Potential harms of supplementation with high doses of antioxidants in athletes
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
in athletes, causing some athletes to consume antioxidants in the erroneous belief that this will counteract the damaging effects of ROS. There is currently no convincing evidence to support the benefits of antioxidant supplementation in acute physical exercise and exercise training. On the contrary, exogenous antioxidants prevent some physiological functions of free radicals that are needed for cell signaling, causing higher dosages of antioxidants to hamper or prevent performance-enhancing and health-promoting training adaptation such as mitochondrial biogenesis, skeletal and cardiac muscle hypertrophy, and improved insulin sensitivity. However, there remains the perception that antioxidants can counterbalance oxidative stress and benefit exercise adaptation and performance in athletes. It is likely that the negative effects of high doses of antioxidant supplementation exceed their potential benefits. We discuss some proposed pathways of potential side effects of exogenous antioxidant supplementation in athletes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it