Researchers found that small declines in blood lead levels were associated with long-term cardiovascular health improvements in American Indian adults. Participants who had the greatest reductions in blood lead levels saw their systolic blood pressure fall by about 7mmHg, comparable to the effects of antihypertensives.
The findings as reported from researchers at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health and NIEHS and NHLBI are published in the Journal of the American Heart Association.
“This is a huge win for public health,” said senior author Anne E. Nigra, PhD, assistant professor of environmental health sciences at Columbia Mailman School of Public Health.
“We saw that even small decreases in a person’s blood lead levels can have meaningful health outcomes.”
Nigra and her co- authors, including Wil Lieberman-Cribbin, MPH, also at Columbia Mailman School, credit these improvements in large part to public health and policy changes that have occurred over the last few decades.
In addition to seeing improvements in systolic blood pressure, the investigators found that reductions in blood lead levels were associated with reductions in a marker associated with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and heart failure.
To conduct this research, investigators partnered with 285 American Indian adults through an extension of the Strong Heart Study, the largest study following cardiovascular health outcomes and risk factors among American Indian adults.
The researchers looked at blood lead levels and blood pressure readings over time in participants living in one of four tribal communities. Lead was first measured in blood collected during the 1997–1999 study visit and again in blood collected during a follow-up visit between 2006–2009.
During this time, participants’ blood pressure was taken and they participated in medical exams, including echocardiographs to assess their heart’s structure and function. Multiple factors were controlled for, including social variables, cardiovascular disease risks, and medical history.
At the start of the study, the average blood lead level was 2.04µg/dL. Throughout the study, the average blood lead level fell by 0.67µg/dL, or 33%.
The most significant changes, categorized by participants with average starting blood lead levels of 3.21 µg/dL and who experienced reductions of about 1.78 µg/dL, or 55%, were linked to a 7mmHg reduction in systolic blood pressure.
“This is a sign that whatever is happening in these communities to reduce blood lead levels is working,” said Mona Puggal, MPH, an epidemiologist in the Division of Cardiovascular Sciences at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). “The reductions in blood pressure are also comparable to improvements you would see with lifestyle changes, such as getting 30 minutes of daily exercise, reducing salt intake, or losing weight.”
The reductions in blood lead levels observed in the study are similar to those seen in the general US population following policies and efforts implemented within the past 50 years to reduce lead exposure through paint, gasoline, water, plumbing, and canned items.
A small study published in September found that some ceramic plates and bowls bought from South African chain stores are coated in glaze that contains lead, a toxic heavy metal which can damage multiple organs when consumed. The paper comes in the wake of research that finds that due to its harmful effects on the cardiovascular system, lead exposure is linked to the deaths of somewhere between 2.3 and 8.2 million people a year worldwide (these findings are dissected in part one of this Spotlight special series on lead poisoning).
It is estimated that about 7.8 million children in South Africa (aged 0-14) have lead poisoning, which is about 53% of all young people in that age-range. This means that they have more than five micrograms of lead per 100mL of blood, the clinical threshold for lead poisoning set by the National Institute for Communicable Diseases. Lead increases the risk of health problems at any level, however if a healthcare worker finds that a patient exceeds this threshold then this indicates that the problem is severe enough that they should notify the health department.
But why are children in the country exposed to so much lead?
Scientists from the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC) have found several sources over the last two decades. These include lead-based paints (which can chip and generate lead dust which people breathe in), certain traditional ayurvedic medicines that contain lead, fishing sinkers (which are sometimes melted down, producing toxic fumes), lead ammunition (which can generate lead dust when fired, and may contaminate hunted game meat), as well as gold mining waste facilities, which can contaminate the surrounding soil.
The recent paper on ceramics adds to a growing body of evidence that cookware and crockery also likely play a role.
Toxic pottery
Research for the new paper was conducted in 2018, when SAMRC scientists purchased 44 randomly selected plates and bowls from six large retail chain stores in Johannesburg. After testing the glaze, they found that almost 60% of the items contained more than the maximum amount of lead recommended by the United Nations – which is 0.009% of total content. Indeed, the average item contained about 47 times this amount.
