[HN Gopher] Lead is still bad for your brain
___________________________________________________________________
Lead is still bad for your brain
Author : lentoutcry
Score : 91 points
Date : 2025-04-11 08:15 UTC (14 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (neurofrontiers.blog)
(TXT) w3m dump (neurofrontiers.blog)
| damnitbuilds wrote:
| I live with children in a very old house. I would love to be able
| to measure my children's lead exposure and check things like
| window paint or house dust for lead content to see how big a
| problem there is.
|
| How do I do that?
| lmpdev wrote:
| I was working part time in copper fabrication and had some
| potential lead exposure
|
| You can ask your doctor, it was just a blood test
|
| It was free but I'm Australian
|
| Came back zero
| rietta wrote:
| You can request blood lead labs done through your doctor.
| People who work in industry and competition shooters and such
| will get that done to track.
| nottorp wrote:
| Competition shooters? They're not likely to touch lead,
| unless they fatally disobey shooting range safety rules.
|
| Now the people manufacturing the bullets for those
| competition shooters... they need lead tests.
| lionkor wrote:
| Doesn't some of the lead end up in the air?
| rietta wrote:
| It's not obvious, but practice enough at indoor ranges or
| reload your own competition ammo long enough. I have heard
| firsthand accounts from shooters who at some point weren't
| feeling well, got tested, and found out they needed to be a
| lot more careful with their lead exposure.
| nottorp wrote:
| Interesting. I'm obviously not from a shooting culture :)
| rietta wrote:
| Don't be hard on yourself. None of us are born with this
| knowledge :-)
|
| If you ever shoot, just remember it is a really good idea
| to wash your hands afterwards (using the dlead soap if
| possible). It is not a bad idea to have a change of
| clothes and to wash your clothes right away as well.
| mmillin wrote:
| A small amount of lead makes its way out of the chamber in
| the form of dust and fumes after shooting. It's quite easy
| to breath this in or get it on your hands and accidentally
| ingest it. Not enough to matter for someone who
| occasionally goes to the range, but significant for those
| shooting nearly daily, especially if shooting indoors.
| esseph wrote:
| A lot of primers have lead, and the dust ends up in the
| air.
| storf45 wrote:
| I've more recently have gotten into competition shooting and
| it is definitely something to be aware of because it can
| easily slip into concerning exposure levels. A Reddit group
| I'm in just had a guy find out he was over exposed. Here's
| the post:
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/nass/comments/1jtrzm7/lead_levels/
| rietta wrote:
| Congratulations on getting into competition! I started
| competing and intentionally practicing to get better about
| 4 years ago after a long time of being a safe but casual
| shooter. In the last year I have won some major Glock-
| sponsored GSSF matches - 1st place Amateur out of 140 at
| their national championship Talladega, AL. One more win and
| they are going to bump me to master class. I do not reload
| my own ammo so I have less lead exposure there. I am very
| careful with my range routine though. I have dedicated
| cross trainer shoes as my range shoes that I put in a
| plastic bag in the trunk of the car on the way home. I wash
| my hands with the dlead soap right away (have wipes in my
| bag for outdoor use). Finally, I put my clothes directly in
| the wash when I get home to reduce tracking anything inside
| particularly since I have small children at home.
| storf45 wrote:
| That's awesome and congrats on the success so far! Smart
| move on the lead precautions. I need to get some of the
| wipes for my bag!
| djohnston wrote:
| There are test kits for at-home usecases like paint and stuff -
| I think they're pretty reliable. For exposure, you can get
| blood tests at your GP. They might be absurdly expensive if
| you're in America, but maybe next time you travel to Europe you
| can pay privately and get a better deal.
| leguminous wrote:
| Some US states require lead screening (blood tests) for
| babies and toddlers. In that case they are covered by
| insurance. My son has been tested once so far.
| edwcross wrote:
| I'm in Europe and I see no way to get such tests. Other than
| lying and saying that you are at risk of contamination ("My
| hobby was glassworking"), I never saw any kind of test that
| you could pay yourself. Everywhere the government says "100%
| reimbursed", but you cannot even order one by yourself unless
| you have a good reason.
