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

Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 59 posts

Re: Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

#41

Post by iopuy »

userbinator wrote: post #34
jfim wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> instead of getting rid of the lead paint, they just painted over it This is actually one of the correct ways to deal with lead paint, assuming the "paint" is actually a proper encapsulant. See for example https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/lead/renovation_repa...

Ditto for the asbestos --- if it's not in a state where fibers of it can easily flake off and float around to be inhaled (technical term is "friable"), it won't do any harm.

Where is the source for this claim? I've always had a conspiracy theory that this is not true and that the "do not disturb and you'll be fine" theory was put forth to save all the home owners who would otherwise be told their homes are worthless or extremely expensive to properly fix. Even if the suggested reasoning is true, who is there to gurantee that a pervious owner did not improperly disturb the asbestos. My real estate agent toward me in all his years of experience in only one case did another ever admit to knowing of a problem where signing off on the proper lead paint/radon/asbestos warnings.

Re: Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

#42

Post by village-idiot »

prions wrote: post #3

Military bases are some of the most polluted sites in America. Lots of soil/groundwater contamination from BTEX and other poorly handled chemicals. However, Military bases provide a lot of research for remediation engineering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_Superfund_si... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016770120...

Don’t forget all the lead from rifle ammunition!

Re: Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

#43

Post by userbinator »

iopuy wrote: post #41
userbinator wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ditto for the asbestos --- if it's not in a state where fibers of it can easily flake off and float around to be inhaled (technical term is "friable"), it won't do any harm.

Where is the source for this claim? I've always had a conspiracy theory that this is not true and that the "do not disturb and you'll be fine" theory was put forth to save all the home owners who would otherwise be told their homes are worthless or extremely expensive to properly fix. Even if the suggested reasoning is true, who is there to gurantee that a pervious owner did not improperly disturb the asbestos. My re…

Where is the source for this claim?

The EPA, for one.

https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/protect-your-family-exposures-a...

The problem is inhalation of fibers, so if the fibers are not in the air and inhalable, they pose no risk.

Re: Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

#44

Post by coryrc »

Theodores wrote: post #18
ra1n85 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s as recent as anything built before 1986 when it comes to lead pipes: https://www.epa.gov/lead/protect-your-family-exposures-lead

In the UK we had lead in petrol until the year 2000 and most motorsports was sponsored by big tobacco in those days. So worrying about a little bit of lead in paint left over from 1986 kind of shows how far we have come. We did actually have lead free petrol before then in the UK and the government even made it significantly cheaper. But nobody wanted it, they chose to pay extra to put toxic lead in their cars. Damag…

Private plane owners in the USA still burn leaded fuel! It's the source of 50% of children's lead exposure.

Re: Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

#46

Post by metaphor »

userbinator wrote: post #43
iopuy wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the source for this claim? I've always had a conspiracy theory that this is not true and that the "do not disturb and you'll be fine" theory was put forth to save all the home owners who would otherwise be told their homes are worthless or extremely expensive to properly fix. Even if the suggested reasoning is true, who is there to gurantee that a pervious owner did not improperly disturb the asbestos. My re…

Where is the source for this claim? The EPA, for one. https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/protect-your-family-exposures-a... The problem is inhalation of fibers, so if the fibers are not in the air and inhalable, they pose no risk.

OSHA also conveniently provides references[1] to various relevant publications by EPA, NIOSH, DHHS, NCI, et al.

[1] https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/asbestos/hazards.html

Re: Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

#47

Post by adsfqwop »

ItsMe000001 wrote: post #37
Gibbon1 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how much dust it takes, one can google 'lead oxide MSDS' though. Occupational limits are 0.05mg/m3. What I've read is lead is really bad for neurological development. Isn't as bad for adult men. Acute toxicity isn't that bad. LD50 > 10000 mg/kg ( Rat ). Two problems with lead paint is, lead is an insidious poison. The body doesn't clear lead that well and it has a long half life. So small repeated exposu…

> Occupational limits are 0.05mg/m3. A note on those limits: The medical limit is zero, and that is not fear mongering but the result of ever more results over decades of research. In a little course I took from Tuft University about drinking water one of the four weeks was dedicated to the topic "lead". Two professors, one an engineer and one a medical professor taught the course. The medical professor made that poi…

Very interesting story. Thanks for this. I've had good success with DMSA myself, it was almost immediate relief when I started, but never got to this dumping stage as you describe, and now it feels like the progress has plateaued. Perhaps this is a similar situation.

I think I actually inhaled lead paint, which caused my particular problems. Sanding old furniture without a mask, not a good idea at all. Many many years ago. Young, and had no clue what I was doing :-/

I was wondering if you wouldn't mind helping with more details about your protocol? If so can you e-mail me at adsfqwop@gmail.com. Thanks a lot.

Re: Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

#48

Post by hudibras »

I see a few outdated comments here about the water at Camp Lejeune. In 2012, a law (Camp Lejeune Families Act) was passed to pay for medical care for servicemembers and their families who were affected by the water quality. Additionally, veterans who were stationed at Lejeune during that time now receive "presumptive service connection" for many ailments. This means they automatically receive disability pensions and medical care if they develop one of the ailments; they don't have to prove that they developed it as a result of the water exposure.

[0]https://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/camp-lejeune/index...

Re: Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

#49

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

gwbas1c wrote: post #45

I keep seeing reclaimed wood with pretty peeling white paint in high end places. Every time, I wonder if it's lead paint placed by a niave interior decorator.

Most reclaimed wood doesn't have any character so much of it is enhanced with faux aging treatments so they can charge more and have better uniformity.

Re: Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases

#50

Post by sumofzeros »

azernik wrote: post #35
userbinator wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ditto for the asbestos --- if it's not in a state where fibers of it can easily flake off and float around to be inhaled (technical term is "friable"), it won't do any harm.

And, in fact, any work to remove it can kick up dust and increase health hazards.

Which raises the following question: is it better to leave the potential source of problem around as long as it's not triggered, or is it better to temporarily activate it in order to remove it for good?
Post reply on HN