World Health Organization increases its drinking-water guideline for uranium
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The World Health Organization (WHO) released the fourth edition of Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality in July, 2011. In this edition, the drinking-water guideline for uranium (U) was increased to 30 μg L(-1) despite the conclusion that "deriving a guideline value for uranium in drinking-water is complex, because the data [from exposures to humans] do not provide a clear no-effect concentration" and "Although some minor biochemical changes associated with kidney function have been reported to be correlated with uranium exposure at concentrations below 30 μg L(-1), these findings are not consistent between studies" (WHO, Uranium in Drinking-water, Background document for development of WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, available: , accessed 13 October 2011). This paper reviews the WHO drinking-water guideline for U, from its introduction as a 2 μg L(-1) health-based guideline in 1998 through its increase to a 30 μg L(-1) health-based guideline in 2011. The current 30 μg L(-1) WHO health-based drinking-water guideline was calculated using a "no-effect group" with "no evidence of renal damage [in humans] from 10 renal toxicity indicators". However, this nominal "no-effect group" was associated with increased diastolic blood pressure, systolic blood pressure, and glucose excretion in urine. In addition, the current 30 μg L(-1) guideline may not protect children, people with predispositions to hypertension or osteoporosis, pre-existing chronic kidney disease, and anyone with a long exposure. The toxic effects of U in drinking water on laboratory animals and humans justify a re-evaluation by the WHO of its decision to increase its U drinking-water guideline.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it