A TRIUMPH OF SUBSTANCE OVER FORM IN HOW DISCRIMINATION LAW TREATS OBESITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent developments in human rights law at the Supreme Court of Canada suggest a new approach to the analysis of discrimination based on disability. Subjective perceptions of disability that lead to unlawful social responses to a physical or mental condition are now seen to disable an individual in the same way that an injury or illness may, regardless of the cause or the nature of the disability. Discrimination on the basis of disability is now being treated in the same way as discrimination on the basis of other grounds, such as race, religion or sex. The new approach to disability discrimination dramatically changes the structure of the legal analysis and with it, the nature of the onus on complainants . It also allows the recognition of conditions such as alcoholism and drug addiction as disabilities under human rights law. In this paper we apply the new jurisprudence to obesity and conclude that obesity can he a disability under human rights law. We test this conclusion by examining whether excluding obesity drugs from employee benefit plans could give rise to successful human rights complaints .
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 | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".