Oxidative stress and Ramadan observance; a possible influence of associated dieting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The effects of Ramadan observance and any associated dietary restriction upon oxidative stress are not well known. The topic has thus been examined in a brief systematic review of available literature concerning non-athletic but otherwise healthy subjects, patients with selected clinical conditions, and in athletes. Methods: Ovid/Medline and Google searches were supplemented by a perusal of reference lists in papers thus identified. Results: Ramadan observance and associated dietary restrictions are generally associated with a decrease of body mass in non-athletic adults, and in patients with conditions such as obesity, metabolic syndrome, diabetes mellitus and hypertension. During Ramadan, measures of oxidative stress (particularly malondialdehyde and F2 isoprostanes) are consistently decreased, antioxidant status (particularly levels of peroxidases, uric acid and reduced glutathione) are enhanced and inflammatory reactions (particularly c-reactive protein, IL-6 and TNF-a) are decreased in association with decreases in body mass. Perhaps because of lower initial body weights and greater dietary control during Ramadan, changes of oxidant status are more variable in athletes; in 3 of 7 studies, Ramadan observance had little effect on oxidant status, and in 2 reports there was some deterioration. In 3 of 4 studies where athletes underwent short-term dieting, there was also no improvement of antioxidant status. Conclusion: Ramadan observance and any associated dieting reduce oxidative stress in non-athletic individuals, apparently in association with decreases of body mass. In athletes, oxidant levels are generally unchanged during Ramadan, and if food intake is maintained they may even increase. More information is needed upon possible adverse health consequences, but chronic risks are probably small because any changes are limited to one month per year.
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 | 0.008 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".