Young children's exposure to lead in the environment is harming their intellectual and emotional development, according to UK researchers.Which sounds good, right? A crackdown on all those unsafe children’s toys with lead-based paint, and the lead in petrol and…
The researchers say the toxic effects of lead on the central nervous system are obvious even below the current so-called safe level of lead in the blood.
They are recommending the threshold should be halved.
Hang on. Didn’t we already get rid of those?
A spokesman for the Health Protection Agency said levels of exposure should be kept to the minimum.So, what are we to do? Raise children in a bubble?
Lead has been removed from paint and petrol by law in the UK, but it is still widespread in the environment.
In 1991, the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, revised their level of concern for blood levels down to ten microgrammes per declitre.The reason I’m uneasy about this is because the UK tends to follow the US in all things.
The World Health Organisation estimates that globally half of the urban children under the age of five have blood levels exceeding this limit.
And the hysteria over ‘lead in the environment’ and the need to do something ‘For the children!!’ has led to some pretty ghastly legislation across the water, as US blogger Darleen Click has been highlighting at ‘Protein Wisdom’:
“While Dan exposes Henry Waxman’s [the Democrats' own Nosferatu] latest authoritarian crusade, let’s not forget the havoc that continues apace with his CPSIA (Consumer Product Safety Improvement [heh] Act of 2008) .”The CPSIA is pretty frightening legislation, in that it has led to that bane of lawmakers, unintended consequences, for the most unlikely businesses:
“As Walter Olson writes:Other unlikely items have come under the hammer under this legislation too, including used clothing.
It’s hard to believe, but true: under a law Congress passed last year aimed at regulating hazards in children’s products, the federal government has now advised that children’s books published before 1985 should not be considered safe and may in many cases be unlawful to sell or distribute. Merchants, thrift stores, and booksellers may be at risk if they sell older volumes, or even give them away, without first subjecting them to testing - at prohibitive expense. Many used-book sellers, consignment stores, Goodwill outlets, and the like have accordingly begun to refuse new donations of pre-1985 volumes, yank existing ones off their shelves, and in some cases discard them en masse.
And before anyone says eBay will sidestep this…
“And don’t think that one will be able to use the Internet to slip some gently used baby clothes or old illustrated kiddie books into willing hands … cuz Henry is watching.Which makes me think this is less about the dangers of lead in the environment, and more about tightening the state’s grasp over channels of trade and communication that have so far slipped through its fingers.
In order to crack down on online sites such as Craigslist and Ebay, the CPSC says, they are currently working with an internet surveillance team to watch over the online marketplaces. “
Anyone think this can’t happen here? In the UK, where even the lowliest state functionary is a hysterical 'something must be done!' risk-averse nincompoop?
Yeah. That's what I thought.
18 comments:
Re second hand shops, I have dropped off stuff there for years (kids' buggies and toys, hi-fi's that still work - which they always reject, plates - are these dishwasher safe? etc) and they get stricter every time.
There was one buggy that was maybe three years old (bought new when child was two and no longer needed when child was five) and they told me they couldn't accept it because it didn't have the appropriate up-to-date kite-mark, which had been introduced recently.
Now, either I had been pushing my little lass round in a dangerously unsafe buggy for three years (the horrors!); or this is just a ploy by the Association of Buggy Manufacturers to prevent low income people saying themselves £40 by buying a second hand buggy.
The bansturbators love it either way, but who is maninpulating whom here?
And meanwhile, those of us who grew up playing with lead soldiers, painted our bikes with lead based paints and walking on streets alongside cars running on leaded petrol continue to live quite ordinary unaffected lives - while kids who have missed all that are increasingly prone to allergies, asthma, autism and all sorts of disorders apparently caused by the modern society.
It's not just the association of buggy manufacturers though, is Mark? All electrical items and soft furnishings are banned. So where's the supporting data? People dying in their hundreds from exploding toasters and incendiary sofas are they? I think I might have heard if they were.
I agree there's an ulterior motive. Watch out for a crackdown on garage and car boot sales on safety grounds, and now I come to think about it, surely older secondhand cars don't meet modern safety requirements either.
Going back to the children's books, I remember reading (this is not a new story BTW) some shops were burning books because it was illegal to sell them. Mmm, book burning. That reminds me of something but I can't put my finger on it.
Anyway, you'll have to prise my 1950s Rupert annuals out of my cold, dead fingers. In fact, I might as well take them to the grave with me as it would obviously be illegal to pass them on to the grandkids.
