Health and Environmental Risks from Lead-based Ammunition: Science Versus Socio-Politics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lead (Pb) is toxic and is banned from gasoline, paints, and various household items in most developed countries. Lead ammunition, however, is still widely used for hunting and shooting, and is now likely the greatest, largely unregulated source of lead that is knowingly discharged into the environment in the USA (Health Risks from Lead-Based Ammunition in the Environment—A Consensus Statement of Scientists 2013; U.S. Geological Survey 2013). For decades, poisoning from spent lead ammunition was mainly regarded as a disease of waterfowl (Bellrose 1959), but it also puts at risk the health of raptors, scavengers, and other terrestrial species, including humans who frequently consume hunted game (Fig. 1). Scientists across North America and Europe have published consensus statements on the risks to wildlife, the environment and human health from the use of lead ammunition, and the need for its replacement by non-toxic alternatives (Health Risks from Lead-Based Ammunition in the Environment—A Consensus Statement of Scientists, 2013; Group of Scientists 2014). This is now a pressing One Health issue.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
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 it