Examination of marine and vegetable oil oxidation data from a multi-year, third-party database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fish oil (FO) products constitute good sources of omega-3 fats. Oxidation data from a large third-party database of 1900 + globally-sourced FO samples were assessed. In FO products, for peroxide value (PV), 13.9% exceeded 5 mEq O2/kg (2.2% >10); for acid value (AcV) 2.1% exceeded 3 mg KOH/g, while for p-anisidine value (pAV) in unflavoured oils, 6.1% exceeded 20, (3.8% >30), and 8.8% exceeded TOTOX limits (26). Additionally, we compared FO with other dietary oils. The FO median PV was similar to those of algal and sunflower oils, 4.8-fold greater than krill oil, and 5.2-fold less than extra-virgin olive oil. The median pAV differed non-significantly among oils. The FO median AcV was similar to those of algal and extra-virgin olive oils, 3.4-fold greater than sunflower oil, and 11.9-fold less than krill oil. This study has provided new insight that retail FO products predominantly meet regulatory guidelines and are comparable in oxidative status to other dietary oils.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".