N1-Methylnicotinamide: Is it Time to Consider it as a Dietary Supplement forAthletes?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exercise is considered to be a "medicine" due to its modulatory roles in metabolic disorders, such as diabetes and obesity. The intensity and duration of exercise determine the mechanism of energy production by various tissues of the body, especially by muscles, in which the requirement for adenosine triphosphate (ATP) increases by as much as 100-fold. Naturally, athletes try to improve their exercise performance by dietary supplementation with, e.g., vitamins, metabolites, and amino acids. MNAM, as a vitamin B3 metabolite, reduces serum levels and liver contents of triglycerides and cholesterol, and induces lipolysis. It stimulates gluconeogenesis and prohibits liver cholesterol and fatty acid synthesis through the expression of sirtuin1 (SIRT1). It seems that MNAM is not responsible for the actions of NNMT in the adipose tissues as MNAM inhibits the activity of NNMT in the adipose tissue and acts as an inhibitor of its activity.NNMT-MNAM axis is more activated in the muscles of individuals undergoing the high-volume-low-intensity exercise and caloric restriction. Therefore, MNAM could be an important myokine during exercise and fasting where it provides the required energy for muscles through the induction of lipolysis and gluconeogenesis in the liver and adipose tissues, respectively. Increased levels of MNAM in exercise and fasting led us to propose that the consumption of MNAM during training, especially endurance training, could boost exercise capacity and improve performance. Therefore, in this review, we shed light on the potential of MNAM as a dietary supplement in sports medicine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.149 | 0.024 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".