Coated vs non-coated cast lead projectiles (Mo. Bullet Co.)

[D.B. Cooper]

Even outdoor instructors show elevated lead blood levels.

Yeah, and to show how serious these guys are about it, the range paid to send their ROs to get blood work done, and I believe all of them came back with "elevated levels." (No details on what that means, but I understand there is no safe level of lead.) And that says something given that the range is essentially a 501c something not for profit entity.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Ultimately, I dislike that it impacts me, because it's not important to me. That said, they gave me (because I'm the only one impacted by the new rule) an extension that all but eliminates that impact. I'll be able to use up all of my uncoated projectiles, and buying coated projectiles going forward incurs approximately a dollar per week (or something like that) cost increase. I can easily absorb that.

 

[Ohen Cepel]

Good to be safe, but I question their lead levels which were tested. Lot of talk about it now and the science is leaning towards needing a bone scan to get the best idea of long term exposure.

I have been through the testing many times over the years and put little faith in it.

That said, if a different bullet makes them happier to let you keep shooting I would do it and drive on.

 

[fxvr5]

Ultimately, I dislike that it impacts me, because it's not important to me.

Can we use that as your epitaph?

 

[D.B. Cooper]

Can we use that as your epitaph?

Absolutely. Hunters and shooters have been exposed to cast lead for well over a century now, yet I haven't seen any conclusive cause and effect correlation between that and any shortened life expectancy of hunters. I haven't heard of alarming rates of birth defects in hunters' and/or shooters' children. If it was as deadly as some people make it out be, I ask the question: where is the pile of dead bodies to prove it?

 

[35 Whelen]

Elevated lead levels are no different than high cholesterol, high blood pressu

Absolutely. Hunters and shooters have been exposed to cast lead for well over a century now, yet I haven't seen any conclusive cause and effect correlation between that and any shortened life expectancy of hunters. I haven't heard of alarming rates of birth defects in hunters' and/or shooters' children. If it was as deadly as some people make it out be, I ask the question: where is the pile of dead bodies to prove it?

You're exactly right. "Men" in this society have been reduced to a population of hang-wringing worry warts.

35W

 

[fxvr5]

Absolutely. Hunters and shooters have been exposed to cast lead for well over a century now, yet I haven't seen any conclusive cause and effect correlation between that and any shortened life expectancy of hunters. I haven't heard of alarming rates of birth defects in hunters' and/or shooters' children. If it was as deadly as some people make it out be, I ask the question: where is the pile of dead bodies to prove it?

Wow, you really don’t get it do you? You don’t need a pile of dead bodies to prove that something is hazardous to your health. With all due respect, your ignorance (uninformed understanding of the health risks) will only serve to make you an unwitting victim of the very thing you claim is not dangerous. Maybe it already has.

Below is an excerpt from one of the articles I posted. It’s worth reading - for everyone.


Laidlaw, M.A.S., Filippelli, G., Mielke, H., Gulson, B. and Ball, A.S. (2017) Lead exposure at firing ranges—a review. Environmental Health, 16:34. https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/ articles/10.1186/s12940-017-0246-0

Health outcomes associated with blood lead levels (BLLs)

