The Most Important Scientist You Have Never Heard Of
July 20, 2020 6:11 AM Subscribe
The hero and the villain of this story are both scientists. It's a parable about the importance of careful and precise work, of not fooling yourself.
It's the true story of why we no longer use leaded gasoline, and how the oil industry resisted that change. And in the end the hero almost certainly prevented more murders and violent crimes than any law enforcement officer in history or most superheroes in fantasy.
On belatedly searching, the main link appears to be a double post. Okay with me if the mods delete, but I hope anyone who hasn't read about the link between lead and crime will click on the other links in the meantime...
posted by OnceUponATime at 6:28 AM on July 20, 2020
posted by OnceUponATime at 6:28 AM on July 20, 2020
It's a great story I must have missed the first time around, so thanks.
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:44 AM on July 20, 2020 [2 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:44 AM on July 20, 2020 [2 favorites]
So I used to visit a firing range every so often. Although I'm not a big "second amendment or die" person I also want to be competent in the use of things like firearms if for no other reason than to safely store, disassemble, and dispose of those that my family holds on to.
I visited the local "NRA range" in part because those not operated by that institution were dangerously lax with even basic safety. The NRA range at least had a test you needed to pass and range instructors who regularly called all stop and booted people who couldn't keep it pointed downrange (or worse). I paid extra to explicitly not be a member to use the facility.
But what they also emphasized on this indoor range was cleanliness after shooting. That is, big shop sinks and pumice cleanser, reminders to wash thoroughly, and I noticed the smell of vaporized metal stuck with me in hair and clothes even after thorough washing.
One of the metals that is vaporized when firing most firearms is lead. That's why they want you to clean it off.
I enjoyed competently operating a firearm, but have since divested because that safety-focused facade was never all that real, and the statistics on dangers once I had kids were not to be ignored. But I have friends who continue to "shoot competitively" - running courses and demonstrating how quickly they can reload while moving and such. Not my jam but they love it.
As I cleaned my arms one day it occurred to me that anybody who shoots regularly - even and especially as a means to responsibly own a firearm - probably continually absorbs much more lead on average than those who don't. And given its cumulative affects on reasoning and violence... it seems too simplistic but also too important to ignore.
I never checked if it was well studied because I didn't have the heart. But maybe someone should.
posted by abulafa at 8:37 AM on July 20, 2020 [37 favorites]
I visited the local "NRA range" in part because those not operated by that institution were dangerously lax with even basic safety. The NRA range at least had a test you needed to pass and range instructors who regularly called all stop and booted people who couldn't keep it pointed downrange (or worse). I paid extra to explicitly not be a member to use the facility.
But what they also emphasized on this indoor range was cleanliness after shooting. That is, big shop sinks and pumice cleanser, reminders to wash thoroughly, and I noticed the smell of vaporized metal stuck with me in hair and clothes even after thorough washing.
One of the metals that is vaporized when firing most firearms is lead. That's why they want you to clean it off.
I enjoyed competently operating a firearm, but have since divested because that safety-focused facade was never all that real, and the statistics on dangers once I had kids were not to be ignored. But I have friends who continue to "shoot competitively" - running courses and demonstrating how quickly they can reload while moving and such. Not my jam but they love it.
As I cleaned my arms one day it occurred to me that anybody who shoots regularly - even and especially as a means to responsibly own a firearm - probably continually absorbs much more lead on average than those who don't. And given its cumulative affects on reasoning and violence... it seems too simplistic but also too important to ignore.
I never checked if it was well studied because I didn't have the heart. But maybe someone should.
posted by abulafa at 8:37 AM on July 20, 2020 [37 favorites]
For anyone who'd prefer a video version, my kids (and I) loved the segment of the Cosmos reboot that told Patterson's story.
posted by martin q blank at 8:44 AM on July 20, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by martin q blank at 8:44 AM on July 20, 2020 [1 favorite]
abulafa:
A couple of my friends at the Seattle Times did an investigative series several years on just that issue. Here's a link to the start of the series.
posted by martin q blank at 9:13 AM on July 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
A couple of my friends at the Seattle Times did an investigative series several years on just that issue. Here's a link to the start of the series.
posted by martin q blank at 9:13 AM on July 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
I never checked if [lead absorption by recreational shooters] was well studied because I didn't have the heart. But maybe someone should.