|
| So, I don't even know if it's expensive or not.
| giardini wrote:
| A friend got a routine physical and blood screening last
| week and to my surprise it included testing for lead
| acetate. I've never seen that before.
| jerlam wrote:
| In the US, you can get a lead test directly through Quest
| Diagnostics, without going through your physician or
| insurance, if you are near a testing center. Probably costs
| less too.
| hyencomper wrote:
| You can buy a Lead Test Kit and check it yourself
| https://www.epa.gov/lead/lead-test-kits
| oftenwrong wrote:
| For the house, hire a professional inspector who will use an
| x-ray fluoresence meter and dust test strips. You want a
| professional because they will be more thorough, and check
| things that you would not know to check.
|
| To test your children's exposure, you can have their blood
| tested. They may very well be exposed from sources other than
| your house
| matthewdgreen wrote:
| As the other commenter mentioned, you can buy at-home testing
| kits. But what you really want is to hire a lead testing and
| remediation company. We also live in an old house and we spent
| a huge amount of time applying "lead block" paint and replacing
| older windows (disastrous for lead dust because of the
| friction) and some older pipes. You may also want to test your
| outdoor soil, because older houses near roads will accumulate
| lead paint in soil due to years of traffic fumes, plus lead
| dust from the exterior of the house. Kids will sometimes eat
| dirt, don't ask me how I know. (Also: regular blood lead tests
| for your young kids! If you live in an older city this will be
| standard.)
|
| Also if you do any construction that disturbs old paint
| (demolition, window replacement) be careful to seal off the
| area using plastic, then clean it carefully with disposable
| wipes.
| throwup238 wrote:
| _> You may also want to test your outdoor soil, because older
| houses near roads will accumulate lead paint in soil due to
| years of traffic fumes, plus lead dust from the exterior of
| the house._
|
| You also want to do this if you're going to be growing
| anything edible in your front or back yard.
| theandrewbailey wrote:
| While that's great, the downside is that if you know there's
| lead in your house, you are obligated to clean it up, no matter
| the cost. That's why when old houses are sold or rented, they
| come with pamphlets warning of lead exposure, unless they are
| certified free of lead, but few want to pay for that.
| PeterHolzwarth wrote:
| If you wish to do some of your own tests, vs using a service,
| swab test kits have a reputation for being very poor quality
| and unreliable. This led this gal to start a kind of one-woman
| crusade on the topic:
|
| https://tamararubin.com/2023/01/dont-panic-these-lead-test-k...
|
| She recommends the american brand Scitus for swab test kits.
| schneems wrote:
| Look for a lead abatement company. The surface test kits only
| test the surface. A dedicated company should have a X-ray
| device that can determine if there is lead that has been
| painted over. Also get soil tests since houses with lead paint
| will have been scraped and that leads to lead going into the
| soil around the house.
| totetsu wrote:
| > If you know there's lead somewhere in your community, try to
| get involved and push for programs that limit its removal.
|
| Programs that to have it removed? I think.
|
| Also what would it be like to go through life knowing you had
| lead disrupting your brain.
| rufus_foreman wrote:
| >> Also what would it be like to go through life knowing you
| had lead disrupting your brain
|
| That's pretty much anyone born before 1980 or so. We breathed
| it every day and it coated every outdoor surface in every city.
| gregwebs wrote:
| This is a great article on the biology of lead exposure.
|
| Unfortunately on the exposure side research wasn't done and it
| propagates the myth that lead exposure is only an issue for those
| with lead pipes or lead paint. It's true that these are the main
| sources of severe lead exposure. However the article points out
| that there is no safe level of exposure to lead and these aren't
| the main ways we are exposed to lead in the US anymore.
|
| Today we are mostly exposed by low level contamination and
| thankfully this usually results in only mildly elevated lead
| levels. In a toddler sticking things in the mouth this could be
| almost any object. For adults it is food and drinks and the
| objects we use to make them.
