Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editors: The recent article on incidence of cancer after diagnosis of Parkinson's disease is strongly confirmatory that risk of melanoma is significantly increased whereas risk of smoking-related cancers is reduced, albeit nonsignificantly (1). This finding was thought to suggest a gene-environment interaction, and one hypothesis was given related to the detoxifying enzyme P450 D6. However, no clear biological explanation was given for the melanoma finding.It should be noted that smoking has been found inversely related to risk of melanoma in four observational studies (2-5). This is in contradistinction to the case for basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin, for which smoking is a risk factor (4). Again, no clear biological explanation has been provided. However, combining the results of ref. 1 with those of refs. 2-5, it seems that the same mechanism related to Parkinson's disease that reduces the risk of smoking-related cancers also increases the risk of melanoma. Perhaps this suggestion will be useful for both sets of studies.I receive funding from the UV Foundation (McLean, VA) and the Vitamin D Society (Canada) and expect funding from the European Sunlight Association.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".