Lead exposure at firing ranges—a review by Mark A. S. Laidlaw, Gabriel Filippelli, Howard Mielke, Brian Gulson & Andrew S. Ball; Environmental Health volume 16, Article number: 34 (2017) [Open access article]
36 studies were reviewed that included blood lead levels (BLLs), and 31 included (increased/high?*) BLLs in shooters.
* I didn't read closely enough to understand how high the listed levels were, and what the implications might be.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:14 AM on July 20, 2020 [2 favorites]
Lead exposure at firing ranges—a review by Mark A. S. Laidlaw, Gabriel Filippelli, Howard Mielke, Brian Gulson & Andrew S. Ball; Environmental Health volume 16, Article number: 34 (2017) [Open access article]
36 studies were reviewed that included blood lead levels (BLLs), and 31 included (increased/high?*) BLLs in shooters.
* I didn't read closely enough to understand how high the listed levels were, and what the implications might be.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:14 AM on July 20, 2020 [2 favorites]
Great story!
I am reminded of the one story from Primo Levi's fantastic book The Periodic Table in which some Europeans re-discover the secret of refining lead. (The book has been called the greatest book about science ever written.)
posted by kozad at 9:27 AM on July 20, 2020 [2 favorites]
I am reminded of the one story from Primo Levi's fantastic book The Periodic Table in which some Europeans re-discover the secret of refining lead. (The book has been called the greatest book about science ever written.)
posted by kozad at 9:27 AM on July 20, 2020 [2 favorites]
abulafa, this seems like it could be relevant to police violence. Now I'm wondering what their exposures are like and if they're routinely tested for lead levels.
posted by sepviva at 11:17 AM on July 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
posted by sepviva at 11:17 AM on July 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
From that literature review - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12940-017-0246-0
"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."
posted by idb at 2:36 PM on July 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
"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."
posted by idb at 2:36 PM on July 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
Yep - thank you for the readily accessible data, martin q blank and filthy light thief.
I came back to summarize what sepviva and idb already have - there's every likelihood that people who are exposed to regular firearms use and training have way over the recommended minimum. So, heartbreak confirmed.
Then again, before hypothesizing that cops or other regular firearms users suffering the effects of lead poisoning drives violence and brutality, it would be worthwhile to compare lead sources and levels to less-armed police forces. England I guess?
I both do and do not want "the answer" to be so simple. Because institutional and systemic racism. Because it's not that simple. But hey if it's one tiny thing that could be identified to help people who have become brittle and default to violence in part because their brains are being subtly poisoned, I guess it could be a win.
posted by abulafa at 3:16 PM on July 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
I came back to summarize what sepviva and idb already have - there's every likelihood that people who are exposed to regular firearms use and training have way over the recommended minimum. So, heartbreak confirmed.
Then again, before hypothesizing that cops or other regular firearms users suffering the effects of lead poisoning drives violence and brutality, it would be worthwhile to compare lead sources and levels to less-armed police forces. England I guess?
I both do and do not want "the answer" to be so simple. Because institutional and systemic racism. Because it's not that simple. But hey if it's one tiny thing that could be identified to help people who have become brittle and default to violence in part because their brains are being subtly poisoned, I guess it could be a win.
posted by abulafa at 3:16 PM on July 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
For those who haven't checked out Robert A. Kehoe: Kehoe was commissioned by DuPont to produce a study to show that the carcinogen 2-Naphthylamine, then widely used by DuPont and shown to produce cancer in nine out of ten employees exposed to it, was safe.[Wikipedia] Later, he defended Freon.
Also in that article, the Kehoe Rule, which says that the burden of proof falls on those opposing a substance/practice. The alternative would be to show safety before using the substance. The Kehoe Rule "provided a model for the asbestos, tobacco, pesticide and nuclear power industries, and other(s)... for evading clear evidence that their products are harmful by hiding behind the mantle of scientific uncertainty." [Wikipedia quoting this Nation article]
posted by CCBC at 4:48 PM on July 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
Also in that article, the Kehoe Rule, which says that the burden of proof falls on those opposing a substance/practice. The alternative would be to show safety before using the substance. The Kehoe Rule "provided a model for the asbestos, tobacco, pesticide and nuclear power industries, and other(s)... for evading clear evidence that their products are harmful by hiding behind the mantle of scientific uncertainty." [Wikipedia quoting this Nation article]
posted by CCBC at 4:48 PM on July 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
The first article, at least, fails to mention that Thomas Midgely Jr who invented tetraethyl lead and forever claimed it safe, later went on to invent chlorofluorocarbons. Quite the twofer.
