So, what's the deal with people saying that primer residue is cancerous? Is there something chemically special about the dust (ie what is it) that makes it cancerous or is it just general concerns? I'd think the lead would be a larger concern.
Primer residue = magic cancer dust?
- Thread starter Caimlas
- Start date
- Status
Primer residue typically contains lead styphnate, barium nitrate, and antimony sulfide compounds. The first two have been linked to cancer in rats, however, only if inhaled in extraordinarily large quantities/concentrations. I seriously doubt the small amount of gunshot/primer residue that we are exposed to as shooters will amount to anything. There are a few companies out there making lead and barium-free primers.
ReloaderFred
Member
That's the first I've ever heard of primer residue causing anything other than lead exposure. Where did you hear this, and who from?
I do know for a fact that the anti-gunners are using the lead issue to try to ban ammunition and to get ranges closed, but I've never heard anyone claim that primer residue causes cancer. If it did, then I would think that my over 50 years of shooting, and 44 years of reloading, would have produced something, which it hasn't. I've also been casting bullets since about 1968, and have suffered no ill effects from even that supposedly dangerous endeaver. I've probably shot close to 1,000,000 rounds of ammunition, if not more, and my only health issue has been a ruptured appendix, which can't be blamed on any of my shooting activities.
From my personal experience, I would chalk that one up to propaganda from the "other side".
Hope this helps.
Fred
I do know for a fact that the anti-gunners are using the lead issue to try to ban ammunition and to get ranges closed, but I've never heard anyone claim that primer residue causes cancer. If it did, then I would think that my over 50 years of shooting, and 44 years of reloading, would have produced something, which it hasn't. I've also been casting bullets since about 1968, and have suffered no ill effects from even that supposedly dangerous endeaver. I've probably shot close to 1,000,000 rounds of ammunition, if not more, and my only health issue has been a ruptured appendix, which can't be blamed on any of my shooting activities.
From my personal experience, I would chalk that one up to propaganda from the "other side".
Hope this helps.
Fred
Well stated Fred. I don't have as many rounds reloaded or shot under my belt yet, however, (as stated in my previous post) I seriously doubt that the minute amounts that we are exposed to are capable of any damage. Didn't know about the "other side" trying to use this arguement to close ranges
ReloaderFred
Member
I was president of our Rod & Gun Club for three years, and am currently the club's delegate to the Oregon Association of Shooting Ranges. I'm also a member of the National Association of Shooting ranges. I've been involved on the front lines with the groups who are trying to close the various ranges, and lead is their latest tactic. The EPA has sided with the ranges, and their official position is that as long as lead is on an open and active shooting range, then it's there for it's intended purpose, and isn't considered a hazardous substance. Once a range closes, then that's a different matter, so the fight is to keep them open.
The ranges can't just ignore the fact that there is lead on the property, though. They have to make sure it's not going into a waterway, and that it's not going off the property. Ph levels are monitored and if the soil is such that it will break the lead down, then the EPA has suggestions for mitigating that, such as treating the soil, etc.
Reclaiming the lead is also part of the equation. All that's required is documentation as to where the lead went, and how it was handled. In our case, we reclaim lead shot and trade it to a shot manufacturer for new shot. Lead bullets are remelted into new bullets. It's really a simple process and the EPA has issued our club, and all the other clubs who have written Best Management Practices Plans, a certificate saying that we are in compliance with their rules for ranges. This certificate goes a long way when someone claims we're "polluting" the environment. When you show them the EPA has said you're not, it takes the wind right out of their sails.
Hope this helps.
Fred
The ranges can't just ignore the fact that there is lead on the property, though. They have to make sure it's not going into a waterway, and that it's not going off the property. Ph levels are monitored and if the soil is such that it will break the lead down, then the EPA has suggestions for mitigating that, such as treating the soil, etc.
Reclaiming the lead is also part of the equation. All that's required is documentation as to where the lead went, and how it was handled. In our case, we reclaim lead shot and trade it to a shot manufacturer for new shot. Lead bullets are remelted into new bullets. It's really a simple process and the EPA has issued our club, and all the other clubs who have written Best Management Practices Plans, a certificate saying that we are in compliance with their rules for ranges. This certificate goes a long way when someone claims we're "polluting" the environment. When you show them the EPA has said you're not, it takes the wind right out of their sails.
Hope this helps.
Fred
I've seen it referred to as "cancer dust" here on the THR reloading area, as well as elsewhere online by reloaders. I didn't know why, so I asked.
I did, however, know that lead and barium are metals (a heavy metal and a soft alkaline metal, respectively). Lead, being a heavy metal, remains resident in your liver and does not flush out with normal means (and long-term, heavy metals can cause or attribute to cancer and a generally weak immune system). Lead also causes mental defects and malfunction. Barium causes nerve damage in high doses, and is generally unhealthy (I don't know if it, too, is body resident, though it wouldn't surprise me):
I'm pretty sure that's due to the environmental impact it has, both directly on waterfowl which consume lead shot, as well as on water and soil (through erosion - lead isn't soluble).