Glaze is a liquid coating that is applied to ceramic to make it shinier and more durable. Once it’s coated, the ceramic is fired, leaving it with a glossy sheen. Lead is often used in these glazes to add extra colour and increase water-resistance, but if the ceramic isn’t heated at a high enough temperature then the glaze won’t completely solidify. In the case of ceramic crockery, this means that lead may run off into food or water prepared in these dishes, particularly if they are used for cooking or simply holding acidic foods.
Indeed, this is precisely what has happened throughout parts of Mexico. Research in that country finds that children have higher amounts of lead in their blood if they live in households where food is prepared in lead-glazed pottery (a result which researchers have found repeatedly). Recently, health inspectors in the US linked cases of lead poisoning to the use of ceramic cookware bought in Mexico. After the affected individuals stopped using the ceramics, their blood-lead levels went down.
In order to test whether lead is leaching off the South African ceramics, the SAMRC researchers left an acidic solution in the plates and bowls. When they returned 24 hours later, lead was found to have run off one of the 44 items.
Angela Mathee, the head of the SAMRC’s Environment and Health Research Unit and the paper’s lead author, says that while this is comforting, the results may be deceiving: “our speculative concern is that particularly for people who are poor and keep their ceramic ware for a very long time, that with knocks and cracks and wear and tear over the years, it’s possible that the product could start leaching – even if it wasn’t at the time of purchase. Though that is untested”.
A second caveat is that of the 44 bowls and plates, only one was originally made in South Africa, and it’s this item that released lead.
Additionally, even if lead-based ceramics don’t leach, the production of these items may still cause harm. For instance, a study in Brazil found that children who simply lived near artisanal pottery workshops were more likely to have high amounts of lead in their blood. Caregivers of these children did not report having any lead-glazed ceramics or being involved in pottery making. Thus, researchers suspect that children were simply breathing in lead dust generated by the nearby potters.
Lead leaching from cooking pots
Although this is the first time lead has been found in ceramic glazes in South Africa, other kinds of kitchenware products have previously been shown to contain lead. In 2020, researchers published a study in which they purchased 20 cooking pots from informal traders and artisanal manufacturers across South Africa. Each pot was made from recycled aluminium.
They found lead in every pot, and some also contained dangerous amounts of arsenic (a known carcinogenic). The researchers cut the pots up, and boiled a piece from each one in an acidic solution. They found 11 out of the 20 pieces leached more lead than the maximum permissible limit set by the EU. (The experiment was repeated twice more on the same metal pieces, with similar results).
Thus, the authors conclude that artisanal aluminium pots are a likely source of lead exposure in the country. And the issue may extend past individual households, as the SAMRC has documented the use of artisanal aluminium pots in school feeding programmes.
Not only can lead-based artisanal pots cause lead poisoning by leaching into food, but researchers note that simply manufacturing them likely generates lead dust. As demonstrated in a small follow-up study on informal metal workshops in Kwazulu-Natal and Limpopo which found that workers had a lot more lead dust on their hands by the end of the work day than at the start.
It’s also possible that production facilities like this end up contaminating nearby residential areas. A 2018 study in the Johannesburg suburb of Bertrams found that nearly a third of all garden soil samples contained dangerous amounts of lead (i.e. lead levels that exceeded South Africa’s guidelines for safe soil). The scientists hypothesised that one reason may be that various cottage industries, including scrap metal recyclers, are interspersed among suburban homes.
Are regulations on lead being ignored?
South Africa has already taken legislative steps to deal with lead coatings. In the 2000s, a number of alarming studies found lead-based paints covering homes and playground equipment in public parks across several cities. In response, a law came into effect in 2009 that made it illegal to sell household paint or glaze that is more than 0.06% lead. Draft regulations published in 2021 will further slash this limit to 0.009% in line with recommendations by the UN. These will only become enforceable once the finalised regulations are gazetted.
