MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378605354 · doi:10.1353/cye.2010.0035

Slow Death by Rubber Duck

2010· article· en· W4378605354 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Erica Phipps

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren Youth and Environments · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicScience Education and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children, Youth and Environments Vol. 20 No. 1 (Spring 2010) ISSN: 1546-2250 Slow Death by Rubber Duck Smith, Rick and Lourie, Bruce (2009). Canada: Alfred A. Knopf Canada; 323 pages. $32.00 (CAN). ISBN 9780307397126. Toxic chemicals can be found not only in the environment that surrounds and sustains us, but inside each one of us. Smith and Lourie bring this point home by demonstrating—with a dozen or so off-the-shelf products and a few days spent holed up in an apartment—the role that consumer products play in determining our “body burdens” of toxic substances such as phthalates, Bisphenol-A, mercury and the antibacterial chemical Triclosan. In a semicontrolled experiment on themselves, the authors use laboratory test results of their before-and-after blood and urine levels to illustrate that simple everyday actions such as eating tuna, using fragranced personal care products and drinking from polycarbonate plastic containers can significantly increase a person’s body burden of toxic chemicals associated with cancer, disruption of the hormone system and a range of other health concerns. While much of the information in the book is not new, Smith and Lourie bring a fresh perspective to the daunting and disturbing issue of the health effects of the many chemicals used in everyday consumer products. With fascinating historical highlights of how substances such as brominated flame retardants have come to be incorporated into sofas and electronics and, ultimately, shed into the house dust that settles on the floors where our children play, the authors reveal the seemingly cavalier manner in which companies have placed our children’s delicate brains and hormone, immune and respiratory systems at risk for the sake of product “enhancement” and market share. With an engaging, rambling journey through the history of chemicals in consumer products, Smith and Lourie, both veteran environmental activists, successfully deliver their two intended “take home” messages. The first is that our choices as consumers do have 345 a profound effect on the levels of chemicals in our bodies. In one experiment, for example, Smith increased his urine levels of Triclosan from less than 3 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) to a whopping 7,180 ng/mL after using a handful of antibacterial products, including soap, dish liquid, toothpaste, shave gel and deodorant, for just two days. Their second take-home message is that it is impossible to completely avoid these toxic exposures given their ubiquitous nature: we must take action at the societal level. Despite the serious nature of the issues it addresses and the legitimate concerns it raises, Slow Death by Rubber Duck is a refreshing break from the often depressing books that line the environmental shelf at the local bookstore. While conveying an urgent need for societal action to curb the toxic content of consumer products, the authors’ insider description of recent regulatory gains and the related upsurge in public interest impart a sense of hope and momentum. While not as groundbreaking as Theo Colborn and colleagues’ expertly-crafted exposé of endocrine disrupting chemicals, My Stolen Future, Smith and Lourie’s book is a welcome addition to the growing tradition of books that translate complex scientific and biomedical concepts into terms that ordinary people can understand and incorporate into their daily lives. Although perhaps worth its inaccuracies given its attention-grabbing power, the book’s title—Slow Death by Rubber Duck—strikes me as somewhat unfortunate. If our kids’ bath toys were indeed made of rubber, a natural substance, we would have less to worry about. Also, the title’s focus on death, although certainly an outcome we want to avoid, belies the perhaps more unsettling concerns about the insidious, often subtle effects that toxic chemicals can have on the delicate architecture and functioning of the brain and other organ systems of the developing fetus and child. The real challenge is getting a scientific grasp of the difficult-to-pin-down chronic effects of the complex mixtures of low-dose synthetic chemicals we are all exposed to on a daily basis, from conception through old age. This book should be read by parents, grandparents, educators, health professionals, activists, industry leaders, shopkeepers, young people, and lawmakers alike. Because of its accessibility...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.028

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildren Youth and EnvironmentsSame topicScience Education and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207