Occupational exposure limits in the context of solvent mixtures, consumption of ethanol, and target tissue dose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals are exposed to mixtures, and never to single chemicals. Depending on the composition of the elements of mixtures, significant toxicological interactions between the components may occur. These interactions are complex and often difficult to predict, ranging from synergistic to additive and subadditive interactions. The nature of the interactions needs to be evaluated as the target tissue dose of the active form of each chemical. PBPK modeling is an effective tool for determining the target tissue dose and evaluating these interactions when data are available for model development. Some of the interactions are pharmacokinetic in nature, affecting the disposition of other chemicals in the body. Other interactions can be pharmacodynamic in nature, altering the effects that other chemicals have on the organism. For many organic solvents, these interactions occur principally at the level of the metabolizing enzyme, cytochrome P-450 2E1 (CYP2E1). Many solvents are known to induce or inhibit CYP2E1, or both. Mixtures may be comprised of concomitant exposures to chemicals or from components encountered separately on-the-job, off-the-job, through the diet, and otherwise. Examples of mixtures where the exposure to separate components occurs off the job will be discussed, with special emphasis on ethanol consumption as a modifier of solvent pharmacokinetics. The present practice of the linear extrapolation of the toxicity of individual mixture components in the interpretation of occupational exposure limits will also be critiqued.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".