MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2737265134 · doi:10.3389/fnut.2017.00030

Risk–Benefit Assessment of Monomethylmercury and Omega-3 Fatty Acid Intake for Ringed Seal Consumption with Particular Emphasis on Vulnerable Populations in the Western Canadian Arctic

2017· article· en· W2737265134 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lena Gmelch, Holger Hintelmann, Brendan E. Hickie, Hermine Kienberger, Gary A. Stern, Michael Rychlik

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Nutrition · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaTrent University
FundersDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstArcticNet
KeywordsArcticConsumption (sociology)Omega 3 fatty acidEnvironmental healthThe arcticRisk assessmentEnvironmental scienceRisk analysis (engineering)GeographyMedicineFatty acidEcologyOceanographyBiologyComputer scienceBiochemistryDocosahexaenoic acidPolyunsaturated fatty acidComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many northern Inuit communities rely on traditional food as major source of nourishment. An essential part of the traditional Arctic diet is marine mammals such as ringed seals or beluga. Being top predators, these animals are often highly contaminated with various toxins. In contrast, some tissues of marine mammals are also characterized by high amounts of n3-PUFAs (omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids). Here, we try to balance the risks associated with the consumption of different tissue types of ringed seals in terms of the neurotoxin monomethylmercury (MMHg) with the benefits of consumption due to high n3-PUFA concentrations. Fetuses are at the highest risk of neurological impairments because MMHg can easily cross the placental barrier. Therefore, women of childbearing age served as an indicator population for especially susceptible subpopulations. We calculated maximal weekly maternal portions sizes if mutual consumption of muscle and blubber tissue or liver and blubber tissue was assumed. Those weekly portion sizes resulted in an estimated overall IQ point gain of infants of 0, whereas the consumption of liver or muscle tissue without blubber could lead to an IQ loss. In contrast to former studies, our data do not generally prohibit the consumption of liver tissue. Instead, our results suggest that a maximal weekly consumption of 125 g liver tissue together with 1 g of blubber tissue is acceptable and does not lead to neurological damages in the long term. Similarly, the consumption of maximal 172 g muscle tissue can be balanced by the mutual consumption of 1 g blubber tissue.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NutritionSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207