|
| I know this because my toddler had elevated lead levels even
| though our neighborhood never had lead paint and our water does
| not have lead (I tested the water coming out of our faucets).
|
| The US has few laws against lead contamination and they aren't
| very stringent and there is little proactive enforcement. This
| non profit has ended up creating several recalls after reporting
| their own testing: https://tamararubin.com/category/recall/ Most
| of the recalls were products marketed for children such as baby
| bottles. But if a child eats off an adult plate there aren't any
| laws against that being contaminated.
|
| Some actions you can take are: * test children's
| lead levels and your own * make sure toddlers aren't
| playing with old toys (pre 1978 really risky, after 2010 is best)
| * stop buying things that have a prop 65 warning (I know prop 65
| isn't perfect, but it's often a lead warning). * Remove
| risky objects like the above from your children's classrooms.
| * For cooking and food and drinks use clear glass, stainless
| steel, and cast iron * avoid processed foods. There are a
| lot of particulars here about what is most likely to be high in
| lead. Chocolate, spices, salt, and cassava products are
| particularly high in heavy metals.
| dustincoates wrote:
| There can even be lead in fruit pouches:
| https://www.cdc.gov/lead-prevention/news/outbreak-applesauce...
|
| I'm far from crunchy, but this led me to start making my kids
| pouches. They're more expensive per pouch, which was a bit
| surprising, but it has the side benefits that we make the
| pouches together (quality time) and I can control what goes in
| (e.g., spinach, carrots, broccoli).
| gregwebs wrote:
| I am glad you are finding the time to avoid contaminated
| industrial processed food.
|
| In the apple sauce contaminations the apple sauce is always
| cinnamon flavored. When tested for various heavy metals,
| cinnamon usually has unsafe levels of heavy metal
| contamination, and lead is usually one of the metals:
| https://tamararubin.com/2024/12/six-cinnamon-products-chart/
|
| There is widespread contamination in spices because the
| machinery that processes most spices is made of metal with
| lead. Some of the lead may be unintentional contamination,
| but lead is also used intentionally because it is cheap and
| useful. I believe it is useful for grinding, etc because when
| used in an alloy the metal doesn't wear down as easily.
|
| So if you want to replicate those apple sauce products
| without heavy metal you would need to buy cinnamon sticks and
| grate them yourself.
| metalman wrote:
| I am a metal worker, and a foodie, living on a farm, and
| have experience and contacts in varios parts of the food
| industry, and have never come across lead, in any food
| relate items. As to alloying with lead, it has been used
| historicaly to make steal easier to machine "free machining
| steel" , but has no part in high strength or tool steels,
| and the steels used in grinding machines are going to be
| food grade..... even the grease in the bearings is food
| grade silcone grease....got some in the shop.... Good
| stainless wears for ever, so it is always used, at least
| here in Canada. So back to the lead and heavy metals, and
| how they are intentionaly added as "flavor enhansers" and
| coulorants, and basicaly how crazy people are and will do
| anything to steal a buck, but of course, not before passing
| it.right! personaly I eat only food, I make from individual
| single ingredients, prepared at home. The most complex food
| I buy is cheese, and very rarely icecream, thats it.And
| even then, there are things that just seem WRONG, like some
| grapes, that had an impossible "floral" aftertaste that
| lingered for hours......and now wont rot, sitting on top of
| the fridge. I could go on at some length, about all of the
| fraud in food, but Food is cheap, and there is no way to
| impliment a system with continious checks and
| investigations, that would guarantee quality and purity,
| without quardrupling the price, and perversly, increasing
| the incentive, to cheat.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| are there lead-free spice sources
| cge wrote:
| >stop buying things that have a prop 65 warning (I know prop 65
| isn't perfect, but it's often a lead warning).
|
| That would seem to mean to stop buying an enormous number of
| things. Extended to locations, it would mean not parking in any
| enclosed parking lot, or entering a number of different stores.
