The indicator amino acid oxidation (IAAO) technique: a novel approach to assess protein intakes that maximize whole-body protein anabolism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dietary protein requirement is defined as the daily intake at which whole-body protein net balance remains in equilibrium and body protein is maintained. Protein intakes to meet the dietary requirement (the Recommended Daily Allowance, RDA; 0.83 g protein·kg BM−1·d−1) were determined using nitrogen balance methodology. More recently, studies using indirect Indicator Amino Acid Oxidation (IAAO) breakpoint analysis suggest a RDA value of 1.20 g protein·kg BM−1·d−1. However, since breakpoint analysis determines the protein intake at which whole-body protein net balance is maximized, we suggest the value determined by IAAO analysis represents the maximal anabolic protein intake, not a protein requirement. Several aspects of the IAAO method should be considered prior to its application and/or interpretation, such as: (1) extrapolation of hourly to daily values; (2) extrapolation of free amino acid sip-feeding to whole-foods, and; (3) misidentification of the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval as the intake level that covers 98% of the population. We conclude that the current IAAO method represents a minimally invasive technique allowing elegant within-subject designs to assess the maximal anabolic protein intake. Therefore, data derived from such studies should not be misinterpreted as an estimate of protein requirements.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".