UBC‐Nepal expedition: The use of oral antioxidants does not alter cerebrovascular function at sea level or high altitude
Bibliographic record
Abstract
NEW FINDINGS: What is the central question of the study? Does the use of antioxidants alter cerebrovascular function and blood flow at sea level (344 m) and/or high altitude (5050 m)? What is the main finding and its importance? This is the first study to investigate whether antioxidant administration alters cerebrovascular regulation and blood flow in response to hypercapnia, acute hypoxia and chronic hypoxia in healthy humans. We demonstrate that an acute dose of antioxidants does not alter cerebrovascular function and blood flow at sea level (344 m) or after 12 days at high altitude (5050 m). ABSTRACT: Hypoxia is associated with an increase in systemic and cerebral formation of free radicals and associated reactants that may be linked to impaired cerebral vascular function and neurological sequelae. To what extent oral antioxidant prophylaxis impacts cerebrovascular function in humans throughout the course of acclimatization to the hypoxia of terrestrial high altitude has not been examined. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to examine the influence of orally ingested antioxidants at clinically relevant doses (vitamins C and E and α-lipoic acid) on cerebrovascular regulation at sea level (344 m; n = 12; female n = 2 participants) and at high altitude (5050 m; n = 9; female n = 2) in a randomized, placebo-controlled and double-blinded crossover design. Hypercapnic and hypoxic cerebrovascular reactivity tests of the internal carotid artery (ICA) were conducted at sea level, and global and regional cerebral blood flow (CBF; i.e. ICA and vertebral artery) were assessed 10-12 days after arrival at 5050 m. At sea level, acute administration of antioxidants did not alter cerebral hypoxic cerebrovascular reactivity (pre versus post: 1.5 ± 0.7 versus 1.2 ± 0.8%∆CBF/-%∆SpO2; P = 0.96) or cerebral hypercapnic cerebrovascular reactivity (pre versus post: 5.7 ± 2.0 versus 5.8 ± 1.9%∆CBF/∆mmHg; P = 0.33). Furthermore, global CBF (P = 0.43) and cerebral vascular conductance (ICA P = 0.08; vertebral artery P = 0.32) were unaltered at 5050 m after antioxidant administration. In conclusion, these data show that an oral antioxidant cocktail known to attenuate systemic oxidative stress failed to alter cerebrovascular function at sea level and CBF during acclimatization to high altitude.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".