Acute Effect of Dietary Fats on Postprandial Vascular Function in Healthy Individuals: A Randomized, Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Research has shown an association between fat consumption and vascular function. Recent evidence suggests that a high saturated fat meal may impair vasodilatory mechanisms post‐ingestion, while other types of dietary fats, depending on chain length, saturation and omega 3:6 ratio may potentially improve vascular function. There have been no head to head comparisons of postprandial effects on commonly consumed sources of dietary cooking oils on vascular function. Objectives The purpose of the study was to assess the effects of 5 different dietary fat sources of varied fatty acid profiles (coconut oil, canola oil, grapeseed oil, Salba‐chia seed oil, and butter) on indices of vascular function and the glycemic response in a healthy adult population. Methods The study recruited 15 healthy individuals (10F:5M; age 29±8; SBP/DBP: 121±10/82±4 mmHg) in a double blind, randomized, crossover, controlled design. Participants visited the clinic at St. Michael's Hospital 5 different times following an overnight fast. At each visit, following collection of anthropometric data and baseline outcome measures, 1 of 5 500ml study shakes were consumed containing 50g of fat (from either: coconut oil, canola oil, grapeseed oil, chia oil or butter) and 50g of available carbohydrate. Over a 3 hour period following intake of study interventions, vascular measures were obtained at hourly intervals and fingerprick blood samples at 0,15, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 180min. The primary outcome was a change in pulse wave reflection (augmentation index‐AIx (%)). Secondary outcome measures included postprandial blood glucose area under the curve (AUC), peripheral and central systolic and diastolic blood pressures. Results Intervention high in omega‐3 fatty acids (Salba‐chia seed oil) produced a reduction in pulse wave reflection relative to the butter control (1h AIx:−5.9±6%, p=0.041; 3h AIx: −3.8±7% p=0.048). All study beverages resulted in a similar acute blood pressure response (−1.2±3mmHg, p=0.25), independently of the type of oil ingested. No significant differences in blood glucose AUC (p=0.69) to the 5 fat‐rich glucose beverages were observed. Conclusions No difference was found in the acute effect of the ingestion of different vegetable oils on hemodynamic indices. All vegetable oils produced a postprandial decrease in hemodynamic indices in healthy participants. Support or Funding Information Internal
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".