Dioxin-like activity in the blood of Greenlandic Inuit and Danish women: a pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: (1) To determine whether plasma dioxin-like (DL) bioactivity differs between Inuit living in different Greenlandic districts, (2) to compare the DL activity of the Inuit having high burdens of POPs with a low-burden study group (Danish volunteers), and (3) to evaluate DL activity associations to POP exposure biomarkers and/or lifestyle factors. STUDY DESIGN: The study was a cross-sectional survey, including randomized inhabitants (70) from 6 different Greenlandic districts and young Danish volunteers (22). METHODS: POPs and fatty acids profiles were analysed. Aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) mediated DL-activity was determined by exposure of Hepa1.12cR AhR-CALUX reporter cell line to hexane: ethanol plasma extracts. RESULTS: The sum PCBs/POPs level of Inuit was more than 10 times higher than the levels found in Danish volunteers, and for both study groups the level was positively associated with age. The TCDD equivalent of the determined DL-activity, AhR-TEQ, differed between the Greenlandic districts. The AhR-TEQ data of the combined Inuit was significantly higher compared with the Danish women. AhR-TEQ of Inuit were positively associated with plasma POPs after adjustment for age and/or the ratio of n-3 to n-6 fatty acids, whereas no correlations were found for the Danish samples. CONCLUSIONS: AhR-TEQ differs between Inuit and Danish plasma samples. Plasma POP levels alone cannot be used as a biomarker for DL-activity. We suggest that the profile and level of plasma POPs, geographical location and diet have the greatest impact on plasma dioxin activity. Further studies are needed to elucidate the differences in geographical determinants of blood DL-activity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".