_____________________________________________________________________
LEAD Action News Volume 22 Number 4 December 2024 Page 26 of 131
all lead pipes. The estimated benefits for each rule far exceeded the costs of those rules.
The recommendations include:
• Recognize and emphasize the cardiovascular disease risk in preventive health policies and
communications; take decisive and consequential actions when adult blood lead levels are at
or above 10 µg/dL.
• Combine adult and child blood lead surveillance systems at federal, state, and local levels;
improve national and state Adult Blood Lead Epidemiology and Surveillance (ABLES)
programs, including performance measures, data management, and funding.
• Use new California OSHA standards as a model for feasible health protection because the
federal standards fail to protect workers.
• Encourage occupational physicians to exercise their discretionary authority to recommend
medical removal and other protective measures at blood lead levels lower than OSHA limits.
• Eliminate all unnecessary workplace and commercial uses of lead where substitution of safer
alternative materials is possible and feasible.
• Increase compliance with EPA’s Lead-Safe Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) rule.
• Mandate lead hazard mitigation activities for permits and inspections conducted in
accordance with model codes of the International Code Council.
• Offer no-cost blood lead screening to uninsured or low-income adults.
• Improve compliance with CDC and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
(ACOG) recommendations for blood lead screening of pregnant people and track success
through healthcare performance measures.
Why it Matters
LEPAC gave seven specific reasons to support its call for action:
• “A prominent endpoint of concern is death, as opposed to subtle or subclinical effects on
organ system function that are often sufficient for public health and regulatory action.”
• “The epidemiological evidence that associates this outcome with lead exposure is derived from
multiple large, high quality prospective cohort studies that extensively controlled for
confounding and bias.”
• “This epidemiological evidence is coherent with clinical and experimental findings that
demonstrate plausible modes of action at consistent lead doses.”
• “Because the background risk of cardiovascular mortality in populations with this ongoing
extent of lead exposure (largely but not exclusively in the workplace) is high, the absolute
increase in mortality may be substantial.”
• “The magnitude of lead-related risk is on par with that of other prominent cardiovascular risk
factors, such as elevated cholesterol, smoking, and hypertension, that have been the focus of
extensive public health concern.”
• “Levels of chronic adult lead exposure linked to this risk remain prevalent in many workplace
settings.”