MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029393972 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-65449-4

In-vitro bioaccessibility and bioavailability of heavy metals in mineral clay complex used in natural health products

2020· article· en· W3029393972 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiumin Chen, Anika Singh, David D. Kitts

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTherapeutic Uses of Natural Elements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMitacs
KeywordsBioavailabilityHeavy metalsEnvironmental chemistryMineralChemistryIn vitroEnvironmental sciencePharmacologyMedicineBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commercial mineral clays that claim to have healing properties are also known to contain trace amounts of heavy metals, albeit the risk of consuming many of them is not entirely known. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the in vitro bioaccessibility and bioavailability of Arsenic (As), Cadmium (Cd) and Lead (Pb) in mineral clay samples collected from the Sierra Mountains (USA) using the Unified Bioaccessibility Research Group of Europe (UBM) method and the Caco-2 permeability assay, respectively. After UMB-gastric (UBM-G) digestion, As and Pb bioaccessibility were lower compared to Cd and decreased further in the UMB-gastrointestinal (UBM-GI) assay. Bioavailability estimates using the Caco-2 cell showed very low to non-detectable permeability for all 3 heavy metals. Thus, while initial heavy metal ranged from 3.8-17 ppm, 0.024-0.061ppm, and 5.8-20 ppm for As, Cd, and Pb, respectively, the bioavailability for these metals was reduced to very low levels that followed: non-detectable values of As, <0.007ppm of Cd, and <0.1ppm of Pb. Using UBM-digestion to mimic bioaccessibility, followed by Caco-2 cell bioavailability enabled us to conclude that in vitro assessment of heavy metal exposure associated with mineral clay-based natural health products does not pose a potential hazard to consumers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicTherapeutic Uses of Natural ElementsFrench-language works237,207