Though evidence is scant, these laws may have had a positive effect. A study last year found that paints produced by large companies being sold in Botswana, but manufactured in South Africa, were all below the lead-threshold set by the 2009 law (and broadly in line with the new draft regulations as well).
However, the research on ceramics suggests the regulations have not always been adhered to, at least when it comes to glazes. The only South African-made piece of crockery which was tested in the study described earlier had a coating that contained over 100 times the amount of lead legally permissible under the 2009 law (despite the tests being conducted nine years after it was passed).
If additional research finds that the problem is widespread, then Mexico’s experience may offer one path forward. There, a ban on lead glaze has long gone unenforced. NGOs in parts of the country have responded by assisting artisanal potters to switch to lead-free glazes and to develop higher-temperature kilns (which would prevent metals from leaching). This has been coupled with public awareness campaigns about the harms of lead-based pottery and a certification program for potters using lead-free coatings.
But stakeholders say the government needs to play its part as well. The South African Paint Manufacturing Association (SAPMA) has previously urged the government to do more to enforce its regulations. In 2021 they stated that “random samples taken from hardware shelves by the government regularly showed that hazardous levels of paint were still being sold. But no report of any offender being charged by the police appeared in the press”.
The National Department of Health didn’t respond to a request for comment about this at the time of publication.
Speaking to Spotlight for this article however, the executive director of SAPMA, Tara Benn, says “I believe manufacturers are adhering to the current regulation and most if not all have already adopted the new regulation of less than 90 parts per million [i.e. 0.009%], but this regulation has not been published as yet”.
Data and investment needed
Except for a few (mostly wealthy) nations like the United States, very few countries run nationally representative blood-lead surveys. In countries like South Africa, researchers have only been able to make very rough calculations about how many people have lead poisoning by pooling together different studies that have been done in particular communities.
As a result, policy makers lack good data about the extent of the problem. National blood-lead monitoring schemes would also allow health officials to work out which communities are most affected, which in turn, could help them identify the sources of lead exposure.
Bjorn Larsen, an environmental economist who consults for the World Bank, explains: “The first thing that needs to be done is we have to get in place routine blood-lead measurements that are nationally representative…This can be done by adding a [blood-lead] module to existing routine household surveys, for example UNICEF’s Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey…countries also have their own routine household surveys, [blood-lead tests] could be added to those”.
In the United States, all children who are enrolled in Medicaid (the government-run insurance scheme) receive blood-lead tests at ages one and two (these can be done via a simple finger-prick test) . This is in addition to nationally representative surveys which are done by the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Overall, the CDC receives about four million lead test results from across the country each year.
In addition, experts are increasingly calling for greater international health financing for the prevention of lead poisoning in low- and middle-income countries. Last month, a group of experts, including researchers from Stanford and officials from UNICEF, released a joint statement on lead poisoning in developing nations. It argues that “despite the extraordinary health, learning, and economic toll attributable to lead, we find the global lead poisoning crisis remains almost entirely absent from the global health, education, and development agendas”.
The statement argues that $350 million in international aid over the next seven years would be enough to make a significant dent in the problem. They provide a breakdown of these funds, which include international assistance with enforcing anti-lead laws, purchasing lead-testing equipment and assisting companies (such as paint manufacturers) with moving away from lead-based sources.
Note: This is the second in a two-part Spotlight special series on lead poisoning. You can read part one here.
An estimated 5.5 million people died of heart conditions linked to lead poisoning in 2019 – more than the number killed by outdoor air pollution over the same period. That’s according to a recent study in the journal Lancet Planetary Health. The number is substantially higher than previous estimates. According to a 2021 World Health Organization (WHO) report there were roughly 900 000 deaths linked to lead exposure in 2019.
The researchers also found that exposure to lead (a powerful neurotoxin) causes more harm to children’s intellectual development than previously thought. The paper estimates that in developing countries, where the condition is most prevalent, a child with average levels of lead exposure loses nearly six IQ points from the metal in their first five years of life (average IQ is 100).
