Four rapid glucose injections of 5 g each were administered to normal young adult subjects before, during, and after an infusion of glucose. After the first glucose pulse, insulin responses measured immunologically reached a peak between 3 and 5 min and rapidly returned to base line. A short glucose infusion of 300 mg/min decreased the rapid insulin response to a second glucose pulse (- 58%), but after a longer infusion (20 hr) the acute insulin response to a third pulse was restored to normal. Stopping the infusion was followed by return of glucose and insulin levels to prestudy base line within 1 hr, but a fourth glucose pulse was followed by a supernormal acute insulin response (+ 200%). Other observations during these studies showed that a short glucose infusion of either 100 mg/min or 300 mg/min produced a parallel rise in glucose and insulin, but continuation of the infusion for 20 hr was associated with a “paradoxical” fall in glucose and continued rise in insulin. These observations are considered incompatible with a simple linear model often used to describe the relation between plasma glucose and serum insulin. Instead, a two pool system—one for acute insulin release, and the other a time-dependent compartment for long term insulin responses—is suggested.
D. Porte Jr., A. A. Pupo
Usage data is cumulative from June 2024 through June 2025.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 250 | 9 |
68 | 34 | |
Scanned page | 392 | 4 |
Citation downloads | 51 | 0 |
Totals | 761 | 47 |
Total Views | 808 |
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.