New Evidence on the Effects of Tea on Mercury Metabolism in Humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors present the results of an experiment in which they explored the role of tea in human metabolic processing of methylmercury (MeHg) from fish consumption. The experiment involved 50 scientists from the Collaborative Mercury Research Network (COMERN) who agreed to eat fish for 2 daily meals for 3 consecutive days. Half of the participants also drank 6 cups of tea daily, starting a week before and continuing through the experiment. The authors calculated the total amount of MeHg that each participant ingested from (1) the measured mercury (Hg) level in fish and (2) the quantity of fish eaten, and compared it with the total increases of Hg and MeHg levels in participants' blood. Results indicated that the control group metabolized roughly 100% of the available fish MeHg, whereas the tea-exposed group showed blood levels of MeHg at more than 40% than that available in the fish provided, suggesting that an external MeHg pool supplied part of the measured blood MeHg increase. The authors conclude that tea may accelerate the enterohepatic MeHg cycle and contribute to a temporary bioamplification of MeHg in the bloodstream.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".