While only about 2% of those living in wealthy countries have lead poisoning, the situation is very different for those in poorer parts of the world. A 2021 study found that nearly half of all children living across 34 low-and-middle income countries have lead poisoning – which is typically defined as a person having at least five micrograms of lead per 100mL of blood.
It’s estimated that the average child in South Africa is well above this threshold – at about 5.59 micrograms. And worryingly, the metal can still cause harm below the clinical threshold. Indeed, any increase in a person’s blood-lead levels is associated with greater health risks, even at the lowest detectable levels.
The metal can make its way from these products into people’s bodies through a number of routes. In some cases – like with alternative medicines or spices – people directly ingest contaminated goods. In others, people breathe in lead dust, which can be generated by unregulated industrial practices. For instance if lead-acid battery recyclers lack proper safety and environmental standards – as is often the case in developing countries – recyclers may simply pour lead-based battery solution onto the ground, contaminating the soil.
Children are most at risk. For one, they’re more likely to put items that contain lead in their mouths, like toys covered in lead paint, or even a thumb coated in lead dust. Secondly, they’re closer to the ground and therefore breathe in more lead-contaminated dust. The theme of this year’s WHO-backed International Lead Poisoning Prevention Week was “End childhood lead poisoning”.
After it’s ingested or inhaled, some lead is excreted, while the rest is absorbed into the bones, teeth and blood. Children absorb more of the metal than adults and once it’s in the blood, lead can be distributed to various organs in the body. This includes the heart as well as the brain, where it can interfere with neurotransmitter systems involved in learning and memory.
No threshold
The new study in Lancet Planetary Health adds to a growing body of evidence that global lead exposure is far more detrimental to human health than previously thought. While people began understanding that lead was poisonous several thousand years ago, it was only recently that evidence accumulated showing that even tiny amounts of lead can cause damage.
Part of the reason is simply because we didn’t have data on low-level exposure until recently, explains Bjorn Larsen, the study’s lead author. Most people in industrialised countries had very high blood-lead levels during most of the 20th century. For instance, in the late 1970s the average American child had about 15 micrograms of lead per 100mL of blood, which is about 25 times the average today, and three times the present-day threshold for lead poisoning. A major reason was leaded gasoline, which was introduced in the 1920s and phased out from the 1970s onward.
Thus, says Larsen, testing the effects of blood-lead levels that we would now perceive as low wasn’t always possible. For instance, to show that even one or two micrograms of lead per 100ml of blood is harmful, researchers would need to compare people at this (very low) level to those with no lead to observe if they come off worse. But if almost everyone is above two micrograms, this becomes close to impossible as there isn’t anyone to test. And in the absence of data, some simply assumed that the metal was only problematic above a particular threshold.
Bruce Lanphear, a professor of public health at Simon Fraser University, was the lead author of a seminal 2005 paper that showed that lead was associated with declines in IQ even below the clinical threshold set at the time (10 micrograms of lead per 100mL of blood). He explains that by the mid-1990s, when 95% of people were below that threshold, many felt that lead was no longer much of an issue: “my advisors at that point said get out of this line of research, the problem seems to be going away and there won’t be any funding for it. And they were right about one of those two things – I haven’t gotten much funding,” Lanphear says.
As blood-lead levels continued to drop and scientists like Lanphear could study the effects of lead on children’s intellectual development at lower levels, a new consensus emerged. Larsen explains: “Now people are willing to say that in all likelihood the correct way to estimate things is that there is some effect on IQ as soon as we can detect lead in the blood – even at the lowest level these effects start”. Indeed, according to a WHO factsheet, “there is no known safe blood-lead concentration”.
Not only that, adds Lanphear, but research shows that “proportionately, we see greater harms – greater reductions in IQ – at the lowest measurable lead levels”. In other words, the more lead you have in your body, the worse it is, but going from one microgram of lead per 100ml of blood to two micrograms causes more additional harm than going from 15 micrograms to 16. Thus, it’s strangely only through the decline in lead poisoning that its most pernicious effects have been revealed.
