Risk Assessment of Dimethylfumarate Residues in Dwellings Following Contamination by Treated Furniture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, numerous cases of dermatitis induced by dimethylfumarate (DMFu) have been reported in Europe. DMFu has been used to prevent mold development in various items, although it is not registered as a biocide. In France, from October 2008 to December 2009, more than 100 cases were reported. Despite a ban on articles containing DMFu and the removal of potentially contaminated products, some people were still suffering from dermatitis or other health problems. The French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety was mandated to assess whether the existence in the past of DMFu-contaminated items in dwellings could continue to pose a threat to the health of inhabitants. A risk assessment was performed based on the classical risk analysis approach for environmental contaminants. Hazard assessment of DMFu with regard to its sensitizing properties was performed, based on human case reports collected in France between January 2009 and February 2010. For around half of the 132 individual cases reported, the causal link to DMFu was considered at least probable. An Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) local lymph node assay performed in a study on mice showed strong sensitizing potential for DMFu. Exposure was assessed by measuring DMFu in items sampled in preselected dwellings. These investigations demonstrated that DMFu exposure can persist after removal of the primary contaminated items. We therefore concluded that there was clearly a risk of skin reactions in patients previously sensitized to DMFu. Furthermore, the available data do not support the existence of significant health effects through the respiratory route.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".