Anthophyllite Asbestos: The Role of Fiber Width in Mesothelioma Induction Part 1: Epidemiological Studies of Finnish Anthophyllite Asbestos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anthophyllite asbestos only occurs in a few parts of the world in sufficient quantities to be mined. The largest deposits of anthophyllite asbestos occur in Finland where it was mined for more than 75 years and very extensively used and distributed, anciently, for more than six millennia. Anthophyllite is one of the five minerals known collectively as amphibole asbestos. Studies of the effect of these five mineral fibre types when inhaled have shown that fibre width is an important determinant of mesothelioma induction. Only the “thinner” fibres or those with fiber diameter dimensional profiles predominantly less than 0.25 – 0.30 µm, are clearly mesotheliogenic. The “thicker” ones or those whose predominant widths are greater than these diameters do not appear to show an observable attendant risk of mesothelioma. Observations based on studies of at least, two “thick” forms of amphibole asbestos support these hypotheses. The one is Bolivian crocidolite; the other Finnish anthophyllite. The Finnish anthophyllite industry presents an important opportunity to study the robustness of the theory that fibre width is key to mesothelioma genesis as vast numbers of people in all sectors of the Finnish industry and their families have historically incurred massive fiber exposures sufficient to cause a gross excess of asbestosis. Nonetheless, in spite of these long term, high dose exposures clear evidence for a mesothelioma risk due to anthophyllite asbestos is still lacking.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".