Thread: Lead bullets and their risk to human health

Yeah there's no safe level of lead for human consumption. Try not to eat it.


I manage the risk while continuing to use lead bullets by not taking meat from close to the likely fragmentation zone, and sometimes head or neck shooting animals. Using smaller bullets also helps - there's simply less lead around to begin with. Maybe this explains the .270 people. Many of the studies on the subject are a bit misleading - while lead consumption certainly is a risk, mitigation by specific butchery practises appears to be really effective at reducing the risk of exposure. Look at Hampton 2023 - read between the lines - very low lead in Kangaroo/Wallaby meat - because they are all headshot, so the bits exposed to fragmentation are not eaten. The factor by which the venison mince exceeded guidelines was minute in comparison to the quail. The butchery approach of those that donated the venison mince isn't known - was it "right up to the hole" from some? There are a number of other studies that make this abundantly clear

"The highest concentrations were found in samples from edible meat from the area close to the wound channel (max 3442 mg Pb/kg), followed by the saddle (max 1.14 mg Pb/kg) and with the lowest levels in the haunch (max 0.09 mg Pb/kg)"

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30412876/


The cost and performance of non-lead alternatives simply doesn't match lead in many ways so I'm balancing things as I see fit.


It would be interesting to get a blood lead test. I eat a lot of bluefin tuna though so I'm probably packed to the gills with methylmercury


While lead is a real risk to humans and wildlife especially scavenging avians, there are also a few researchers around the world who have made a career out of finding "anti-lead" research to be a lucrative path to funding and dominate the field, so while there is valid research to be done there are often issues, bias and omissions in the existing peer-reviewed literature. Unfortunately peer-review is far from a foolproof process as anyone in science should know, the quality of reviewer comment can be highly variable. Jordan Hampton appears to be one of these and has released a series of papers that while peer-reviewed, are of pretty questionable value.

Originally Posted by gimp

Yeah there's no safe level of lead for human consumption. Try not to eat it.


I manage the risk while continuing to use lead bullets by not taking meat from close to the likely fragmentation zone, and sometimes head or neck shooting animals. Using smaller bullets also helps - there's simply less lead around to begin with. Maybe this explains the .270 people. Many of the studies on the subject are a bit misleading - while lead consumption certainly is a risk, mitigation by specific butchery practises appears to be really effective at reducing the risk of exposure. Look at Hampton 2023 - read between the lines - very low lead in Kangaroo/Wallaby meat - because they are all headshot, so the bits exposed to fragmentation are not eaten. The factor by which the venison mince exceeded guidelines was minute in comparison to the quail. The butchery approach of those that donated the venison mince isn't known - was it "right up to the hole" from some? There are a number of other studies that make this abundantly clear

"The highest concentrations were found in samples from edible meat from the area close to the wound channel (max 3442 mg Pb/kg), followed by the saddle (max 1.14 mg Pb/kg) and with the lowest levels in the haunch (max 0.09 mg Pb/kg)"

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30412876/


The cost and performance of non-lead alternatives simply doesn't match lead in many ways so I'm balancing things as I see fit.


It would be interesting to get a blood lead test. I eat a lot of bluefin tuna though so I'm probably packed to the gills with methylmercury


While lead is a real risk to humans and wildlife especially scavenging avians, there are also a few researchers around the world who have made a career out of finding "anti-lead" research to be a lucrative path to funding and dominate the field, so while there is valid research to be done there are often issues, bias and omissions in the existing peer-reviewed literature. Unfortunately peer-review is far from a foolproof process as anyone in science should know, the quality of reviewer comment can be highly variable. Jordan Hampton appears to be one of these and has released a series of papers that while peer-reviewed, are of pretty questionable value.

Classic line

Originally Posted by gimp

Yeah there's no safe level of lead for human consumption. Try not to eat it.


I manage the risk while continuing to use lead bullets by not taking meat from close to the likely fragmentation zone, and sometimes head or neck shooting animals. Using smaller bullets also helps - there's simply less lead around to begin with. Maybe this explains the .270 people. Many of the studies on the subject are a bit misleading - while lead consumption certainly is a risk, mitigation by specific butchery practises appears to be really effective at reducing the risk of exposure. Look at Hampton 2023 - read between the lines - very low lead in Kangaroo/Wallaby meat - because they are all headshot, so the bits exposed to fragmentation are not eaten. The factor by which the venison mince exceeded guidelines was minute in comparison to the quail. The butchery approach of those that donated the venison mince isn't known - was it "right up to the hole" from some? There are a number of other studies that make this abundantly clear

"The highest concentrations were found in samples from edible meat from the area close to the wound channel (max 3442 mg Pb/kg), followed by the saddle (max 1.14 mg Pb/kg) and with the lowest levels in the haunch (max 0.09 mg Pb/kg)"

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30412876/


The cost and performance of non-lead alternatives simply doesn't match lead in many ways so I'm balancing things as I see fit.


It would be interesting to get a blood lead test. I eat a lot of bluefin tuna though so I'm probably packed to the gills with methylmercury


While lead is a real risk to humans and wildlife especially scavenging avians, there are also a few researchers around the world who have made a career out of finding "anti-lead" research to be a lucrative path to funding and dominate the field, so while there is valid research to be done there are often issues, bias and omissions in the existing peer-reviewed literature. Unfortunately peer-review is far from a foolproof process as anyone in science should know, the quality of reviewer comment can be highly variable. Jordan Hampton appears to be one of these and has released a series of papers that while peer-reviewed, are of pretty questionable value.

