Environmental Exposure to Brominated Flame Retardants: Unraveling Endocrine and Mammary Gland Effects That May Increase Disease Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brominated flame retardants (BFR) are molecules added to consumer products to reduce fire hazards. They were banned in North America and Europe because of their persistence and biomagnification. However, BFR are still released in the environment due to continued use of products manufactured before restriction, and from waste and recycling processes of those products. As a result, they remain sources of chronic environmental and human exposure worldwide. BFR are well-characterized endocrine disruptors. They have been associated with a wide range of alterations in endocrine and reproductive systems both in humans and experimental models in vivo and in vitro. Paradoxically, the effects of BFR on mammary glands, whose development and carcinogenesis are mainly under hormonal dependency are poorly known. There is increasing weight of evidence that exposure to endocrine disruptors promotes breast cancer, especially if the exposure occurs during sensitivity windows. For the mammary gland, these windows include the perinatal life, puberty, and pregnancy, as important remodeling of the organ happens during those periods. The peak of exposure to BFRs happened during late 1990s and beginning of 2000s in most countries. Women who were pregnant at that time are reaching menopause while their daughters are 20-30 years old. It is thus important to better understand the effects of BFRs on mammary gland development and breast cancer to determine whether these women are more at risk. Thus, this review aims to propose a comprehensive review of data reporting the effects of exposure to BFR on female endocrine and reproductive systems, with a particular focus on mammary gland development and of a potential increased risk of breast cancer.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 teacher head, 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".