Lead ‘poisons’ our cells
As more data is gathered, estimates of the harm caused by lead are constantly being revised upward. The finding that lead is linked to 5.5 million cardiovascular deaths a year is over six times the number previously determined by a 2019 study. It should be noted however that the new estimate is relatively uncertain – the researchers estimate the real value is most likely in the range 2.3 to 8.3 million.
Part of the reason for the updated estimates is that the 2019 research had only looked at the effects of lead on blood pressure, while the new paper considers a wide variety of cardiovascular problems associated with lead.
According to a statement by the American Heart Association from earlier this year these effects include injury to the cells that line the blood vessels, oxidative stress (which can result in cell and tissue damage) and coronary heart disease, which is when the blood flow is restricted, increasing the risk of a stroke or heart attack.
Gervasio Lamas, Chief of cardiology at Mount Sinai Medical Centre and the lead author of the statement, explains that heavy metals like lead can erode cardiovascular health through two broad channels: “one is that toxic metals typically will end up replacing essential metals or ions in vital cellular reactions,” he says.
For instance, lead replaces the calcium in our cells, a mineral which is involved in keeping our hearts pumping, our blood clotting and our heart muscles properly functioning. By removing calcium, lead “poisons these cells,” says Lamas.
He tells Spotlight that the other main route is that toxic metals often interfere with our antioxidant mechanisms. Antioxidants are molecules which deactivate harmful free radicals (chemicals that can attack our cells and DNA). Lead disrupts these antioxidant defences, he says. As a result, free radicals build up, which may cause the blood vessels to harden (called atherosclerosis), blocking blood flow.
Different strands of evidence point in the same direction
To arrive at the conclusion that 5.5 million people died from lead-induced heart conditions, Larsen and his colleague relied on two large observational studies from the United States (where there is lots of data). These studies measured the blood-lead levels of thousands of people and looked at what happened to them over time. They showed that those who had more lead in their blood were more likely to die of heart complications at a younger age, even when controlling for lots of other factors.
Larsen and his colleagues used estimates from these studies to develop a model which calculates the increase in a person’s risk of dying of heart disease at different levels of lead exposure. They then plugged in the blood-lead levels that we observe among people around the world to estimate how much cardiovascular death the metal is linked to.
One contention that emerges from research like this is whether it really shows cause and effect. As Lamas notes, “the populations that are most affected by high lead levels are [more likely] to be underprivileged in some way. They are often either poor or have access to less healthcare or live in areas that are more generally contaminated – things that you would expect would in any case cause [health] problems for them”.
When we find that people who have more lead in their blood die of heart disease more often, this may be due to one of these other factors.
But according to Lamas, there are a number of reasons to be confident that lead is actually the driver of heart disease. The first is that when observational studies (like the ones discussed above) measure the relationship between people’s lead levels and cardiovascular disease, they control for a range of other risk factors, including their socioeconomic status. “Even when you do that, lead still sticks out like a big sore thumb,” Lamas notes.
The other reason is that there are lots of different sources of evidence that all find lead damages cardiovascular health: “there are direct experiments where patients or animals are infused with lead and those show that arterial function [i.e. the ability of our arteries to transport blood] is diminished,” Lamas explains.
Finally, Lamas points to the results of a randomised clinical trial which he and his colleagues published in 2013. In it, they took over 1700 patients who had recently suffered from a heart attack and randomly split them into different groups. One group received a treatment for lead poisoning called EDTA chelation. This is an intravenous medicine that binds with toxic metals in the body before being urinated out. Those who didn’t receive the chelation therapy got a placebo drug.
Five years later, those who got chelation therapy appeared to be better off. They performed better than the placebo group when measured by a composite index that combines factors like patients’ risk of dying and their need to return to hospital for further procedures.
With so many different kinds of research pointing in the same direction, Lamas believes the evidence that lead plays a causal role in heart disease is about as conclusive as in the case of high cholesterol.
