03-12-2019, 06:23 AM
quote:
Originally posted by glinda
Oh I see.. length of life is the criteria. Pretty simple yeah? For one who bitches about folks being dumbed down by a bit of pakalolo one would think it would be cognitive skills, or even the propensity of some to use da kine, or any other number of tell tell signs of lessoned mental and emotional abilities (the word is lessened - maybe you had a little too much exposure to lead yourself - or was it too much pakalolo?) ....
Shortened lifespan, lesser cognitive abilities, use any measure you like - my perspective on this is that the relevant questions are: 1) how broadly and to what degree has exposure to the measured lead/arsenic levels at these schools increased the blood lead/arsenic level in the children exposed and how does that increase (if any) compare to their lead/arsenic levels induced from other exposures in their every day environment outside the schools? and 2) by how much have these lead/arsenic level increases (from the school exposure) impaired their intellectual and emotional development compared to those caused by all other factors to which these children are exposed? If you are truly concerned about compromised cognitive development, then you identify the most significant source of the problem first and treat that first - not spending time and resources on random and possibly irrelevant sources. (Kind of how we're (not) dealing with climate change - banning soda straws when the real problem is that our global population is probably at least ten times what the planet can sustainable support.)
There's lots of pathways for lead exposure: was your home built prior to about 1980? then it likely has lead based solder in the copper plumbing. Of course we all know about the lead based paint and lead headed nails in roofs that fed catchment systems - as well as the lead based paint that was used to paint the interior of the catchment tanks. How much of the lead produced as a result of tetra-ethyl lead is still hanging around the streets and playgrounds? For that matter, how much lead paint is still on the walls of the pre-80's homes that these children live in? or, even more likely, present in the soils around their homes from paint chips flaked off the weathering walls. Based on the article below, it sounds like that last is the most likely source of the lead present in the schools' soils.
This is reminiscent of California Prop 65 warnings - pretty soon everything has a warning that it contains potentially cancer causing agents. And the warnings become meaningless. The published list of schools where elevated lead and arsenic levels were found is meaningless - without a lot more data. Everybody gets wound up about a perceived risk that they have no way, and inadequate expertise, to assess - and the newspaper sells eyeballs and lives to publish another day.
This is a fairly well balance article on the findings - although no information on the actual levels of lead found - however they do quote DOH toxicologists that seem to indicate that the level of risk is not especially high.
https://www.westhawaiitoday.com/2019/03/...i-schools/
Another, earlier article on lead levels in children - but again, elevated levels without the necessary information to know what the exposure pathway was.
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/34591...waii-kids/
ETA: that second article does indicate that lead levels were actually fairly low for Hawaii children as compared to many mainland areas...