Subchronic Tolerance Trials of Graded Oral Supplementation with Phenylalanine or Serine in Healthy Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenylalanine and serine are amino acids used in dietary supplements and nutritional products consumed by healthy consumers; however, the safe level of phenylalanine or serine supplementation is unknown. The objective of this study was to conduct two 4-week clinical trials to evaluate the safety and tolerability of graded dosages of oral phenylalanine and oral serine. Healthy male adults (n = 60, 38.2 ± 1.8y) completed graded dosages of either phenylalanine or serine supplement (3, 6, 9 and 12 g/d) for 4 weeks with 2-week wash-out periods in between. Primary outcomes included vitals, a broad spectrum of circulating biochemical analytes, body weight, sleep quality and mental self-assessment. At low dosages, minor changes in serum electrolytes and plasma non-essential amino acids glutamine and aspartic acid concentrations were observed. Serine increased its plasma concentrations at high supplemental dosages (9 and 12 g/day), and phenylalanine increased plasma tyrosine concentrations at 12 g/day, but those changes were not considered toxicologically relevant. No other changes in measured parameters were observed, and study subjects tolerated 4-week-long oral supplementation of phenylalanine or serine without treatment-related adverse events. A clinical, no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) of phenylalanine and serine supplementation in healthy adult males was determined to be 12 g/day.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".