Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lead is still bad for your brain

neurofrontiers.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 192 posts

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#51

Post by rietta »

nottorp wrote: post #18
rietta wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Interesting. I'm obviously not from a shooting culture :)

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.

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#52

Post by aziaziazi »

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

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#53

Post by gregwebs »

cge wrote: post #45
gregwebs wrote: post #14

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…

>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 in…

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.

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#54

Post by rietta »

storf45 wrote: post #21
rietta wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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/

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.

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#55

Post by apercu »

deadbabe wrote: post #33
londons_explore wrote: post #27

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 e…

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.

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!

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#56

Post by gregwebs »

Robotbeat wrote: post #36
jvanderbot wrote: post #31

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.

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…

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/

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#57

Post by gregwebs »

FalseNutrition wrote: post #47
Robotbeat wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

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,…

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/

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#58

Post by londons_explore »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #38
londons_explore wrote: post #27

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 e…

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.

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.

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#59

Post by gregwebs »

avalys wrote: post #34
jvanderbot wrote: post #31

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.

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 w…

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.

Re: Lead is still bad for your brain

#60

Post by tzs »

wffurr wrote: post #22
Reason077 wrote: post #15

> “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…

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.

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?

Post reply on HN