AN EXAMINATION OF URANIUM LEVELS IN CANADIAN FORCES PERSONNEL WHO SERVED IN THE GULF WAR AND KOSOVO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A uranium bioassay program was conducted involving 103 active and retired Canadian Forces personnel. The total uranium concentrations in each of two 24-h urine collections were analyzed separately at independent commercial laboratories by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) and by instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA). The mean and median concentrations were determined to be 4.5 ng L(-1) and 2.8 ng L(-1), respectively, from ICP-MS and 17 ng L(-1) and 15 ng L(-1), respectively, from INAA. The total uranium concentrations were sufficiently low so that isotopic (238U:235U ratio) assays could not be performed directly from urine samples. Isotopic assays were performed on hair samples from 19 of the veterans participating in the testing. The isotopic hair assays were scattered around the natural 238U:235U ratio of 137.8, ranging from 122 +/- 21 to 145 +/- 16 (1sigma). Due to concern expressed in the media over possible depleted uranium exposure and long-term retention in bone, a single bone sample (vertebrate bone marrow) from a deceased member of the Canadian Forces was also analyzed for total uranium content and isotopic ratio by ICP-MS. The sample was shown to have 16.0 +/- 0.3 microg kg(-1) uranium by dry weight and a 238U:238U isotopic ratio of 138 +/- 4, consistent with natural uranium.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".