Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In this issue, Swan et al. report finding a relationship between the amount of beef consumed by women during pregnancy and subsequent sperm concentration in their sons in adulthood. There is extensive evidence that maternal nutrition and maternal consumption of specific nutrients, drugs and chemicals present in food during pregnancy and lactation can have consequences for subsequent pathophysiology of offspring. This has been demonstrated experimentally in animals, and the developmental origins of human health and disease (DoHAD) hypothesis also has considerable support from the epidemiological literature (Fowden et al., 2006; Gluckman et al., 2007). Only recently have researchers interested in fetal nutrition and metabolic diseases become aware of findings relating developmental exposure to the class of environmental chemicals known as endocrine disruptors to metabolic and reproductive disorders in males. Specifically, Skakkebaek et al. (2001) have identified that a cluster of reproductive abnormalities in males (sperm quality and testicular cancer) is associated with conditions identifiable at or shortly after birth (cryptorchidism, hypospadias), which they have named the ‘testicular dysgenesis syndrome (TDS)’. This cluster of abnormalities of male reproductive development is proposed to be due, at least in part, to fetal/neonatal exposure to environmental estrogens (EE) [one example of such an EE is bisphenol A, the chemical used to make polycarbonate plastic and the resin lining of metal cans (vom Saal and Hughes, 2005)] and chemicals with antiandrogenic activity [one example would be phthalates used in PVC plastic and many other products (Swan et al., 2005)]. Skakkebaek’s hypothesis is thus that developmental disorders identifiable at birth are predictive of subsequent male reproductive system pathologies, such as reduced fertility due to low sperm count as well as testicular cancer. Although there are a number of potential factors that could account for the association reported in the current study by Swan et al., these authors suggest based on the Skakkebaek TDS hypothesis that the association between the number of beef meals eaten per week during pregnancy and sperm concentration in male offspring might be due to exposure to hormonal residues in beef. This hypothesis is plausible because during the years this cohort of fertile men were in utero (median year of birth was 1970), beef cattle in North America (where the majority of study participants were born) were routinely treated with the growth-promoting anabolic steroids. For example, the drug diethylstilbestrol (DES) was widely administered to beef cattle in the USA between 1954 and 1979 (Raun and Preston, 2002). Although the use of hormones to promote an increase in lean muscle mass in beef cattle has not been legal in Europe since 1989, and while DES was banned in 1979, administration of combinations of other hormonally active drugs to beef cattle has continued to be a common practice in the USA and Canada. The International Joint Food and Agricultural Organization’s World Health Organization Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) published acceptable (tolerable) daily intake ADIs (TDIs) for all hormones in current use as growth promoters in beef cattle, although the assumptions used by JECFA to determine ‘safe’ daily human exposure levels in their 1988 report have been challenged (Andersson and Skakkebaek, 1999). There has been a trade dispute over the safety of hormone residues in beef going on for many years, with the European Union opposing importing hormonetreated beef from the USA and Canada. The position of the USA and Canada is that hormone residues in beef pose no threat to human health; this position is based primarily on research concerning the mutagenic activity of estradiol. Over the past decade, there has been a shift in the focus of research in endocrinology, cancer and developmental biology based on findings that hormones, hormonally active drugs and *In autumn 2006, the author served on the science advisory committee of the European Union regarding low-dose effects of xenobiotic estrogenic chemicals in food.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».