No question that is true. But we are talking about ultratrace exposure and how toxic that is. Hence, officials insist no safe level. After sloppy research.
1 Like
And into everybody who lived in New York. Isnāt that when economic and social decay set in? Crime rose. The city eventually came very close to bankruptcy.
DB2
Sez you.
The Mayo Clinic begs to differ.
Complications: Exposure to even low levels of lead can cause damage over time, especially in children. The greatest risk is to brain development, where irreversible damage can occur. Higher levels can damage the kidneys and nervous system in both children and adults. Very high lead levels may cause seizures, unconsciousness and death.
The NIH would disagree:
Most pharmaceutical companies have set a limit for maximum daily intake of lead as 1.0 Ī¼g/g, however prolonged intake of even this low level of lead is hazardous to human beings. Occupational exposure also results in elevated blood lead levels. Increased blood levels are associated with delayed puberty in girls (Schoeters *et al* ., [2008](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4961898/#CIT0078)). There is no threshold value for the level of lead present in blood below which its concentration can be considered safe. Extremely low yet permanent levels of lead exposure were found to reduce the cognitive capacity of children (Needlemann *et al* ., [1990
The CDC would seem to disagree:
Protecting children from exposure to lead is important to lifelong good health. No safe blood lead level in children has been identified. Even low levels of lead in blood have been shown to negatively affect a childās intelligence, ability to pay attention, and academic achievement.
But feel free to have your kids drink out of lead pipes, even lined ones like in Flint. To each his own, I guess, even if it turns out mutants and cripples, apparently.
3 Likes
There is no acceptable level of lead.
I get that might be hard to understand but it is true.
They did not do the obvious experiment.
More PR than science. If they did the experiment itās likely a safe level would be found.
ZERO would be the āsafe amountā.
Science does not recognize the term zero. It is always less than the detection limit of the analytical method.
Usually presented at ND. None detected. Or in the trade, none dare.
1 Like
Never mind detectable limits, just make the obvious investment in far safer and more durable non-lead pipes. Or shall we haul a glass of water from every lead pipe served habitation into a lab for testing?
Sheesh.
d fb
7 Likes
Measurable lead in you blood serum is one thing. Measurable lead in your drinking water does matter. Lead is everywhere and may very well be present in your water source. Safe level may exempt some sources from extra treatment. And will set priorities and investment required. Anything less than that is absurd.
As to lead pipes probably good enough to run another line and stop using the lead pipe. I see no urgency to actually remove the pipe.
1 Like