Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies all forms of asbestos as carcinogens.Likewise, the International Labor Organization states that there is no safe use for asbestos.The World Health Organization urges cessation of the use of all types of asbestos in order to eliminate asbestos-related diseases (ARDs), such as asbestosis, benign pleural disease, cancers with sufficient evidence -(mesothelium, lung, larynx and ovary), and cancers with limited evidence -(pharynx, stomach, colon and rectum), as well as other diseases.Thailand has no active asbestos mines; all asbestos is imported, previously from Canada, and currently from Russia.In 2006, the Asian Asbestos Conference adopted "The Bangkok Declaration on Elimination of Asbestos and Asbestos-related Diseases."For some reasons, however, no ban on the import and use of asbestos has been implemented during the ensuing decade.Thailand still imports and uses chrysotile asbestos in industry, even though cases of ARDs have been diagnosed, albeit fewer than had earlier been predicted.Of course, the easy way to save Thailand from being accused of having ARDs is by doggedly denying the reported cases and simply claiming that Thailand is free of ARDs.The correct way to save Thailand from ARDs, however, is prevention.Tertiary prevention includes rehabilitating patients with ARDs.Secondary prevention involves improving ARDs diagnosis and treatment capacity and quality.Most importantly, primary prevention covers exposure reduction, import reduction, bans, proper renovation and removal/demolition of asbestos-containing buildings, and proper disposal of asbestos-containing waste.This article describes recent activities of the National Health Commission Office of Thailand, which are aimed at saving Thailand from ARDs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.005 |
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".