked to the co-absorption of pro-inflammatory lipopolysaccharides with dietary lipids. This causes endotoxemia that is involved in the pathophysiology of obesity and insulin resistance, but to date the impact of food formulation is unknown. We tested a novel concept that endotoxin absorption can be modulated by fat emulsified structure in the meal, and potentially differently in obese vs. lean men. METHODS: In a randomized controlled crossover study, eight normal-weight and eight obese age-matched healthy men ingested two isocaloric, isolipidic breakfasts of identical composition including 40 g of milk fat that was emulsified or unemulsified. Plasma- and chylomicron-endotoxemia and chylomicron-triglycerides were measured during 8 h after breakfast ingestion. RESULTS: = 0.02), which was higher than (i) after spread fat in obese subjects (P < 0.05) and (ii) after both spread and emulsified fat in normal-weight subjects (P < 0.05). However in obese subjects, the iAUC of plasma endotoxemia over 8 h was lower after emulsion than after spread fat (P < 0.05) whereas in NW subjects such reduction of plasma LPS-iAUC was not observed (P = 0.67). CONCLUSION: This study provides initial evidence that optimizing fat structure in the meal can be part of a dietary strategy to lower the metabolic impact of postprandial endotoxemia in obese men. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT01249378 on July 13, 2010.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".