The Blood Exposome and Its Role in Discovering Causes of Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since 2001, researchers have examined the human genome (G) mainly to discover causes of disease, despite evidence that G explains relatively little risk. We posit that unexplained disease risks are caused by the exposome (E; representing all exposures) and G × E interactions. Thus, etiologic research has been hampered by scientists' continuing reliance on low-tech methods to characterize E compared with high-tech omics for characterizing G. OBJECTIVES: Because exposures are inherently chemical in nature and arise from both endogenous and exogenous sources, blood specimens can be used to characterize exposomes. To explore the "blood exposome" and its connection to disease, we sought human blood concentrations of many chemicals, along with their sources, evidence of chronic-disease risks, and numbers of metabolic pathways. METHODS: From the literature we obtained human blood concentrations of 1,561 small molecules and metals derived from foods, drugs, pollutants, and endogenous processes. We mapped chemical similarities after weighting by blood concentrations, disease-risk citations, and numbers of human metabolic pathways. RESULTS: Blood concentrations spanned 11 orders of magnitude and were indistinguishable for endogenous and food chemicals and drugs, whereas those of pollutants were 1,000 times lower. Chemical similarities mapped by disease risks were equally distributed by source categories, but those mapped by metabolic pathways were dominated by endogenous molecules and essential nutrients. CONCLUSIONS: For studies of disease etiology, the complexity of human exposures motivates characterization of the blood exposome, which includes all biologically active chemicals. Because most small molecules in blood are not human metabolites, investigations of causal pathways should expand beyond the endogenous metabolome.
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 | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".