Lead contamination of raisins sold in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Graphite-furnace atomic absorption spectrometric analysis of raisins imported in 1993-95 from different countries into Canada showed that raisins from Turkey had unusually high lead levels. The Turkish raisins (n = 18) contained a mean (range) of 0.93 (0.056 3.1) mg kg(-1) lead, whereas five samples from Australia, South Africa, Iran, Mexico and Chile contained a mean of 0.0085 (0.005-0.010) mg kg(-1). Acid-washing studies showed that most of the lead in the Turkish raisins was on the surface of the fruit. The impact of eating the raisins on the dietary intake of lead was estimated for Canadians of different ages and sexes. For example, eating raisins from Turkey would increase the dietary intake of lead by 1-4-year-old children from 0.97 to approximately 2.2 microg kg(-1) body weight day(-1). The source of the lead was traced to use of a copper fungicide contaminated with high lead levels. Currently, lead levels in raisins imported from Turkey are low and approach levels in raisins from other countries. Uncontaminated raisins contain approximately 0.01 mg lead kg(-1), and a maximum tolerance for lead in raisins of 0.1 mg kg(-1) is achievable irrespective of the type of raisin or country of origin. Therefore, consideration should be given to proposing this level as a maximum tolerance for lead in raisins.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".