This is a very sore subject with me, so pay close attention. I have followed this situation with lead paint for many years and I believe the problems with lead in the blood stem mostly from automobiles not from house paint. I am not making any of this up. The information I am about to print comes from articiles I have read in fine print on back pages and not on front headlines.
When people talk about lead in inner cities, they always talk about paint in old buildings. But, they never tell you about the trillions of gallions of gas that have been put in the air over the last 100+ years. And that the lead in all the gas has fallen onto the ground. Are inner city children eating paint? I tend to doubt it. Are they playing outside in the street and in the dirt and putting there hands in there mouths! I believe this to be exactaly what happens. I have also read (on back pages) that since the lead has been removed from gas that the incidence of lead in children has dropped dramatically! No suprise on this face!
I do have a recent firsthand report from a friend who’s very young children got sick and they found out they have minor lead poisoning. He called me and wanted all the paint removed from inside and outside his wood Victorian house. I calmed him down and asked him what his children were doing when this happened and he said “They were outside playing in the DIRT” I had him test his soil around his house and guess what? High concentrations of lead! I rest my case. Now, I understand that in some cases like this some of the lead came from the constant rain washing off the paint into the dirt around the house. But I also believe stripping the entire inside and outside is alittle extreme. I believe this thread should be a very hot topic. Your comments please. Jim Facinelli Restorations Unlimited Inc.
Replies
Jim:
Believe you have hit the nail on the head, and as a conservative Republican I was absolutely off the wall when I realized we had been conned. Live in an older (1860's) house and became paranoid about lead when we had our first child. The current CDC guidelines is for lead testing every year until age six, and desired levels are <= 10 Mcg/DL. Well my child first tests at 7 and I still want to move out. Then, decided to do some basic research. In children tested between 1976-1980, 88.2% had levels over this supposed "safe" level. By 1988-1991, this had dropped to 8.9%, and by 1991-1994 to 4.4%. Did this sudden drop come from removing lead from paint, statistically no way in h$%^. This came largely from removing lead from the atmosphere, where we breath it in, where it settles in the soil, where it contaminates the food we eat (and if from open reservoirs, the water we drink). Lead is bad news; even the "safe levels" are a question of balancing economics and public health; "evidence exists for subtle effects at lower levels"(i.e.: study shows reading level differences in schoolage children with levels of 5). This was big oil wanting to increase their octane ratings a cheaper way, by adding lead. They reduced engine knock by knocking off childrens' brain function. Then they added MBTE and caused massive aquifer pollution nationwide( I won't even get into what a cluster-f&*% that move was and will turn out to be... )I am a staunch republican, but this is one time that I really think the american public got screwed.
Regards,
Rework
Edited 9/22/2002 1:43:41 PM ET by Rework
Edited 9/22/2002 1:46:32 PM ET by Rework
It was good to hear your response. Sometimes I think I am the only oddball out here. I am glad you have all the evidence to back it all up. I never saved any. Only in my head! Sometime soon I will start a thread an my other cases. like asbestos, what a joke that is. Indoor air pollition, caused by all this crap about tight houses. We burn fossil fuels and make our houses tight. Fill our homes with carpet filled with fermaldahyde, wash our carpets and create indoor mold and then wonder why we are all sick, have allergies and rashes! See don't get me started! Jim p.s. I am also a republician!
Jim:
Hope you and I are not the only oddballs. Right from the CDC website,
Average BLLs in the United States have fallen dramatically since the 1970s. Whereas in 1976-1980 the average BLL in children was 15ug/dL, in 1991-1994, the average was 2.7ug/dL.
Remember, under 10 is now the "safe" level. The figures in my first posting were from a CDC epidemiology report on the situation. Sure, a main source of current exposure is lead paint, but the main source of past exposure was the damn gasoline. Even living in "lead free" homes, newborn children are both inheriting these lead loads from their mothers and from the environment....
Regards,
Rework
In the pasr, it was from lead added to the atmosphere via the gasoline tank.
Now tho', it is from lead dust that we breathe or ingest. Trying to remove it when it is not loose in the first place is idiotic. Most kids don't chew on the woodwork.
