Industry sponsored harm reduction conference courts Indigenous peoples in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In November 2019, Jeff Gaulin, Director External Affairs with Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc (RBH) opened a conference in Calgary, Canada. RBH was not listed on any of the promotional material or the registration platform but Gaulin announced he was one of the driving forces behind the event and he asked the audience of Indigenous health professionals and advocates, “So why is the world’s largest maker of cigarettes assembling a harm reduction conference?”.1 It’s a good question. RBH’s audience was an impressive list of leading Indigenous scholars and public health professionals attending a Harm Reduction Forum at the Grey Eagle Resort and Casino to discuss supporting people impacted by addiction. In his opening remarks, Gaulin claimed that RBH was ‘transforming’, seeking an ‘unsmoked Canada’. He set cessation as the goal and listed the benefits and relative safety of vape products as smoke-free alternative technologies to smoking. As Cree-Metis scholars and settler allies, who have studied the tobacco industry and commercial tobacco use in Indigenous communities, we have deep concerns …
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".