Effects of Ginseng Supplementation and Endurance-Exercise in the Artery-Specific Vascular Responsiveness of Diabetic and Sedentary Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effects of 12 weeks North-American ginseng supplementation, exercise training, and sedentary behavior on vascular responses in type I diabetic rats. The following hypotheses were tested: 1) Ginseng supplementation would result in improved vascular responsiveness and sensitivity; 2) exercise training would result in further improvement in these vascular responses; 3) control rats with no access to exercise would show a depressed vascular response compared to control rats that were not exposed to a sedentary lifestyle. Groups: non-diabetic sedentary control (CS), sedentary diabetic (DS), sedentary diabetic with ginseng supplementation (DS+GS), diabetic with ginseng supplementation and high-intensity endurance exercise (D+GS+EX), and control not exposed to sedentary behavior (C). Diabetes was induced by streptozotocin. Arteries were excised, cleaned, and mounted onto a myography system. Percent vasorelaxation to acetylcholine (ACh) (10-8 M ACh to 10-4 M ACh) of the carotid artery was similar in CS (57±31%), C (66±35%), DS (58±36%), D+GS+Ex (71±37%), and DS+GS (64±37%) (p> 0.05). Percent vasorelaxation of the aorta was smaller in CS (23±17%) compared to C (46±35%), DS (60±40%), D+GS+Ex (64±40%), and DS+GS (56±39%) (p< 0.05), and smaller in C compared to D+GS+Ex (p< 0.05). In the femoral, the percent vasorelaxation was reduced in DS (18±16%) compared to all the other conditions (CS, 43±22%; C, 79.1±28%; D+GS+Ex, 55±27%; DS+GS, 45±26%; p< 0.05), but larger in C compared to the other conditions (CS, DS, D+GS+Ex, DS+GS; p< 0.05). Diabetes and sedentary lifestyle have detrimental effects on vascular responses that are evident in the femoral arteries of the diabetic rats. Ginseng supplementation restored the loss of sensitivity, with no added vascular protection of exercise training.
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) | 0.000 | 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".