Is Farm Milk a Risk Factor for Sarcoidosis? The Role of Farm Residence, Unpiped Water and Untreated Milk in Sarcoidosis: A Case-Referent Study in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Sarcoidosis is thought to be an aberrant immune response to environmental agents, with rural living as a risk factor. We aimed to determine if farm living, consumption of farm (untreated) milk, or untreated water increased the risk of sarcoidosis. Methods: In a case-referent design, patients aged 18–60 with pulmonary sarcoidosis together with referents with other chronic respiratory disease, diagnosed 1999–2005 in Alberta, Canada, were approached through their specialist physician. Participants completed a telephone questionnaire about farm living, use of untreated water and farm milk for each residence from birth to diagnosis. Exposures at birth, up to age five, and up to diagnosis were calculated. Results: The study included 615 cases and 1334 referents. The consumption of farm milk, but not of unpiped water or farm living overall, appeared to be consistently associated with sarcoidosis in a fully adjusted analysis. The association was present for farm milk used in the residence of birth (odds ratios (OR): 1.59, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.08–2.34) and persisted for those drinking farm milk to age five years (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.04–2.21), and for those drinking farm milk for >16 years to diagnosis (OR: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.04–2.15). The association with sarcoidosis was stronger when the referent was in the subgroup diagnosed with asthma but was present also with referents with other chronic respiratory disease. Among those whose family used farm milk at birth and to age 5 years, continued use of farm milk into adulthood increased the risk of sarcoidosis. Conclusion: We observed evidence of positive association between consumption of farm milk and sarcoidosis.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".