posted by hearthpig at 4:49 PM on July 20, 2020 [10 favorites]
posted by hearthpig at 4:49 PM on July 20, 2020 [10 favorites]
I'm not a GMO skeptic myself, but after reading multiple accounts like this (lead, tobacco, asbestos, DDT, etc. etc.), I can see why many people are. If you're not close to the labs and the science yourself - as I know many Mefites are, but most of the general population isn't - how do you know whether the scientists saying it's all okay are more like Kehoe or more like Patterson? It's a very difficult problem for both scientists and the public.
posted by clawsoon at 5:16 PM on July 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
posted by clawsoon at 5:16 PM on July 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
Is the other moral of the story that all scientists lie to oil companies in order to get their money?
posted by clawsoon at 5:20 PM on July 20, 2020 [3 favorites]
posted by clawsoon at 5:20 PM on July 20, 2020 [3 favorites]
> On belatedly searching, the main link appears to be a double post.
Personally, I would say we need a post on this topic every year or so, just to remind us. We forget far too soon, otherwise.
posted by flug at 7:57 PM on July 20, 2020 [3 favorites]
Personally, I would say we need a post on this topic every year or so, just to remind us. We forget far too soon, otherwise.
posted by flug at 7:57 PM on July 20, 2020 [3 favorites]
> Lead exposure at firing ranges—a review
If you didn't read this, here are a few highlights:
TLDR: People who shoot regularly have their blood lead level raised from the U.S. national average of 1.2 μg/dL to roughly 10-20 μg/dL. This is an increase about 8-16X compared with normal. Levels in this range are associated with small but clear loss of cognitive function and increase in negative psychological effects such as depression and anger.
posted by flug at 8:49 PM on July 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
If you didn't read this, here are a few highlights:
- People who fire guns and workers at shooting ranges and galleries are exposed to more lead than you might think. Lead from gun training/firing/use comes not just from projectile itself. The majority of it comes from the primer and associated parts, which are made largely of lead. The primer explodes in the chamber, and the vaporized/fragmented bits of lead from that, plus the tiny fragments of lead that are created as the projectile contacts the barrel of the firearm, are all spewed in the immediate vicinity of the shooter. So it is not very surprising that people who shoot regularly or work at shooting ranges have markedly higher levels of lead in their blood than the population as a whole.
- Geometric mean Blood Lead Level (BLL) of the entire U.S. adult population in 2009–2010 was 1.2 μg/dL
- All studies of people shooting at gun ranges found BLL's of 2.0 μg/dL or higher.
- Most of the studies of gun users found BLLS in the ballpark of 10-20 μg/dL
- Some studies have found, for example, that for every 10 µg/dL increase in BLLs, children's IQ was found to be lowered by 4 to 7 points. (The usual view is that children are more susceptible to lead's effects than adults, however.)
- Meyer-Baron and Seeber (2000) performed a meta-analysis of 12 studies . . . They concluded that there were obvious neurobehavioral deficits at current blood lead levels < [70] μg/dL.
- The extent of the exposure related decrease of performance (for the group of studies looking at cognitive effects of BLL < 70 μg/dL) was comparable with those changes of performance which can be expected during aging of up to 20 years.
- Cognitive function was an important consideration of because of . . . increasing concern that cognitive function in adulthood may be affected by relatively low lead doses.
- Several lines of evidence suggest that increased blood lead levels are associated with psychiatric symptoms in adults, such as depression, anxiety, irritability, and anger. For example, a cross-sectional analysis of 107 occupationally exposed individuals showed increased rates of depression, confusion, anger, fatigue, and tension as measured by the Profile of Mood States . . . among those with blood levels > 40 μg/dL
- The strength of associations between lead and cognitive function is strong and can be compared to the influence of age on cognitive function . . . a 5-μg/dL increase in blood lead was equivalent to an increase of 1.05 years in age.