Some do tho', when they have poor nutrition, natural cravings kick in but with a perverted direction and it is called PICA. The sweet taste of lead entices them to continue and they can be poisoned if any loose chips exist. Basically, keeping a clean house will take care of it, along with regular hand washing. The current bad cases involve things like actively eating it or living in a swirl of lead dust.Excellence is its own reward!
I have read, but can't prove, that the high lead content in soil around older houses is from the decades oif allowing paint scrapings to fall on and work into the soil.
There's no question that a big part of the lead problem was from leaded gasoline, but I don't see where that elimnates lead based paints and other finishes with lead as potentially significant problems.
The hazmat types I talk to stress the importance of dusting around old double hung windows, on the grounds that the constant rubbing of surfaces creates lead laden dust and is the highest source of lead in older houses.
So maybe some of that drop in lead poisoning levels also results from growth of the vinyl window industyry!
Bob, What you say is possible but, the edges of the sash where not painted and neither where the edges of the window stops that held them in! The growth of the vinyl industry was because people wanted tighter houses and hate to have some air blowing in around the sash. Plus no one wants to paint there houses anymore. So we created a vinyl throw away unit. Use it 10 to 20 years and then buy a whole new unit! I have 57 windows in my 100 year old home and they are all original! I paint them every 12-15 years instead of replacing them and they still work great. Jim
> the edges of the sash where not painted and neither where the edges of the window stops that held them in!
Actually the sash and stops often do get painted over and over again, until most of them can't be opened or closed without the aid of a bottle jack.... ;-)
-- J.S.
Wait!
I'm 41. You guys mean to tell me that if they took the lead out of gas before I was born I could of been a rocket scientist or President of the Northern Hemisphere and instead I'm a carpenter?!! Who do I sue?
Go to Rhode Island .......... the gov't is suing the paint manufacturers ........... another rip off similar to the tobacco suits.
Bob--
Wasn't trying to minimize the risk of lead from paint. What was apparently overlooked was that the average lead level in children used to be high enough to cause measurable brain damage, and this was not coming from lead in houses, but rather from our gasolines. How does Rhode Island now sue lead paint manufacturers, rather than suing the oil companies years ago? Did I miss the suits, were they federally exempted from liability?
Regards,
Rework
I'm trying to figure out what, if any, point you're attempting to make. They discovered lead in gasoline was dangerous, so they took the lead out; they discovered that lead in paint was dangerous, so they took the lead out; if you do demolition/excavation on an old gas station site, you have to be very careful to remove all the contaminated soil and dispose of it in a secured facility; if you disturb old lead paint, you have to be very careful about its removal and dispose of it in a secure facility.
Seems pretty straight forward.
Phill Giles
The Unionville Woodwright
Unionville, Ontario
Phil, The point is I do not believe it was or is necessary to remove all paint in all pre 1970's buildings inside and outside of all trim. That now, even though lead has been removed from all fuel, that the lead found today in and around most homes is still from old fuel not necessarly from all paint. I have read as recently as a few months ago where they are still suing paint manufactures for lead posining. It is the same story about asbostes. Yes it can cause cancer but, the only time it is friable and dangerious is when it was sprayed on to a ceiling where one could breath the dust 24-7. So we spend billions of our tax dollars only to find that is was not necessary.
My company works primarily in old homes. We are now mandated to tell the owners of every building we go into about lead and asbestos. Jim
FYI, look for a nicely balanced article on lead paint in the next issue of FHB.
Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
I type with trepidation, knowing one carefully, if at all criticizes FHB to the accidental moderator:
Actually, great article on lead paint. Described how to reduce risk in a non-alarming matter...
Had to laugh at a letter to the editor by R______l_________,R&D manager/vinyl applications,______"Although I agree with greener alternatives, I have a hard time seeing fiber cement as being viable because the silica dust created in cutting is toxic and hazardous." Indicates to me that the vinyl industry recognizes a competitive (if not superior) product when they see one. Would advise him to avoid beaches, the wind blown silica permeating that environment would also be "toxic and hazardous" given a long enough exposure...What is that old rhubarb "poisoning is a matter of dose...."?