My grandfather has been shooting for a bit longer than that, and he's got lymphatic and recently liver cancer. When he was going through initial treatments, they found very high levels of lead and other heavy metals in his liver and throughout his system. They didn't necessarily cause the cancer (the correlation is minimal and from my understanding not that well known throughout the popular medical community), but the heavy metal likely contributed to precisely where the cancer initially took hold. Though, in fairness, his levels of heavy metal toxicity were mostly likely primarily due to having been a railroad engineer (NY Central) for 30 years, and shooting and any other activities secondary.
Have you needed engineering services throughout any of that? I know that the EPA requires civil engineers for most if not all industrial regulation assessments and "Plans", such as SPCCs for oil product to verify things such as waterways, soil pH, and general porousness of the soil.
Anyway, I've gone and tangented my own thread.
ReloaderFred
Member
No civil engineers were required for any of the Best Management Practices agreement with the EPA. The lead man for EPA is Ed Guster III. He works closely with Rick Patterson, of NSSF. Rick is also the SAAMI representative to the UN, as one of the few NGO's allowed in the world disarmament talks recently held. He was instrumental in getting the U.S. position stated by Ambassador Bolton, in opposition to the ban on small arms last year.
Ed and Rick have written several books on lead management, which are available from NSSF. Rick will also send any range interested in creating a BMP plan the information necessary to write one.
Hope this helps.
Fred
Ed and Rick have written several books on lead management, which are available from NSSF. Rick will also send any range interested in creating a BMP plan the information necessary to write one.
Hope this helps.
Fred
qajaq59
Member
If I stayed away from everything the "experts" said was bad for me I wouldn't be able to get out of bed in the morning. And even then they'd probably say that somehow the blanket was going to kill me.
The Bushmaster
Member
Aah come on guys...Get off the paranoid wagon...Yer gonna die someday anyway...Ya might as well know what you're dying from...It's like Sacrin. You will have to drink 10,000 sodas in in a month to have any effect on you...That'll sure make ya slosh a bit...
"Lead, being a heavy metal, remains resident in your liver and does not flush out with normal means..."
Actually, the body stores (sequesters) most heavy metals in the bones.
They can do damage on the way, and the continual creation and destruction of bone throughout life will lead to a steady state level in the soft tissue.
Actually, the body stores (sequesters) most heavy metals in the bones.
They can do damage on the way, and the continual creation and destruction of bone throughout life will lead to a steady state level in the soft tissue.
I'm not so worried about the dying. After all, once it happens, I don't have to live with it bothering me anymore.
What I am concerned about is living well and being healthy until I die - or close to it. No drooling creamed spinach in a nursing home for me, thanks. That means I want to avoid cancer, Alzheimer's, brain and nerve/nervous system damage, and various other ailments caused by (particularly) man-introduced environmental pathogens. It's all about being able to have the muscle and nerve coordination when I'm 70 to both see and hit the target as accurately as possible (as well as doing various other things which are typically considered "young people" activities).
It has nothing to do with being paranoid. It's just "this stuff is bad, and I want to avoid it so I can enjoy life".
What I am concerned about is living well and being healthy until I die - or close to it. No drooling creamed spinach in a nursing home for me, thanks. That means I want to avoid cancer, Alzheimer's, brain and nerve/nervous system damage, and various other ailments caused by (particularly) man-introduced environmental pathogens. It's all about being able to have the muscle and nerve coordination when I'm 70 to both see and hit the target as accurately as possible (as well as doing various other things which are typically considered "young people" activities).
It has nothing to do with being paranoid. It's just "this stuff is bad, and I want to avoid it so I can enjoy life".
I actually did get cancer last year (I'm only 35) and this was/is a specific concern of mine. I have been reloading and casting bullets since I was a teenager. One of the stupidest things I did years ago was to tear apart old car batteries and melt the plates for the lead. There's worse stuff than lead in those things, and I was breathing it.
I have come to the conclusion that I will not worry too much about it. It's possible my metals exposure contributed but there's no way to really know. I'll keep reloading but I'll be more careful just in case. I plan on installing a small ventilation hood for melting lead, wash my hands carefully after handling lead, and I vacuum after sizing shells.
You don't need to be paranoid, but it's not hard to take some simple precautions and be a little careful.
I have come to the conclusion that I will not worry too much about it. It's possible my metals exposure contributed but there's no way to really know. I'll keep reloading but I'll be more careful just in case. I plan on installing a small ventilation hood for melting lead, wash my hands carefully after handling lead, and I vacuum after sizing shells.
You don't need to be paranoid, but it's not hard to take some simple precautions and be a little careful.
- Status