And if lead truly is killing 5.5 million people through heart conditions each year, this places it among the top risk factors for cardiovascular disease globally. Despite this, lead poisoning along with exposure to other toxic metals, remains a remarkably overlooked issue. Lamas explains, “at the individual physician level – sitting across from a patient – I’m the only cardiologist I know who routinely checks lead, mercury, arsenic and cadmium”.
Note: This is part one of a two-part Spotlight special series on lead poisoning.
A new study calculates that exposure to car exhaust from leaded gas during childhood lowered the IQ levels of about half the population of Americans alive today.
The findings suggest that Americans born before 1996 may now be at greater risk for lead-related health problems, such as faster ageing of the brain. Leaded petrol was banned in the US in 1996, but anyone born in the US before the end of that era, and especially those at the peak of its use in the 1960s and 1970s, had worryingly high lead exposures as children, the researchers said. In South Africa, leaded petrol was only banned at the end of 2005.
Lead is a neurotoxin that can enter the bloodstream via a number of routes and there is no safe level of exposure at any point in life. Young children are especially vulnerable to lead’s ability to impair brain development and lower cognitive ability.
“Lead is able to reach the bloodstream once it’s inhaled as dust, or ingested, or consumed in water,” said study co-author Aaron Reuben, a PhD candidate in clinical psychology. “In the bloodstream, it’s able to pass into the brain through the blood-brain barrier, which is quite good at keeping a lot of toxicants and pathogens out of the brain, but not all of them.”
To answer the complex question of how more than 70 years of leaded petrol use may have left a permanent mark on human health, Reuben and co-authors Michael McFarland and Mathew Hauer, both professors of sociology at Florida State University, opted for a fairly simple strategy.
Using publicly available data on US childhood blood-lead levels, leaded-gas use, and population statistics, they determined the likely lifelong burden of lead exposure carried by every American alive in 2015. From this data, they estimated lead’s assault on our intelligence by calculating IQ points lost from leaded gas exposure as a proxy for its harmful impact on public health – a result which stunned the researchers.
“I frankly was shocked,” Prof McFarland said. “And when I look at the numbers, I’m still shocked even though I’m prepared for it.”
As of 2015, more than 170 million Americans (more than half of the U.S. population) had clinically concerning levels of lead in their blood as children, likely resulting in lower IQs and putting them at higher risk for other long-term health impairments, such as reduced brain size, greater likelihood of mental illness, and increased cardiovascular disease in adulthood.
Leaded gasoline consumption rose rapidly in the early 1960s and peaked in the 1970s. As a result, Reuben and his colleagues found that essentially everyone born during those two decades are all but guaranteed to have been exposed to pernicious levels of lead from car exhaust.
Even more startling was lead’s toll on intelligence: childhood lead exposure may have blunted America’s cumulative IQ score by an estimated 824 million points – nearly three points per person on average. The researchers calculated that at its worst, people born in the mid-to-late 1960s may have lost up to six IQ points, and children registering the highest levels of lead in their blood, eight times the current minimum level to initiate clinical concern, fared even worse, potentially losing more than seven IQ points on average.
While the loss of a few IQ points may seem negligible, the authors note that these changes are dramatic enough to potentially shift people with below-average cognitive ability (IQ score less than 85) to being classified as having an intellectual disability (IQ score below 70).
Prof McFarland is continuing by analysing the racial disparities of childhood lead exposure, hoping to highlight the health inequities suffered by Black children, who were exposed more often to lead and in greater quantities than white children.
Reuben’s next step will be to examine the long-term consequences of past lead exposure on brain health in old age, based on evidence showing that adults with high childhood lead exposure may experience accelerated brain aging.
“Millions of us are walking around with a history of lead exposure,” Reuben said. “It’s not like you got into a car accident and had a rotator cuff tear that heals and then you’re fine. It appears to be an insult carried in the body in different ways that we’re still trying to understand but that can have implications for life.”
