Adults with metabolically healthy overweight or obesity present more brown adipose tissue and higher thermogenesis than their metabolically unhealthy counterparts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a subset of individuals with overweight/obesity characterized by a lower risk of cardiometabolic complications, the so-called metabolically healthy overweight/obesity (MHOO) phenotype. Despite the relatively higher levels of subcutaneous adipose tissue and lower visceral adipose tissue observed in individuals with MHOO than individuals with metabolically unhealthy overweight/obesity (MUOO), little is known about the differences in brown adipose tissue (BAT). METHODS: F-FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography scan after a 2-h personalized cooling protocol. Energy expenditure, skin temperature, and thermal perception were assessed during a standardized mixed meal test (3.5 h) and a 1-h personalized cold exposure. Body composition was assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, energy intake was determined during an ad libitum meal test and dietary recalls, and physical activity levels were determined by a wrist-worn accelerometer. FINDINGS: Participants with MHOO presented higher BAT volume (+124%, P = 0.008), SUVmean (+63%, P = 0.001), and SUVpeak (+133%, P = 0.003) than MUOO, despite having similar BAT mean radiodensity (P = 0.354). In addition, individuals with MHOO exhibited marginally higher meal-induced thermogenesis (P = 0.096) and cold-induced thermogenesis (+158%, P = 0.050). Moreover, MHOO participants showed higher supraclavicular skin temperature than MUOO during the first hour of the postprandial period and during the cold exposure, while no statistically significant differences were observed in other skin temperature parameters. We observed no statistically significant differences between MHOO and MUOO in thermal perception, body composition, outdoor ambient temperature exposure, resting metabolic rate, energy intake, or physical activity levels. INTERPRETATION: Adults with MHOO present higher BAT volume and activity than MUOO. The higher meal- and cold-induced thermogenesis and cold-induced supraclavicular skin temperature are compatible with a higher BAT activity. Overall, these results suggest that BAT presence and activity might be linked to a healthier phenotype in young adults with overweight or obesity. FUNDING: See acknowledgments section.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".