| It's not clear to me it's even possible to avoid everything
| with a prop 65 warning. Unfortunately, the bad incentives
| involved (private actions mean there is a risk for not putting
| a warning if some law firm can try to argue to a court in a
| civil action that you might be exposing people to something,
| while at the same time there is no penalty or cost at all to
| putting a completely unnecessary and bogus warning when you
| don't actually know of any risk) make it so that the safest
| option is just to put a warning.
| gregwebs wrote:
| Often times prop 65 is a lead issue. But perhaps most often
| it means that the company doesn't want to bother testing for
| lead rather than that the item definitely has lead.
|
| With all things, be strategic- the importance of avoiding
| prop 65 is relative to the likelihood of it ending up in the
| body- so items in your kitchen, your garden, that young
| children would touch.
| wahern wrote:
| There's a good episode of 99% Invisible that discusses Prop
| 65, including an interview with the original author of Prop
| 65, David Roe:
| https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/warning-this-
| podcast-...
|
| Yes, there are a lot of problems with Prop 65, but the
| podcast also highlights the benefits. Slapping a Prop 65
| warning on foodstuffs in particular significantly decreases
| sales, so it's not something you just do merely to avoid
| extortionate lawsuits. It incentives testing beforehand, and
| if you find contaminants to then reformulate. Notwithstanding
| the seeming ubiquity of Prop 65 warning labels in California,
| the salient effects are significant and largely hidden--you
| don't notice all the products that _don 't_ have the label,
| and don't _because_ they were reformulated to avoid the
| label. Prop 65 was one of the most significant drivers in the
| US of the removal of lead and other contaminants in products.
| The author of the bill admits the unintended consequences
| have been significant, especially harassment lawsuits, but he
| also argues there aren 't really good alternatives that could
| have achieved what Prop 65 has with a better cost/benefit
| ratio.
|
| Having an army of private lawyers vigorously prowling for
| contaminants in products is a pillar of Prop 65's success.
| You couldn't achieve what Prop 65 has with centralized
| regulation, not without creating tremendous (i.e. costly in
| time if not money) bureaucratic hurdles to creating and
| selling products in the market. Prop 65 is a kind of "ask for
| forgiveness" model, rather than "ask for permission". The
| former is generally more preferable if you want to preserve
| market dynamism and profitability, while also minimizing the
| risk of regulatory capture, and lax, haphazard enforcement.
| Moreover, you get the escape hatch of just adding a warning
| label, without having to take your product off the market.
|
| There is a centralized regulatory aspect to Prop 65--the
| State of California's list of contaminants--subject to
| typical bureaucratic and lobbying externalities. But on
| balance Prop 65 seems defensible, however imperfect. After
| listening to the podcast, which if anything leaned into Prop
| 65 criticism, I softened my views on Prop 65.
| leereeves wrote:
| That's an interesting behind the scenes point of view. But
| from a consumer point of view:
|
| > you don't notice all the products that don't have the
| label
|
| ...because there are too many with it, so people stopped
| caring. As a consumer, I would prefer a label that
| identified the major risks.
| harrall wrote:
| It's extremely rare that I come across products with a prop
| 65 warning. And in the rare chance you do see it, like on a
| bowl, you might learn that some bowl paints and glazes
| actually have lead in them!
|
| Second, information is not meant to be executed on
| directly... you are supposed to process information with
| critical thinking. Yes, enclosed parking lots give you
| cancer. Guess what, you can still park in it... In the same
| way that tuna contains a lot of mercury but I still eat
| tuna.... just less of it. I rather know and make an informed
| decision than not know anything at all.
| giardini wrote:
| What was the source of your "toddler's" hi lead levels?
| gregwebs wrote:
| Unfortunately I don't know. We have gotten rid of a lot of
| old toys and made sure our kitchen and plates are lead free
| and did some of that before a retest and that may have helped
| some. We are going to retest now that he is older and not
| sticking random stuff in his mouth much. He still eats a lot
| of sweet potatoes and I suspect that could be a source. I
| also just got some of the new easy to use lead testing kits
| and am starting to test some things with that but everything
| seems to come up negative so far.
