Scurvy as a factor in the loss of the 1845 Franklin expedition to the Arctic: a reconsideration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1845, an expedition, commanded by Sir John Franklin, set out to discover the Northwest Passage. The ships entered the Canadian Arctic, and from September 1846 were beset in ice off King William Island. A note left by the expedition in May 1847 reported all was well, but by April 1848, 24 of the 129 men had died. The ice-locked ships were deserted in April 1848, but the 105 survivors were so weakened that all perished before they could reach safety. The causes of the morbidity and mortality aboard the ships have long been debated, and many commentators have argued that scurvy was an important factor. This study evaluates the historical evidence for the likely effectiveness of anti-scorbutic precautions taken on polar voyages at that time, and investigates whether the skeletal remains associated with the expedition provide evidence for scurvy. Skeletal remains available for study were carefully examined for pathological changes, and lesions potentially consistent with scurvy were subject to histological analysis. Where remains were no longer accessible, use was made of published osteological work. It is argued that the anti-scorbutic measures customarily taken on mid 19th century British naval polar voyages were such that there is no a priori reason to suppose that scurvy should have been a problem prior to the desertion of the ships. The analysis of the skeletal evidence provided little in the way of bony lesions consistent with the disease, and cannot therefore be used to support the presence of scurvy. Factors other than scurvy may been the main causes of morbidity and mortality in the 11 months prior to the desertion of the ships. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".