Regards,
Rework
I type with trepidation, knowing one carefully, if at all criticizes FHB to the accidental moderator:
Hey, I resemble that remark! What can I say? A bunch of people I'm inutterably proud to know, let alone work with, pour their hearts and souls into this magazine. I get a little defensive sometimes, knowing what's gone into making it.
As to silica, do you have to be so reasonable?Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
Okay, knew I had no building skills, now realize my sense of humor also needs to be "reworked". All was in jest, no offense meant, and hopefully none was taken. Perhaps I just proved once again that no one likes a smart ####...
Regards,
Rework
No offense taken at all. I wrote that because I'd responded more passionately to Steven Hazlett than he deserved the other day (the Don't Shoot Me thread). Figuring you'd seen that, I wanted to explain myself, and make sure that everyone who read your post realized that criticizing the mag wouldn't lead to being cast into the flames. As much as it pains me to read them, criticisms help to keep the magazine on track.Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
Phill--
My point was that prior to adding lead to gasoline, the oil companies knew it was neurotoxic, and that it was the lead from gas, and not from paint, that was the primary source for poisoning whole generations of children. Admittedly, the "worst" cases as far as blood lead levels were from sources such paint, but the vast majority of children (85%) had blood lead levels now recognized as harmful, and the fast decline in the numbers indicates it was not coming from the paint. Adding lead was a cheaper way to increase the octane number, so to save costs they knowingly poisoned the public. Where are the law suits? Seems if you poison enough people in so subtle a fashion, then you can get away with it...
Regards,
Rework
Remember the days of 90/10 solder in homes ?.
Phill Giles
The Unionville Woodwright
Unionville, Ontario
You mean like up until about ten years ago?Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
Been longer than that around here; they weaned us off the stuff - first 50/50, then 30/70, not even sure what's in the new stuff..
Phill Giles
The Unionville Woodwright
Unionville, Ontario
I think the new stuff is mostly tin, maybe with a little antimony tossed in for flavor.Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
reply to the person(s) who are stating on this thread that the gas companies knowingly poisoned us with lead and should be sued, etc. etc.
I don't rember all the facts about when lead was added to the gasoline but if my memory serves, it was begun in the '30s for airline gas and implemented for regular automotive use in the late '40s / mid '50s.
The lead was a powerfuly useful additive as it was a big part in making it possible for cheap auto engines to suddenly jump in power output from around 30 or 40 hp to hundreds at the muscle car peak (it had great lubricating properties, anti-knock properties and a few other benefits that the primitive technology at the time made much use of).
During the '60s and '70s alternatives were found that could be used but there were MANY difficulties with implementing them and all of the associated technology to make use of them (i.e. why most of our cars had sucky performance during the mid '70s) that I doubt anyone could have implemented a widely useful lead replacement much sooner than they did. The gas companies and the car companies spent an awful lot of money making that possible (and yes, they made money as a result, as that is what companies exist for).
Are you just assuming that "the gas companies knew it would be bad for us and did it anyway"? or do you have some evidence? There are so many things that were done during the same time in modern human history that were found to be quite bad for us later(asbestous, DDT, and so on) that I think it is a waste of your time to get upset about who did it and focus instead on something useful.