It's all about control, it's always about control, no matter how they dress it up. If they can bend just one person to their whim, it sends a frisson of pleasure through their near dead nervous systems as it proves they exist and are 'worthwhile'
So, all those books pre-1985 which contained all sorts of awkward information, such as the truth, facts, etc...recalled and down the memory hole.
That year sounds like a handy cut off point for all childrens' literature that wasn't edited for political correctness.
Hmmm...
And re-issues will probably be subject to new laws on what can and can't be said, even under the first amendment.
Either that, or milquetoast publishers will make changes to avoid possible offence (read loss of revenue).
I can see the day when unredacted Tintin books will be illegal to posess.
Common sense among our lawmakers has flown out the window.
It's probably all that lead exposure, over the years. Rotted their brains. Maybe we should listen, after all.
I have lead underpants and they fit very well. Their has been a little wearing in the rear but all in all a great material to advise in the construction of more pants, silver is apparently good for other reasons. Can anyone advise if I should switch to silver pants on a temporary or permanent basis for the health concerns raised in respect of lead usage? Please note, I do not intend on eating my pants soon.
It's got to the stage where the kids are not allowed to move now. Just how far can nannying of kids go before they grow up as nervous wrecks?
"...they told me they couldn't accept it because it didn't have the appropriate up-to-date kite-mark..."
Slowly, they tighten their grip...
Of course, having taken the government's money (or rather, ours) they then can't tell the government to get stuffed, can they? Or even lobby for exemptions.
"Watch out for a crackdown on garage and car boot sales on safety grounds.."
Bound to happen. You can buy as many aspirin as you want in those places. And knives!
"It's all about control, it's always about control.."
Yup, that's what it always boils down to.
"So, all those books pre-1985 which contained all sorts of awkward information, such as the truth, facts, etc...recalled and down the memory hole."
Heh!
"That year sounds like a handy cut off point for all childrens' literature that wasn't edited for political correctness."
Must be a coincidence... ;)
"Common sense among our lawmakers has flown out the window.
It's probably all that lead exposure, over the years."
It would be poetic justice if so, wouldn't it?
"Just how far can nannying of kids go before they grow up as nervous wrecks?"
The ones that aren't feral savages mostly are!
It's about control. And money.
"So, all those books pre-1985 which contained all sorts of awkward information, such as the truth, facts, etc...recalled and down the memory hole."
Oh, Rob, I hadn't even thought of it in those terms. Do you think they're really trying to do a real-life adaptation of 1984 meets Fahrenheit 451? Oh, what a world...
I will open my home to books of all sorts - especially those that fit your description here - "give me your tired stacks, your huddled pages, yearning to flip free..."
It sounds ludicrous. Unbelievable. And this is why the CPSIA flew under the radar, because no one wanted to believe SANE people could draft such a law, certainly it would never PASS, and if it passed, was surely unenforceable...
The crafters and clothiers tried to make people listen, but they dismissed THEM as the nutbuckets until the law passed.
Scan those books.
Nobody can claim the kids will get lead poisoning if the books are on screen, or printed out using a brand new inkjet.
The authors and publishers will need to give permission to put them online, but since they face a total loss of sales and the destruction of their work, they might be more inclined to agree to it.
Especially if they were getting a few pennies per download. They don't get anything from second hand book sales so even a penny a download is a massive improvement.
Then it'll come down to 'content control', which is what it's really about anyway. It would force the Ban Brigade to show their true colours though.
Some of those old books don't have any 'gay' characters in them. Burn them!
Exposure to the British Education System is harming their intellectual and emotional development!!!
I can see the day when unredacted Tintin books will be illegal to possess.
And Noddy
Another Orwellian implementation.
Rewrite history, erase reference to the good times had by a free society and in the interim, demonise their content.
Control.
"It sounds ludicrous. Unbelievable. And this is why the CPSIA flew under the radar, because no one wanted to believe SANE people could draft such a law, certainly it would never PASS, and if it passed, was surely unenforceable..."
That often happens. And we never seem to learn...
"Then it'll come down to 'content control', which is what it's really about anyway. It would force the Ban Brigade to show their true colours though."
I'm thinking the sooner people wake up to this, and what it means, the better...
"Exposure to the British Education System is harming their intellectual and emotional development!!!"
Exactly! What need for books in the future? Who will still read?
"I can see the day when unredacted Tintin books will be illegal to possess.
And Noddy"
They're already hard to find in bookstores and libraries.
"Another Orwellian implementation.
Rewrite history, erase reference to the good times had by a free society and in the interim, demonise their content."
Yup. It's glaringly obvious. Why don't more people see it?
Post a Comment