In 2012, The United States National Toxicology Program (NTP) published evidence regarding health effects associated with BLL exposure in adults and children [30]. For adult men and women there is “sufficient evidence” that BLLs <10 μg/dL are associated with essential tremor, hypertension, cardiovascular-related mortality and electrocardiography abnormalities, and decreased kidney glomerular filtration rate. For women there is “sufficient evidence” that BLLs <5 μg/dL are associated with reduced foetal growth. For adult men and women there is “limited evidence” that BLLs <10 μg/dL were associated with psychiatric effects, decreased hearing and cognitive function, incidence of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and increased spontaneous abortion in women. For adults there is “limited evidence” that BLLs <5 μg/dL were associated with incidence of essential tremor. For children with BLLs <5 μg/dL there is “sufficient evidence” of decreased academic achievement, intelligence quotient (IQ), specific cognitive measures, increased attention related behaviours, delayed puberty and reduced postnatal growth. For children with blood lead levels < 10 μg/dL there is “sufficient evidence” of decreased hearing. For children with BLLs < 5 μg/dL there is “limited evidence” of an association of decreased kidney glomerular filtration rate, and delayed puberty. For prenatal exposure with BLLs < 5 μg/dL there is “limited evidence” of decreases in measures of cognitive function. For prenatal lead exposure < 10 μg/dL there is “limited evidence” of decreased IQ, increased incidence of attention-related and problem behaviors and decreased hearing. For adult men and women there is “limited evidence” that BLLs between 15 and 20 μg/dL are associated with adverse sperm parameters and increased time to pregnancy in women. There is “limited evidence” that BLLs ≥10 μg/dL are associated with decreased fertility. There is “limited evidence” that spontaneous abortion occurs in female partners of men with BLLs ≥ 31 μg/dL. However, modern exposures are orders of magnitude larger than early hominids [31] with pre-industrial blood lead levels in humans estimated at 0.016 μg/dL [32]. Bellinger (2011) [33] noted that adverse health effects are continually being associated with decreasing exposures.

Conclusions

Shooting at firing ranges results in the discharge of Pb dust, elevated BLLs, and exposures that are associated with a variety of adverse health outcomes. Women and children are among recreational shooters at special risk and they do not receive the same health protections as occupational users of firing ranges. Nearly all BLL measurements compiled in the reviewed studies exceed the current reference level of 5 μg/dL recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (CDC/NIOSH). Thus firing ranges, regardless of type and user classification, currently constitute a significant and unmanaged public health problem. Prevention includes clothing changed after shooting, behavioural modifications such as banning of smoking and eating at firing ranges, improved ventilation systems and oversight of indoor ranges, and development of airflow systems at outdoor ranges. Eliminating lead dust risk at firing ranges requires primary prevention and using lead-free primers and lead-free bullets.

 

[Dudedog]

Not trying to take sides but I shot at a poorly ventilated indoor range and my lead levels were sky high, chelation level high >60 ug/dl.
Trust me you don't want to go there, not fun, nothing good down that road..
No issues shooting at the outdoor range but I can see how a R+O could be exposed by following every shooter.

The main routes of ingestion are inhalation and ingestion.
For shooters the main issue is inhalation of lead vapors. (primers are the main culprit)
So unless you are eating the lead bullets the game was shot with a typical hunters exposure is low.


Be careful out there, lead poisoning is no joke.

Edit-
PS: I CA labs are required to report levels higher than some # to the State, "Public Health Issue" (so much for HIPPA). The State freaked, I got phone calls from them, a bunch of junk in the mail, A DVD about lead expsoure....

 

[Rule3]

Here is the WHOLE article link rather than just the conclusion. It is very long and will make ones eyes bleed.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12940-017-0246-0

An interesting line is this.

“Green bullets” have also been proposed as a preventative measure that could minimize lead exposure to participants and the environment. These bullets consist of copper rather than lead bullets. Bismuth has been proposed as a substitute for lead bullets but its environmental health impacts are poorly understood [77]. It is clear that firing lead-free bullets results in dramatic decreases in airborne lead exposures at firing ranges [78]. The use of copper-jacketed lead bullets does not appear to be a solution to a reduction in lead exposure because it results in only minor reductions in BLLs (see Tripathi et al. (1991, Table 1) [46]. The United States Department of Defence (DoD) is aware of the health threat posed by lead exposure from small arms [69] and efforts are underway to test and replace lead in both primer and bullets [73, 79].

As said over and over, it is mostly the PRIMERS.

 

[Laphroaig]

Here's some more fuel for the fire. Both of these studies show drastically elevated lead levels in the breathing zone when firing lead bullets vs. jacketed.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2301251

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2029046

Both on outdoor ranges.