- Nearly all reviewed studies found a dose–effect relation for [lead] . . . Associations have been observed in populations with mean blood lead levels as low as 4.5 μg/dL
TLDR: People who shoot regularly have their blood lead level raised from the U.S. national average of 1.2 μg/dL to roughly 10-20 μg/dL. This is an increase about 8-16X compared with normal. Levels in this range are associated with small but clear loss of cognitive function and increase in negative psychological effects such as depression and anger.
posted by flug at 8:49 PM on July 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
The first article, at least, fails to mention that Thomas Midgely Jr who invented tetraethyl lead and forever claimed it safe, later went on to invent chlorofluorocarbons. Quite the twofer.
posted by hearthpig
A Darwinian threefer. His death was from inadvertent strangulation by one of his own inventions.
One of history's starker warnings about good intentions being insufficient, even dangerous. All three of those inventions were intended to fix another problem.
posted by Pouteria at 10:20 PM on July 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
posted by hearthpig
A Darwinian threefer. His death was from inadvertent strangulation by one of his own inventions.
One of history's starker warnings about good intentions being insufficient, even dangerous. All three of those inventions were intended to fix another problem.
posted by Pouteria at 10:20 PM on July 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
Agencies that manage firing ranges (at least on the level of state and federal governments) are aware of the lead-exposure risk and actively attempting to manage it. One of the options is using green ammunition, but it is more expensive and often people bring in lead ammo without notifying the owner of the range. This then fucks up their hazardous waste management stream.
It's a problem that is known, but it costs a lot to switch out from lead, and where is the money to come from?
posted by suelac at 3:25 PM on July 22, 2020
It's a problem that is known, but it costs a lot to switch out from lead, and where is the money to come from?
posted by suelac at 3:25 PM on July 22, 2020
It's a problem that is known, but it costs a lot to switch out from lead, and where is the money to come from?
The people... who profit... from the unacceptable behavior?
I'd kind of like to understand what state regulators are involved and what the tax and safety burden is. If range operators make money by allowing customers who they "don't know" (or choose not to know) customers bringing their own ammo, maybe it's not legal to use ammo not purchased at the range unless you pay the cost of weekly inspections.
I'm not saying it's governmentally easy, but it's not an intractable problem if you're willing to legislate under clear cover of "people are getting poisoned."
posted by abulafa at 3:48 PM on July 22, 2020
The people... who profit... from the unacceptable behavior?
I'd kind of like to understand what state regulators are involved and what the tax and safety burden is. If range operators make money by allowing customers who they "don't know" (or choose not to know) customers bringing their own ammo, maybe it's not legal to use ammo not purchased at the range unless you pay the cost of weekly inspections.
I'm not saying it's governmentally easy, but it's not an intractable problem if you're willing to legislate under clear cover of "people are getting poisoned."
posted by abulafa at 3:48 PM on July 22, 2020
often people bring in lead ammo without notifying the owner of the range.
Lead tests are basically instantaneous. The one I'm familiar with is "spray solution 1 ... spray solution 2 ... look for a colour change." There's no reason a range owner couldn't make that test compulsory. They wouldn't even need to test the ammo: they could test the gun before and after.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:10 PM on July 22, 2020 [1 favorite]
Lead tests are basically instantaneous. The one I'm familiar with is "spray solution 1 ... spray solution 2 ... look for a colour change." There's no reason a range owner couldn't make that test compulsory. They wouldn't even need to test the ammo: they could test the gun before and after.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:10 PM on July 22, 2020 [1 favorite]
What green ammunition are we talking about?
As I understand it, the ammunition using lead styphnate as a primer was itself the 'green' alternative to ammunition using fulminate of mercury, which is far more toxic than the lead styphnate.
Last I read, some military rounds continue to use fulminate of mercury, and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to hear that some gun fanciers have found ways to access it and bring it to gun ranges. It would surprise me if they hadn't.
posted by jamjam at 4:37 PM on July 22, 2020
As I understand it, the ammunition using lead styphnate as a primer was itself the 'green' alternative to ammunition using fulminate of mercury, which is far more toxic than the lead styphnate.
Last I read, some military rounds continue to use fulminate of mercury, and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to hear that some gun fanciers have found ways to access it and bring it to gun ranges. It would surprise me if they hadn't.
posted by jamjam at 4:37 PM on July 22, 2020
« Older A model for reparations programs around the... | We don’t know what this is or what it was used for... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Me after clicking the links: "CALLED IT!"
posted by Jacqueline at 6:26 AM on July 20, 2020 [5 favorites]