MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213419499 · doi:10.1289/ehp10359

Current Breast Milk PFAS Levels in the United States and Canada: After All This Time, Why Don’t We Know More?

2022· article· en· W4213419499 on OpenAlexaffabout
Judy S. LaKind, Marc-André Verner, Rachel Rogers, Helen M. Goeden, Daniel Q. Naiman, Satori A. Marchitti, Geniece M. Lehmann, Erin P. Hines, Suzanne E. Fenton

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Perspectives · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast milkPerfluorooctanePerfluorooctanoic acidBiomonitoringBreast feedingMedicineEnvironmental healthGeometric meanUrineAnimal sciencePhysiologyChemistryEnvironmental chemistryEndocrinologyBiologyPediatricsSulfonateMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite 20 y of biomonitoring studies of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in both serum and urine, we have an extremely limited understanding of PFAS concentrations in breast milk of women from the United States and Canada. The lack of robust information on PFAS concentrations in breast milk and implications for breastfed infants and their families were brought to the forefront by communities impacted by PFAS contamination. OBJECTIVES: ) compare measured/estimated milk PFAS concentrations to screening values. METHODS: We used three studies reporting breast milk concentrations in the United States and Canada We also estimated breast milk PFAS concentrations by multiplying publicly available serum concentrations by milk:serum partitioning ratios for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA). Measured and estimated breast milk concentrations were compared to children's drinking water screening values. DISCUSSION: Geometric means of estimated breast milk concentrations ranged over approximately two orders of magnitude for the different surveys/communities. All geometric mean and mean estimated and measured breast milk PFOA and PFOS concentrations exceeded drinking water screening values for children, sometimes by more than two orders of magnitude. For PFHxS and PFNA, all measured breast milk levels were below the drinking water screening values for children; the geometric mean estimated breast milk concentrations were close to-or exceeded-the children's drinking water screening values for certain communities. Exceeding a children's drinking water screening value does not indicate that adverse health effects will occur and should not be interpreted as a reason to not breastfeed; it indicates that the situation should be further evaluated. It is past time to have a better understanding of environmental chemical transfer to-and concentrations in-an exceptional source of infant nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP10359.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.277
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations67
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health PerspectivesSame topicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFrench-language works237,207