Influence of <i>Rhodiola rosea</i> on the heat acclimation process in young healthy men
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adaptogen Rhodiola rosea (RR) may mitigate stress responses and have beneficial effects on endurance capacity (EC) and mental performance. Heat acclimation (HA) improves EC in the heat, but the potential impact of RR on the HA process is unknown. Therefore, our intent was to determine if RR has a positive impact on HA. Twenty male subjects (age, 22.5 ± 3.0 years) completed 2 EC tests involving walking (6 km·h −1 ) until volitional exhaustion in a climate chamber (air temperature, 42 °C; relative humidity, 18%) before (H1) and after (H2) an 8-day HA period. One group (SHR; n = 10) ingested standardised extract SHR-5 of RR (a single daily dose of 432 mg), while a second group (PLC; n = 10) administered a placebo prior to each HA session. Efficacy of HA was evaluated on the basis of changes that occurred from H1 to H2 in the time to exhaustion (TTE), exercise heart rate (HR), core and skin temperatures (T c , T sk ), stress hormones, ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) and fatigue (RPF), and thermal sensation (TS). HA significantly increased TTE (133.1 ± 44.1 min in H1; 233.4 ± 59.8 min in H2; p < 0.0001) and decreased (p < 0.0001) HR, T c , T sk , stress hormones as well as RPE, RPF, and TS. However, the magnitude of all these changes was similar (p > 0.05) in the SHR and PLC groups. These results suggest that the use of RR during HA has no beneficial performance, physiological, or perceptual effects in young healthy males.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it