| Reason077 wrote:
| > _"even if we were to completely stop mining for and using lead
| (which we aren't, since the lead-acid battery market is projected
| to increase in the next years"_
|
| I'm surprised by this. Modern cars (EVs, at least) have started
| replacing their 12V lead batteries with Li-ion, which are more
| durable, store much more energy, and of course are less toxic.
|
| But in any case, isn't the one advantage of lead-acid batteries
| their recyclability? Don't 99%+ of lead batteries get recycled
| into new lead batteries?
|
| Surely there can't be all that much new lead being mined for
| batteries?
| wffurr wrote:
| Most EVs have a 12V lead acid battery for standby power and to
| buffer the 12V accessory system. The solenoids to the traction
| battery are open when parked and the 12V battery closes them
| when the car is started.
|
| This does mean you might actually need a "jump start" for an EV
| if the 12V battery is drained, eg from leaving a light on or a
| fault in the 12V charging system.
| Reason077 wrote:
| Yes, EVs still have a 12V battery, but it's not always lead
| acid. Tesla, for example, switched from lead acid to Li-ion
| 12V batteries in all their models several years ago. So have
| Porsche, even in combustion models I believe.
| philjohn wrote:
| They are a lot more expensive though, at least aftermarket.
| Reason077 wrote:
| Yes but you have to replace them much less often. Kind of
| like LED vs incandescent light bulbs.
| tzs wrote:
| I assume that jump starting an EV takes a lot less current
| than jump starting an ICE due to no need to crank an engine.
| I'd guess it just needs enough to power the control
| electronics and close the solenoids to the traction battery?
|
| That raises an interesting question: is the power requirement
| low enough that you could make a hand cranked EV jump
| starter?
| philjohn wrote:
| You would be correct.
|
| It needs enough to open the contactors which allows the
| high voltage battery to send power via the inverter to
| charge the 12V
|
| My Lithium Ion jump pack is tiny, about the size of two
| iphones stacked on top of each other, and a single jump
| uses only a few %.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| That's because everything in a car is standardized into 12V,
| but the EV engine run on some hundreds of Volts. It would be
| dangerous to feed energy from the engine's battery into the
| rest of the car.
|
| As a sibling said, that doesn't require that you use a lead
| battery. The only requirement is that it's insulated from the
| main one.
| marcosdumay wrote:
| The lead batteries have always be 90%+ recycled (well, at least
| since any time we should care about). So the amount of mining
| is still proportional to the amount of batteries running
| around.
| MisterTea wrote:
| Radiation shielding. There's a lot of it in industry involving
| electron beam processing which produces x-rays. From printing
| machines using EB set ink, welding, melting, cross-linking, etc.
| A lot of those machines are lead shielded. Even at particle
| accelerator labs I've walked past stacks of lead bricks around
| beam lines (esp around the injector)
|
| Sucks that there's so much use for something so dangerous.
| Amazing the perils we have both dug up and invented in the
| pursuit of progress which is ultimately just making money.
| icameron wrote:
| >Now, acute effects of lead exposure are pretty clear. If someone
| were to chomp down on a piece of lead, it would result in
| seizures, coma, and possibly death.
|
| Tell that to anglers. Chomping down on lead is how to put weights
| on the line.
| tentacleuno wrote:
| Interestingly, Lead is still used in fuel for small aircraft.
| It's called avgas 100LL (Low Lead). I do worry about the effects
| of the fuel, given lead's health effects at low exposure levels.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Did you know, the world still mines more lead now than it did 50
| years ago, at the peak of 'put lead in everything' mania?
|
| To me, this says that we still put lead in too many things. Lead
| is still used for flashing in roofs. It's still used as a mould
| release when making plastics. It's still used in making dishware.
| It's still used in bullets.
|
| It's still used for all kinds of things which will one day end up
| in the environment and someone's drinking water.
| deadbabe wrote:
| When I posted here about how lead pipes during the Roman Empire
| was bad for the people I was met with a torrent of downvotes
| right here on Hackernews saying it wasn't that bad. I'm not
| optimistic about the future.