"I am the only man standing between Richard Nixon and the Whitehouse", John F. Kennedy
"I would have made a good pope", Richard M. Nixon
The neurotoxic effects of lead in humans has been known for centuries. In fact, by 1901 scientific attention had already turned to the effects of lead on waterfowl. Producing gasoline is applied chemistry, and it was clear where the "new" additive, a performance booster, was going to go. My mentioning of suits was from the perspective that lead paint manufacturers are currently being sued, whereas they voluntarily removed the product prior to government regulation. In contrast, companies such as the Ethyl Corporation sued the EPA three years after the agency took action regarding lead in gasoline seeking to overturn the regulations. Much of our environmental and pharmaceutical regulation has been reactive in nature (e.g.: Lake Erie catches fire; passage of Clean Water Act). As you mentioned DDT, I don't now if the ban was actually the best thing, as millions of additional lives per year might be lost worldwide to malaria. However, it is widely recognized that the involved industries launched a concerted effort to personally discredit and ridicule Rachel Carson. I remain a conservative republican; however, I do expect the government to protect its citizens from those factors which are beyond their control, but do impact their basic rights. I believe that there is a basic right not to be injured by the air we breath and the water we drink; (we can always try to grow our own food). I do not believe as expert chemists that the oil companies can claim ignorance of chemical laws, just as ignorance of the our civil and criminal laws is no excuse even to ordinary citizens. I firmly believe it was a "business decision": performance boosting vs. potential environmental damage, but there were alternatives (e.g.: Buckminster Fuller had a car that could go as fast, transport more passengers, and use less gasoline). Unfortunately the biggest victims were children, who by definition inherit an initial lead load from their mother's bodies. There is capitalism, and then there is inexcusable behavior. Take the year that you believe lead was introduced, calculate the amount of lead released from the burning of gasoline, and tell me where you would draw the line....
Regards,
Rework
I don't understand what your point is. Are you suggesting that state/local and federal officials concerned with public health should be less vigilent about the removal of lead from our living environments, or that the protocol for removing lead should be loosened? I disagree with either proposal.
The public health consequences of lead are binary, lead is neither good nor benign, it's a public health hazard. The FDA guidelines for lead levels are just that - guidelines meant to balance what is reasonable and practical against what is in the best interests of society. Given a choice, I would opt for a zero level of lead in my blood; I can't think of any reasonable person that would choose to have lead, even a small amount, in their body over none at all.
The protocol to remove and dispose of materials that contain lead is expensive and time consuming, so be it. The alternative is a process that is loosely regulated and haphazard, the effect of which would be to expose the general public to a substance that is known to be harmful.
I guess the POINT that most of you are missing is taking responsibility for ones own actions. Lead based paint was the best coating for wood ever invented to date. Remember it is only harmful when you eat it. When I go outside I breath the air to live. When it was full of lead I had no choice. I never read anything anywhere where, the gas company's are responsible for there actions.
I bet most people have chlorine bleach under there sink and I bet not far away is a bottle of ammonia. What do you think would happen if you mixed the two together. Why, we evacuate cities when trains spill this stuff and yet we always go after the wrong people. I guess after working on thousands of homes in a 30 year span I hear all the owners comments on the homes. I have heard countless times from realtors and buyers that they will not buy a house that has asbestos roofing? Or vinyl asbestos floor tile.
I guess we should just tear down every home built before ca.1970 due to lead, asbestos, mold etc. Maybe that would help. We could just build millions of new homes paid for by millions of lawsuits against all the manufactures of these bad products. Just think of all the work we would have. Talk about market stimulation, wow! Why Americans would be living in all new Tight houses full of bad air from formaldehyde and all those other cancer causing new chemicals that in about 10-20 years we could start this whole process all over again.
Maybe I should just keep my mouth shut and keep restoring all these BAD homes!
I lean your direction in some of this discussion but not so far as to fall of my ladder. You say, "Remember it is only harmful when you eat it." which is not correct. It would be more true to say, "when you INGEST it"
Lead scaling, lead washed down by water, lead paint oxidizing away, painters sanding lead paints, lead freed in dust from wear and tear on floors and stairs, lead in air from burning old painted woodwork, - all these put lead in the air or where little hands can collect it before doing what all little kids do - putting them in their mouth.
If the lead is sound and secure, keep it there. But when we have to disturb it or when it is already being disturbed, it needs to be dealt with.
Now go be good to those bad houses.
;-)Excellence is its own reward!
Jim:
Agree with the great Piffin, as a humble servant must: lead is also absorbed through the lungs.
Regards,
Rework
You're kind of over doing it ain't you? It's getting lonely and windy up here on this pedestal.Excellence is its own reward!
