An Investigation of TAS2R38 Haplotypes, Dietary Intake, and Risk Factors for Chronic Disease in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Variation in common taste receptor type 2 member 38 (TAS2R38) haplotypes is associated with bitter-taste sensitivity, but associations with dietary intake and risk factors for chronic disease are inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether common TAS2R38 haplotypes are associated with dietary intake and risk factors for chronic disease using cross-sectional data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (n = 26,090). Outcomes were assessed among the full sample and stratified by sex. METHODS: Taster status was determined from TAS2R38 haplotypes, and the respondents were classified as supertasters, tasters, and nontasters. Primary outcome variables were the consumption frequencies of vegetables, sweet-tasting foods, alcoholic beverages, and visceral adiposity index (VAI). Secondary outcome variables were the individual VAI components. Multivariable regression models adjusted for sociodemographic and lifestyle factors were used to assess associations between the taster status and outcome variables. RESULTS: Among the sample, 5655, 12,821, and 7614 respondents were classified as supertasters, tasters, and nontasters, respectively. Vegetable consumption was significantly higher among nontasters than among supertasters (1.23 ± 0.26 and 1.20 ± 0.22, respectively, P = 0.02). Among males, the consumption of sweet-tasting foods (0.40 ± 8.80 and 0.38 ± 7.55, P = 0.02) and green salad (0.35 ± 0.31 and 0.33 ± 0.27, P = 0.02) was also higher for nontasters than supertasters. Nontasters were more likely to be regular alcohol consumers compared with supertasters among the full sample (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.12 [1.03, 1.22]; P = 0.01) and among females (OR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.27; P = 0.04). No significant associations were observed between TAS2R38 haplotypes and VAI, although high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was significantly lower among supertasters than nontasters (1.45 ± 0.59 and 1.47 ± 0.63, respectively; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Among middle- to older-aged adults, minor associations are observed between TAS2R38 haplotypes, dietary intake, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Genetic predisposition to bitter-taste sensitivity is linked to diet; however, further research is needed to understand the relevance for chronic disease risk.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".