Nonsense. You watch too much woke TV. If that was the case Lead would be banned and we wouldn't be digging it up. lead acid batteries, lead dive weights, lead fishing sinkers, none of them would exist.

Dont know about NZ, but workers/employees in AU are considered safe and healthy with low levels of lead in their blood. Regular testing is required. At a trigger point workers are removed from potential exposure for a few months until their lead blood levels return to normal Note, no medical intervention is required. The body removes the lead naturally.

These are full time workers exposed to lead daily. Yes, they are required to, follow procedures, wear PPE, use mechanical equipment such as extraction systems to reduce exposure. But none the less many have low levels of lead in the blood almost constantly.

Lead exposure is easy to manage. Young children are a different matter.

A large part of the problem is people repeating that nonsense on the www without checking the facts or having any knowledge on the matter.

And I'll add, similar nonsense is spruked about CO. Yes, It can be dangerous, but is exceptionally easy to manage.

I think its about time society in general, especially politicians are educated to understand that life is full of risks. Nothing is 100% safe. The exposure of lead should be very low on their list of priorities.

Originally Posted by Oldbloke

Nonsense. You watch too much woke TV. If that was the case Lead would be banned and we wouldn't be digging it up. lead acid batteries, lead dive weights, lead fishing sinkers, none of them would exist.

Dont know about NZ, but workers/employees in AU are considered safe and healthy with low levels of lead in their blood. Regular testing is required. At a trigger point workers are removed from potential exposure for a few months until their lead blood levels return to normal Note, no medical intervention is required. The body removes the lead naturally.

These are full time workers exposed to lead daily. Yes, they are required to, follow procedures, wear PPE, use mechanical equipment such as extraction systems to reduce exposure. But none the less many have low levels of lead in the blood almost constantly.

Lead exposure is easy to manage. Young children are a different matter.

A large part of the problem is people repeating that nonsense on the www without checking the facts or having any knowledge on the matter.

And I'll add, similar nonsense is spruked about CO. Yes, It can be dangerous, but is exceptionally easy to manage.

I think its about time society in general, especially politicians are educated to understand that life is full of risks. Nothing is 100% safe. The exposure of lead should be very low on their list of priorities.

I'm inclined to agree with you Oldbloke. Although I'm not disputing lead being bad in our system.
But there are a whole pile of people out there that have turned scaremongering in to a very lucrative business opportunity.
If we read the contents of numerous items on supermarket shelves, according to some, a number of those ingredients will turn us belly up in no time.
I know people who think smelling a coffee bean is going to cause life long issues.

Originally Posted by Oldbloke

Nonsense. You watch too much woke TV. If that was the case Lead would be banned and we wouldn't be digging it up. lead acid batteries, lead dive weights, lead fishing sinkers, none of them would exist.

Dont know about NZ, but workers/employees in AU are considered safe and healthy with low levels of lead in their blood. Regular testing is required. At a trigger point workers are removed from potential exposure for a few months until their lead blood levels return to normal Note, no medical intervention is required. The body removes the lead naturally.

These are full time workers exposed to lead daily. Yes, they are required to, follow procedures, wear PPE, use mechanical equipment such as extraction systems to reduce exposure. But none the less many have low levels of lead in the blood almost constantly.

Lead exposure is easy to manage. Young children are a different matter.

A large part of the problem is people repeating that nonsense on the www without checking the facts or having any knowledge on the matter.

And I'll add, similar nonsense is spruked about CO. Yes, It can be dangerous, but is exceptionally easy to manage.

I think its about time society in general, especially politicians are educated to understand that life is full of risks. Nothing is 100% safe. The exposure of lead should be very low on their list of priorities.

I recall somewhere that blood lead is the easy way to measure lead in the body - but not the only way the body accumulates lead. It also accumulates in the long bones during growth, and in parts of the body that don't readily exchange it with the blood (which is why it takes so long for the blood lead levels to drop as the 'slow tissues' release it back into the blood). This is one of the reasons for the current popularity of anti-lead - the effects on kids who are laying down a lot of calcium for the formation of bones (lead being a similar metal element to calcium I think is the order of battle there).

Originally Posted by Oldbloke

Nonsense. You watch too much woke TV. If that was the case Lead would be banned and we wouldn't be digging it up. lead acid batteries, lead dive weights, lead fishing sinkers, none of them would exist.

Dont know about NZ, but workers/employees in AU are considered safe and healthy with low levels of lead in their blood. Regular testing is required. At a trigger point workers are removed from potential exposure for a few months until their lead blood levels return to normal Note, no medical intervention is required. The body removes the lead naturally.

These are full time workers exposed to lead daily. Yes, they are required to, follow procedures, wear PPE, use mechanical equipment such as extraction systems to reduce exposure. But none the less many have low levels of lead in the blood almost constantly.

Lead exposure is easy to manage. Young children are a different matter.

A large part of the problem is people repeating that nonsense on the www without checking the facts or having any knowledge on the matter.

And I'll add, similar nonsense is spruked about CO. Yes, It can be dangerous, but is exceptionally easy to manage.

I think its about time society in general, especially politicians are educated to understand that life is full of risks. Nothing is 100% safe. The exposure of lead should be very low on their list of priorities.

I don't know about here, but in the UK when I was working with Pb we were tested regularly, and moved to another line (and given a re-education) if our blood levels climbed. Just like you have explained.

Non the less I found the RNZ piece an interesting read.