I guess the POINT that you are missing is that I, nor anyone else, has any control over the lead that is in pre-1978 (I believe that's the year it was banned) paint, therefore I can contribute no action that will correct the situation. I also can't control what is in the air I breath or the water I drink... and if lead can leech into the soil, it can runoff into streams and become airborne, and it can get into our food supply, and so on. Petroleum companies removed lead from their product along a prescribed schedule, and quite honestly I do think they should be held liable for any public health consequences that can be attributed to their products.
And don't be crying a river of tears for the asbestos companies either, there was ample scientific data connecting asbestos as a carcinogen. Just like the tobacco companies, and the coal companies (black lung), they knew that stuff was killing people yet they still went on pumping it out to pad their bottom line. Damn right they should be held legally liable for all of the human suffering they contributed to.
I manage private investments for a living, hell I have the word "capitalist" in my job title, and I'm about as conservative as anyone on economic and foreign policy issues, but this is one area where our government needs to be vigilent and relentless, ensuring the highest public health standards in the world. We've got a long way to go.
My suggestion is to give this one up, defending lead, tobacco and asbestos companies is senseless.
Edited 9/26/2002 1:15:24 AM ET by JEFFN7
Defending these guys is the last thing i want to do. I guess I just get tired of hearing of little guys like us who must clean up where everybody else left off. I grew up in the hard coal area in northeastern pa. My dad owned a small bar where all the miners would come in to drink and smoke. I watched ALL of them die including my family all from cancer. So you see I am the last one standing and I want to make it a bit longer.
In our local builders assoc. when I was a board member I used to talk to the members about all this #### in our industry and they mostly thought I was nuts. My biggest complain then Appox15 years ago was about radon. They do not laugh at me anymore. About 2 years ago I met a client who's home flooded in the winter, when her steam boiler got stuck and steamed her house for about 2 weeks. She was a medical doctor and told me all about this mold issue. "I" , thought she was nut's! well since then all hell has broken loose I must have 3" of info on this stuff and it is hell worse than anything you can imagine! If the mold is tested and turns out to be one of the several bad one's ie. "Stachabotry"? (that is how it is pronounced). and if you inhale it you will probably get very sick with a good chance of DEATH. To date 2 years later this doctor did get very sick and she was always dressed like she was handling radio active material! The insurance co. are all fighting about the claim the house has not been cleaned up. est, cost over $200,000! She still stays in a hotel paid for by the ins. co.
This all makes my lead problems pretty small! By the way I still think fiberglass insul. is still going to back to haunt us all!
fibergass insulation? yep, but it'll be quite a while before they get around to it. 10 years?Half of good living is staying out of bad situations.
Forget the primal scream, just Roar!
It is historically evident that manufacturers of products are the last ones to count on for correcting a wrong, it is the people who face the customer, such as the builders, that end up making it right. That's were the legislative process comes in, and when that fails to address the issue fully, the courts kick in and through crimminal (rare) and civil (common) litigation force a change in behavior (punitive damages), as well as compensate for damage (compensatory relief).
Builders need to constantly assess how the structures they build are not only structurally sound, but present a safe living environment that won't make the inhabitants sick, or kill them, through the entire service life of the structure. That means that builders have a responsibility to ask the tough questions and demand that the mfgs do the research and provide all the relevant information before they use the products and materials. With the amount of new materials coming on the market annually, this is no small task, therefore the builders associations and product councils should really step up to be not just a promoter of the industries but a watchdog as well... much like the federal government has the NTSB to evaluate the safety of airlines, and the FAA to promote the industry.
The mold issue is an entirely different thread of discussion, but fundamentally different from what we have been talking about because nobody manufactures mold nor building products that are intended (and marketed as such) to prevent the spread of mold. It is a huge issue, I agree completely, and I am somewhat suffering the consequences of it right now... we were just notified by our insurance company that they are pulling out of the California market due to the number of household mold claims.
Lucky for me I don't have any of that nasty mold growing on my lead-painted walls or my vinyl-asbestos flooring!
(Just kidding - I don't know if my walls or floor have those materials.)
I have decided that we have beaten this subject to death! I just received some hot news on mold. I will start a new thread. So ya there! Jim
I'm right behind you.