How Hattie Lost 300 Pounds: 'I Was Ready To Do Whatever It Took To…
14 Active Dates For Valentine's Day
Lead levels and lunch boxes: getting the story straight
Posted on Feb 20th 2007 7:00AM by Bethany SandersWhen the Consumer Product Safety Commission safety tested soft vinyl lunch boxes in 2005, they found that 20% contained dangerous levels of lead -- so they changed the way they did their test. They claimed that cutting the lunch boxes apart and testing them, as they did the first time around, did not reflect the way the soft, vinyl boxes would be treated by children and adults in real life. So they did a second test where they wiped the outside of the lunch boxes, and got much lower results.
The CPSC decided not to release the results of the first tests to the public, but then last year the FDA got a hold of them and had a very different reaction. Claiming that lead would be considered a "food additive" if it rubbed off on to enclosed food, the FDA warned lunch box manufacturer's that they may have to pull their products from store shelves and revamp the production of the bags. Lead is used as a stabilizer in vinyl, but there are other stabilizers that can be used. Many stores and companies have complied, but the CPSC stands by it's original test results, saying that children would have to ..."rub their lunch box and then lick their hands more than 600 times every day, for about 15 to 30 days..." for their lunch boxes to post a risk.
Numerous studies have shown that lead, even in low doses, can cause learning and neurological problems in children. If you want to test your or your child's lunch box for lead, go here, or if you want to dodge the issue completely, you can always pick up a lead-free lunch bag. I'm curious to hear your take on this, though. Do you think the CPSC should have published the results of both tests and let consumers decide for themselves whether it was a risk they were willing to take? Or is the risk so small that this is a non-issue to you?
The CPSC decided not to release the results of the first tests to the public, but then last year the FDA got a hold of them and had a very different reaction. Claiming that lead would be considered a "food additive" if it rubbed off on to enclosed food, the FDA warned lunch box manufacturer's that they may have to pull their products from store shelves and revamp the production of the bags. Lead is used as a stabilizer in vinyl, but there are other stabilizers that can be used. Many stores and companies have complied, but the CPSC stands by it's original test results, saying that children would have to ..."rub their lunch box and then lick their hands more than 600 times every day, for about 15 to 30 days..." for their lunch boxes to post a risk.
Numerous studies have shown that lead, even in low doses, can cause learning and neurological problems in children. If you want to test your or your child's lunch box for lead, go here, or if you want to dodge the issue completely, you can always pick up a lead-free lunch bag. I'm curious to hear your take on this, though. Do you think the CPSC should have published the results of both tests and let consumers decide for themselves whether it was a risk they were willing to take? Or is the risk so small that this is a non-issue to you?
