MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112802997 · doi:10.32920/cd.v5i1.1336

Consuming health, negotiating risk, "eating right"

2020· article· en· W3112802997 on OpenAlex
Barbara Parker

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Critical Dietetics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthConstruct (python library)Food choiceFemininityNegotiationEmpowermentEnvironmental healthPsychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyMedicineGender studiesSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the health-risk society, food choice is framed through public health nutrition and dietary risks which are produced through nutritionism and econutrition. Dietary guidelines recommend the consumption of functional foods to target bodily health (Scrinis 2013; Mudry 2010), whereas ecological nutrition pushes sustainable diets for planetary health (Mason & Lang 2017; Friedberg, 2016). These healthy eating discourses construct dietary food risks and reorient ideas about what constitutes good food and eating right. This paper explores how food risk discourses extend the moralizing of healthism through emerging public health nutrition discourses and the ‘new public health.’ I suggest that in considering what constitutes eating right, dietary health risks extend individual responsibility for bodily health to increasing responsibility for the health of our environment or ecosystems, exercised as choice over the foods one chooses to eat. The feminine-citizen-subject is particularly targeted because as Moore (2010) contends, hegemonic femininity is constructed through beliefs about health and the healthy body. Thinking through feminist intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991) however, I draw attention to the limits of choice and individualized approaches to managing food risk given the structural constraints of food and health.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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