Consumption of Solnul™ Resistant Potato Starch Produces a Prebiotic Effect in a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of resistant starch at high doses have been well-characterized, but the potential prebiotic effects of resistant starch at doses comparable to oligosaccharide prebiotics have not been evaluated. A three-arm randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of 3.5 g and 7 g daily doses of Solnul™ resistant potato starch (RPS) on beneficial populations of gut bacteria and stool consistency after a 4-week period. The relative abundance of Bifidobacterium and Akkermansia was determined by employing 16Sv4 sequencing of stool samples. To assess the effect of RPS on laxation and bowel movements, stools were recorded and scored using the Bristol Stool Form Scale. Participants consuming 3.5 g/day of RPS experienced significantly greater changes in Bifidobacterium and Akkermansia compared to the placebo after 4 weeks. The number of diarrhea- and constipation-associated bowel movements were both significantly lower in the 3.5 g RPS arm compared to the placebo group. Participants consuming 7 g of RPS responded similarly to those in the 3.5 g arm. Our analyses demonstrate that Solnul™ RPS has a prebiotic effect when consumed for 4 weeks at the 3.5 g per day dose, stimulating increases in beneficial health-associated bacteria and reducing diarrhea- and constipation-associated bowel movements when compared to the placebo group.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".