| Gigachad wrote:
| I feel the same about leaded solder for hobby electronics.
| alnwlsn wrote:
| At least leaded soldering wire is mostly contained in a
| large chunk, but I really don't like leaded solder paste.
| Which is like leaded peanut butter, and easily spread
| around.
|
| All the new parts are designed based on a lead free process
| anyways, so you might as well get used to working with
| lead-free solder to begin with.
| apercu wrote:
| I'm sure that contributed to some of the insanity, but they
| also cooked down wine in lead pots (sapa or defrutum) which
| caused lead to leach and act as a sweetener. I think they
| also used this in cooking but this is all from memory so
| trust but verify!
| foobarian wrote:
| IIRC they also used lead acetate as a sweetener. It boggles
| my mind that using enough of that to noticeably impact the
| flavor of food did not instantly kill people. Meanwhile
| here we are talking about micrograms!
| philjohn wrote:
| To be fair lead pipes aren't good, but the other uses in the
| Roman Empire were probably the cause of far more of the
| issues.
|
| Especially with hard water (of which the water in Rome is
| VERY hard[1] today, and if similar sources are used, it
| stands to reason it was very hard way back when) it forms a
| scale that drastically reduces the amount that leeches into
| the water.
|
| [1] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Map-of-water-
| hardness-of...
| theandrewbailey wrote:
| In my mind, there's only two acceptable uses of lead: radiation
| (x-ray, gamma ray) shielding, and ICE batteries. Even then, I
| expect there's much increased demand for those things (and
| thus, the lead to manufacture them) from 50 years ago.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Even ICE batteries is IMO not a valid use. Lithium batteries
| are better by almost every metric, and now nearly every model
| of car battery has a drop-in compatible lithium
| battery+controller too, so there isn't even an excuse for
| vehicles currently on the road.
|
| Lead batteries contain not just lead, but the H2SO4 needed to
| dissolve large amounts of it and transport it through
| watercourses when the plastic case inevitably cracks.
| alnwlsn wrote:
| No, but they are dead simple aren't they? Charging them is
| easy. They can handle super high discharge rates no
| problem. Construction is simple, only lead, sulfuric acid,
| and plastic. The materials are cheap, abundant, and
| recyclable. The battery chemistry is old and well
| understood. They aren't made from flammable materials, and
| if one does catch on fire, you can extinguish it using a
| normal fire extinguisher. They work well at low
| temperatures, and can be put in storage long term fully
| charged. About the only downside is they can make hydrogen
| if overcharged, and are heavy.
|
| Too bad they use lead, because it would be too good to be
| true otherwise. You have to treat lithium batteries like a
| spoiled child in comparison.
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| Lead acid batteries still offer far better performance in
| cold conditions, voltage stability, burst current capacity,
| and ease of charging.
|
| You can overcome most of these issues, but it comes at a
| significant cost. I think it could be worth it, especially
| when you factor in that the lithium ion battery could
| theoretically pay for itself in longer lifespan, but most
| buyers would prefer the cheap, familiar, reliable option.
| copperx wrote:
| Don't scream at me, but what about non-industrial, hobby
| soldering?
|
| AFAIK soldering is not hot enough to vaporize lead.
| teamonkey wrote:
| Soldering contamination mainly comes from ingestion.
| Touching it, having small particles of lead burn off and
| land on your skin, then in your mouth (or eyes, elsewhere).
| Even so, by washing hands and wearing light PPE it's fine.
|
| Because if that, many people consider the ban of industrial
| lead solder to be over-zealous. But that ban is in place to
| stop _consumers_ being contaminated if they somehow touch
| the board. Also to minimise lead entering the water table
| once it is discarded.
| therein wrote:
| I love my Kester 40% lead solder and always use gloves
| when using it. Probably an overkill since I have been
| soldering since 90s.
| Braxton1980 wrote:
| We need more government regulations and enforcement to solve
| this problem. There's no other solution in a capitalist
| environment
| krapp wrote:
| The US is probably going to put _more_ lead into everything
| because RFK Jr believes it builds character or something.
