Daily repeated magnetic field shielding induces analgesia in CD‐1 mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have recently observed that a single exposure of mice to a magnetically shielded environment can attenuate opioid induced analgesia. Here, we report the effect of repeated exposures to the same magnetically shielded environment. Adult male Swiss CD-1 mice were placed in a Mu-metal lined box or an opaque Plexiglas box (sham condition) for 1 h per day for 10 consecutive days. Nociception was measured as the latency time to a foot lift/lick in response to an aversive thermal stimulus (hotplate analgesiometer, 50 +/- 1 degrees C) before and immediately after exposure. Multiple experiments were conducted in which thermal latency was tested on each of the 10 days or on days 1, 5, and 10, with some utilizing post-exposure testing only. It was shown that mice can detect and will respond to the repeated absence of the ambient magnetic field, with a maximum analgesic response occurring over days 4-6 of exposure and returning to baseline thereafter. The effect was robust, independent of pre-exposure and intermittent testing, and seems to be opioid related, since the results obtained on day 5 were similar to those from a 5 mg/kg dose of morphine and were abolished with the opioid antagonist, naloxone.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".