Consumption guideline concerning cadmium in moose meat in northern British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Disturbed by reports of high concentrations of cadmium in large land mammals in Arctic Canada, community members wondered if they should eat less moose (Alces alces). STUDY DESIGN: Risk assessment modelling. METHODS: We measured cadmium concentrations in moose tissues donated by food hunters. As a conservative assumption, we took the upper limits of the 95% confidence intervals for the means. Cadmium intake from other sources we estimated using risk assessment models. Assuming a Tolerable Daily Intake of cadmium of 1 microgram per kg body weight per day, we calculated maximum allowable intakes of moose kidney, liver and muscle. RESULTS: For a non-smoking 70 kg adult, allowable monthly intakes are: 52 kg of moose muscle, or 137 g of kidney, or 516 g of liver. Allowable intakes varied by age and in proportion to body weight. Cigarette smokers (one to 1.5 packs per day) reach the limit even if they consume no moose at all. CONCLUSIONS: Adults may continue to eat moose kidney and liver occasionally and in moderate amounts, but children and cigarette smokers should not eat these organs at all. Consumption of moose muscle need not be restricted. Monitoring of cadmium concentrations in moose should continue.
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 | 0.001 | 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".