| ifyoubuildit wrote:
| His whole thing is about environmental toxins probably
| being the cause of most of our problems, so no that doesn't
| seem likely.
| mort96 wrote:
| Has he specifically included lead in a list of "toxins"?
| If not, "toxins" is such a vague term that it can include
| or exclude just about anything.
| Avshalom wrote:
| https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2025/04/11/cdc-
| denies-mi...
|
| Yeah, about that.
| Fomite wrote:
| https://www.cbsnews.com/news/milwaukee-schools-lead-
| poisonin...
|
| This aged wildly poorly.
| alnwlsn wrote:
| Don't forget about lead in brass and free-machining steel. Got
| a normal metal? Now it has lead.
| jvanderbot wrote:
| There's a "acceptable minimum level of lead" in most processed
| foods such as baby food.
|
| This is because food cannot be heavily processed without some
| heavy metals leeching in, according to a food safety guy who is a
| long time friend.
|
| It is completely mind boggling we let that happen.
| avalys wrote:
| What do you think the regulatory standard should be set to? It
| is currently set to 10 ppb (parts per billion).
|
| Do you think it should be 0? 0.0000 ppb? No detectable lead
| whatsoever? What do you do if detection technology improves and
| the minimum detectable level decreases?
|
| Even if you go live totally off the grid with your child and
| grow your own vegetables in your backyard with completely
| natural ingredients, you will still end up with some level of
| lead - which is a natural ingredient itself, after all.
|
| At some point, you have to set a threshold and say that any
| lead below this level is not worth the cost of removing it or
| avoiding it. Would you pay 10x more for baby food at a 1 ppb
| level instead of 10 ppb? Do you think that would produce a net
| benefit for society?
| Robotbeat wrote:
| Granite has lead at levels of 30,000ppb, fwiw. Lead is a
| naturally occurring mineral. the only way to fully eliminate
| lead would be to live in a fully synthetic environment,
| everything grown hydroponically, etc.
| https://www.science.smith.edu/~jbrady/petrology/igrocks-
| tool...
| FalseNutrition wrote:
| Not only that. Life accumulated those over the eons, as the
| rocks eroded, the useful metals got saved by life, and the
| rest was washed down. So the natural levels are way higher.
| Life is good at hoarding these "heavy metals".
|
| People in this thread
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43631251 have been
| arguing that these people must have been some top class
| elite, and I totally get it. They are too good looking.
| But, that's how it was. The typical of the past would be
| above celebrity looks today. A lot of curent idols look
| _stunted_ in comparison.
| gregwebs wrote:
| Another poster linked to this study that states [1]
| Existing rates of lead absorption are about 30 times
| higher than inferred natural rates
|
| [1] https://sci-
| hub.se/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14334042/
| Robotbeat wrote:
| That's fully consistent with the idea that there has to
| be some threshold for lead in food because it's literally
| naturally occurring in the soil.
|
| In fact, to fully avoid lead, you'd basically have to
| carefully grow food hydroponically. Certified Organic
| mineral fertilizers like basalt rock dust (which provide
| calcium, phosphorus, and potassium, etc) would obviously
| not be okay if you wanted to eliminate all lead, as
| basalt contains 7.5ppm lead, comparable to the average in
| the Earth's crust.
| FalseNutrition wrote:
| What method was used to infer the natural rates?
| gregwebs wrote:
| Most of the lead in baby food comes from the industrial
| processing. So if you grow your own apples and make your own
| apple sauce and don't put industrial processed spices in it
| it's likely not going to have any detectable lead in it.
|
| The problem with our standards for baby food isn't
| necessarily that they are too high. The problem is that there
| is little enforcement. You have know way of knowing you will
| be getting 10ppb or be the unlucky one getting the large
| dosages that eventually got reported to the CDC. For much of
| the rest of the food supply the standards do allow for too
| much lead.
| jvanderbot wrote:
| I would like it to be "equal or less than a standard
| reference food of similar ingredients" which would penalize
| adding lead or heavy metals via the processing itself instead
| of naturally occuring.
