BigDumbDinosaur wrote:
Ironically, the authorities who have stated that lead exposure in any amount is deleterious are in the same boat as you (and me). How would they know that without having been sufficiently exposed to lead to cause them physiological problems?
Ideally, through studies of people that have reached particular exposure levels against control groups who haven’t.
Although I’m interested in who these authorities who have stated “lead exposure in any amount is deleterious” actually are. Even in California, the prop 65 regulations (see 27 CCR § 25705) define lead as “Posing No Significant Risk” at an exposure level of lower than 15 micrograms orally per day. Maybe that limit is too low, I don’t claim to know - but I can claim thats certainly a higher exposure level than “any amount”.
As far as I can tell the current state is something along the lines of “companies doing risk analysis judge that slapping a sticker on at pennies-or-less per unit will cost less long term than proving in court whether or not the product contains any of the chemicals on the list and at exactly what level; especially given the list will change and presumably so will the regulations declaring levels”.
Edit: I now find myself wondering how that 15 microgram limit was codified and whether or not it’s at all related to the EPA limit for lead in drinking water being 15 micrograms/liter.