jryoung
Well-known member
This is also a very big flaw in many of the studies because the absence of lead in blood does not eliminate lead poisoning. IIRC the North Dakota study (or perhaps it was another) was delayed in testing, had low levels and thus that data was use by pro traditional ammunition groups without context. Further complicating samples is how much a shooter shoots, lots of time at a range, especially indoors will lead to elevated blood levels. I know this because I've tested myself pre and post shooting.Actually that's misleading. There has never been a study I seen that tests for lead by any other method than a blood test. After ingesting lead it leaves the blood relatively quickly and is then stored in your bones, teeth, brain, etc. For obvious reasons bone biopsy tests havent been done.
We have seen elevated lead levels in various groups post hunting seasons, it'd be interesting to test cumulative lead exposure in many of those same groups through x-ray fluorescence.