| Robotbeat wrote:
| There's also lead in any random patch of dirt or gravel because
| it occurs naturally in granite at about 30 parts per million
| (and usually less in other rock types).
| https://www.science.smith.edu/~jbrady/petrology/igrocks-tool...
|
| The "action levels" of lead in food (fruits and vegetables,
| etc) are 10 parts per BILLION, and stuff less than that is
| considered acceptable, because otherwise freaking everything
| would test positive because food grows in dirt which contains
| minerals from rocks.
|
| Lead has higher allowable levels in things like nuts, again
| because they are grown in the dirt and have a lot of minerals.
| I think peanuts and stuff have 100-900ppb lead.
| https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12011-024-044...
| gregwebs wrote:
| Another poster linked to this study that states [1]
| Existing rates of lead absorption are about 30 times higher
| than inferred natural rates
|
| It's not the case that all soil is contaminated with lead
| that then ends up in high levels in food. Top soil is
| composed mostly of decomposed plants. Plants only take up a
| small fraction of the lead in the soil. So the contamination
| of the top of the soil must reach some threshold. Due to
| leaded gasoline, there is widespread lead contamination in
| top soil, and I have read many parts of the world still use
| leaded gasoline in agriculture. Without human activity my
| understanding is that most soil samples would test very low
| or non detect and most food would as well. In some types of
| food (I know this is true of spices and to a lesser extent
| chocolate), much of the lead in food can come from processing
| phases after it is already harvested.
|
| We certainly know it is the case that food produced by one
| producer varies dramatically in lead levels from another due
| to testing. Some of that may be attributed back to the soil,
| but it still goes to show that we could be testing soil
| levels and avoiding growing in lead contaminated soil.
|
| Thank you for those links. For the nut study, they are
| studying finished products bought in the supermarket, so it
| is possible that some of the contamination may come from the
| processing (removing shells, etc) which is pointed out in the
| study itself.
|
| [1] https://sci-
| hub.se/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14334042/
| Robotbeat wrote:
| I wouldn't call it contamination if it's literally just
| from natural soil and minerals sourced from fairly typical
| rocks.
|
| I wasn't claiming heightened lead exposure is good, just
| responding to those who seem shocked that we tolerate some
| low level of lead in foods. Obviously leaded paint is dumb
| and we STILL, for some reason (well, I know the reason, but
| it's not a good one imo), allow leaded aviation fuel. In
| fact, fully unleaded fuel was not allowed in a very large
| fraction of general aviation aircraft until recently
| because the FAA dragged their feet in approving lead free
| fuel mixtures for heritage general aviation aircraft (which
| is a large fraction of the general aviation fleet since
| lawsuits and the FAA have made newer aircraft just
| obscenely expensive), which is still very rare in small
| airports.
|
| It is, ironically, the downstream effect of improper and
| over-regulation of general aviation.
| DonHopkins wrote:
| There are people who think it suddenly stopped being bad for your
| brain? They must be chewing on paint.
| Gigachad wrote:
| The article is more about the fact that the exposure risk
| hasn't gone away after banning it in fuel and paint, and that
| it's still everywhere and contaminated the soil.
| DonHopkins wrote:
| No, apparently people really are still chewing on paint.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43656465
| aziaziazi wrote:
| What methodology is used for lead testing ? I eared about blood
| sampling but that quote from the article make me wonder the
| effectiveness:
|
| > the half-life of lead in the blood (meaning the amount of time
| needed for the concentration to drop to half) is relatively
| short, at only 28 days, that's not the same as the half-life in
| the body. Some of the lead in the blood will not be eliminated,
| but it will actually go into the soft tissue, i.e. kidneys,
| liver, brain, where the half-life is a few months, and more
| annoyingly, into the bones, where the half-life is between 10 to
| 30 years. What's more, from here, lead can leach back into the
| bloodstream, from where it can once again get into the soft
| tissue and cause more damage
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-04-11 23:00 UTC)