MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014155922 · doi:10.1080/19440049.2011.644588

Identification and quantification of the migration of chemicals from plastic baby bottles used as substitutes for polycarbonate

2012· article· en· W2014155922 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Additives & Contaminants Part A · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEffects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEuropean unionBottlePolycarbonatePolypropylenePulp and paper industryForensic engineeringMaterials scienceBusinessComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The results of a study on the analytical identification and quantification of migration of chemicals from plastics baby bottles found in the European Union market made of materials that are now present as substitutes for polycarbonate (PC) are reported. A total of 449 baby bottles with a focus on first age or sets of bottles were purchased from 26 European Union countries, Canada, Switzerland and the USA. From this collection, which contained several duplicates, a total of 277 baby bottles were analysed. The materials included different types of plastic such as PC, polyamide (PA), polyethersulphone (PES), polypropylene (PP), but also silicone, and from the United States a co-polyester marketed under the trade name Tritan™. The bottles were subjected to the conventional migration test for hot fill conditions, i.e. 2 h at 70°C. The simulant used was that specified in European Union legislation (2007/19/EC) for milk, i.e. 50% ethanol. In a first phase 1, migration was conducted since the scope of this investigation was a screening rather than a true compliance testing check. Second and third migrations were performed on selected articles when migrated substances exceeded limits specified in the legislation. In order to verify some materials, a portion of the bottle was cut to run an FT-IR fingerprint to confirm the nature of the polymer. The migration solutions in general showed a low release of substances. Results showed that bottles made of PP and silicones showed a greater number of substances in the migration solutions and in greater quantity. Chemicals from PP included alkanes, which could be found in >65% of the bottles at levels up to 3500 µg kg⁻¹; and benzene derivatives in 17% of the baby bottles and found at levels up to 113 µg kg⁻¹. Some substances were found on a regular basis such as plasticisers, esters and antioxidants (e.g. tris(2,4-di-tert-butylphenyl)phosphate, known as Irgafos 168. Some substances found were not included in the Community positive list, which means that those should not be found even in the first migration. Such substances included 2,6-di-isopropylnaphthalene (DIPN), found in 4% of the bottles at levels up to 25 µg kg⁻¹, 2,4-di-tert-butyl phenol (in 90% of the bottles at levels up 400 µg kg⁻¹). Moreover, bisphenol A (BPA) was detected and quantified in baby bottles made of PA, but limited to one brand and model specific (but labelled BPA free). Results for baby bottles made of silicone also indicated the presence of components, e.g. potentially coming from inks (benzophenone, diisopropyl naphtahalene - DIPN, which could come for example from the presence of instruction leaflets in the bottles). In the case of silicone, phthalates were also found in relevant concentrations, with levels for DiBP and DBP from the first migration test of 50-150 µg kg⁻¹ and DEHP at levels 25-50 µg kg⁻¹.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it