A Snapshot of Lead in Consumer Products Across Four US Jurisdictions.

BACKGROUND: Following the removal of lead from gasoline, paint and pipes were thought to be the main sources of lead exposure in the United States. However, consumer products, such as certain spices, ceramic and metal cookware, traditional health remedies, and cultural powders, are increasingly recognized as important sources of lead exposure across the United States. OBJECTIVE: This paper reviews data from four US jurisdictions that conduct in-home investigations for children with elevated blood lead levels (BLLs) to examine the prevalence of lead exposures associated with consumer products, in comparison with housing-related sources. METHODS: Authors reviewed investigation data (2010-2021) provided by California, Oregon, New York City, and King County, Washington, and compared the extent of lead exposures associated with housing-related vs. consumer products-related sources. DISCUSSION: The proportion of investigations identifying consumer products-related sources of lead exposure varied by jurisdiction (range: 15%-38%). A review of US CDC and US FDA alerts and New York City data indicates that these types of lead-containing products are often sourced internationally, with many hand carried into the United States during travel. Based on surveillance data, we believe that US immigrant and refugee communities are at an increased risk for lead exposures associated with these products. To engage health authorities, there is a need for evidentiary data. We recommend implementing a national product surveillance database systematically tracking data on consumer products tested by childhood lead poisoning prevention programs. The data repository should be centralized and accessible to all global stakeholders, including researchers and governmental and nongovernmental agencies, who can use these data to inform investigations. Effectively identifying and addressing the availability of lead-containing consumer products at their source can focus resources on primary prevention, reducing lead exposures for users abroad and in the United States. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP14336.

Structured expert judgement approach of the health impact of various chemicals and classes of chemicals.

INTRODUCTION: Chemical contamination and pollution are an ongoing threat to human health and the environment. The concern over the consequences of chemical exposures at the global level continues to grow. Because resources are constrained, there is a need to prioritize interventions focused on the greatest health impact. Data, especially related to chemical exposures, are rarely available for most substances of concern, and alternate methods to evaluate their impact are needed. STRUCTURED EXPERT JUDGMENT (SEJ) PROCESS: A Structured Expert Judgment (Research Outreach, 2021) process was performed to provide plausible estimates of health impacts for 16 commonly found pollutants: asbestos, arsenic, benzene, chromium, cadmium, dioxins, fluoride, highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs), lead, mercury, polycyclic-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), Per- and Polyfluorinated Substances (PFAs), phthalates, endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), and brominated flame retardants (BRFs). This process, undertaken by sector experts, weighed individual estimations of the probable global health scale health impacts of each pollutant using objective estimates of the expert opinions' statistical accuracy and informativeness. MAIN FINDINGS: The foremost substances, in terms of mean projected annual total deaths, were lead, asbestos, arsenic, and HHPs. Lead surpasses the others by a large margin, with an estimated median value of 1.7 million deaths annually. The three other substances averaged between 136,000 and 274,000 deaths per year. Of the 12 other chemicals evaluated, none reached an estimated annual death count exceeding 100,000. These findings underscore the importance of prioritizing available resources on reducing and remediating the impacts of these key pollutants. RANGE OF HEALTH IMPACTS: Based on the evidence available, experts concluded some of the more notorious chemical pollutants, such as PCBs and dioxin, do not result in high levels of human health impact from a global scale perspective. However, the chemical toxicity of some compounds released in recent decades, such as Endocrine Disrupters and PFAs, cannot be ignored, even if current impacts are limited. Moreover, the impact of some chemicals may be disproportionately large in some geographic areas. Continued research and monitoring are essential; and a preventative approach is needed for chemicals. FUTURE DIRECTIONS: These results, and potential similar analyses of other chemicals, are provided as inputs to ongoing discussions about priority setting for global chemicals and pollution management. Furthermore, we suggest that this SEJ process be repeated periodically as new information becomes available.