Under basal and stimulated conditions, normal insulin secretion oscillates with periods in the ultradian 100-150-min range. To test the hypothesis that oscillatory insulin delivery is more efficient in reducing blood glucose levels than continuous administration, nine normal young men were each studied on two occasions during a 28-h period including a period of polygraphically recorded sleep. Endogenous insulin secretion was suppressed by somatostatin, a constant intravenous glucose infusion was administered, and exogenous insulin was infused either at a constant rate or in a sinusoidal pattern with a period of 120 min. The mean glucose level over the 28-h period was 0.72 +/- 0.31 mmol/liter lower when insulin was infused in an oscillatory pattern than when the rate of infusion was constant (P < 0.05). The greater hypoglycemic effect of oscillatory versus constant infusion was particularly marked during the daytime, with the difference averaging 1.04 +/- 0.38 mmol/liter (P < 0.03). Serum insulin levels tended to be lower during oscillatory than constant infusion, although the same amount of exogenous insulin was administered under both conditions. Ultradian insulin oscillations appear to promote more efficient glucose utilization.
J Sturis, A J Scheen, R Leproult, K S Polonsky, E van Cauter
Usage data is cumulative from November 2023 through November 2024.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 151 | 0 |
141 | 21 | |
Scanned page | 294 | 15 |
Citation downloads | 46 | 0 |
Totals | 632 | 36 |
Total Views | 668 |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.