Dietary Cocoa Flavanols Do Not Alter Brain Excitability in Young Healthy Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ingestion of dietary cocoa flavanols acutely alters functions of the cerebral endothelium, but whether the effects of flavanols permeate beyond this to alter other brain functions remains unclear. Based on converging evidence, this work tested the hypothesis that cocoa flavanols would alter brain excitability in young healthy adults. In a randomised, cross-over, double-blinded, placebo-controlled design, transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to assess corticospinal and intracortical excitability before as well as 1 and 2 h post-ingestion of a beverage containing either high (695 mg flavanols, 150 mg (-)-epicatechin) or low levels (5 mg flavanols, 0 mg (-)-epicatechin) of cocoa flavanols. In addition to this acute intervention, the effects of a short-term chronic intervention where the same cocoa flavanol doses were ingested once a day for 5 consecutive days were also investigated. For both the acute and chronic interventions, the results revealed no robust alteration in corticospinal or intracortical excitability. One possibility is that cocoa flavanols yield no net effect on brain excitability, but predominantly alter functions of the cerebral endothelium in young healthy adults. Future studies should increase intervention durations to maximize the acute and chronic accumulation of flavanols in the brain, and further investigate if cocoa flavanols would be more effective at altering brain excitability in older adults and clinical populations than in younger adults.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".