Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(4)
These species represented 55% of total seafood intake.
* Models adjusted for maternal age, gestational age at blood draw, HDL concentrations, total seafood intake, parity and inter-pregnancy interval.
They included age, gestational age at blood draw, pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI, kg/m), parity, smoking during pregnancy, interval between previous birth and current pregnancy, duration of breast-feeding a previous child, total seafood intake at mid-pregnancy, and plasma concentrations of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and albumin.
When we looked at total seafood consumption, we found no association with risk of SGA births; the ORs for the intermediate and highest categories of total seafood intake were respectively 0.97 (0.54–1.76) and 1.02 (0.65–1.58), p = 0.9, compared with the lowest category.
Similar(56)
A total weekly seafood intake including two fish dinners would represent about 500 g of seafood.
In populations with low seafood intake, total urine arsenic and the sum of inorganic arsenic and methylated (MA and DMA) urine arsenic species are established biomarkers that integrate inorganic arsenic exposure from multiple sources (Calderon et al. 1999; Francesconi and Kuehnelt 2004; Hughes 2006; National Research Council 1999).
In U.S. adults with no seafood intake, median total urine arsenic is 3.4 μg/L.
From the literature and from an assessment of the total INUENDO study populations (Jonsson et al. 2005; Toft et al. 2005), age and seafood intake are known determinants affecting the POP serum level.
Separation of Risks and Benefits of Seafood Intake.
The findings support the role of arsenic on diabetes and the importance of controlling for seafood arsenicals in populations with high seafood intake.
From PK model estimates, the concentrations of selenium in the blood of a typical seafood consumer and a high-seafood consumer were approximately 93 and 224 μg/l based on daily seafood intake of 60.2 and 145.2 μg/day, respectively.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com