Lead Ammo Brief - go debate

[Four Season Whitetail's]

At the bold part, are you serious? What? Am I back in school where I have to raise my hand too? Where's the bathroom pass? I have go #2 Mr. Rossi. Geez,

 

As for some people not being happy about the price of non lead ammo, I think it's very relevant to this topic. The person who buys lead shotgun ammo for $6 a box may not be able to afford to buy his/her usual ( this is an example ) 10 boxes a year when the cost would be more then triple that. If you think those people, people like me are irrelevant, you are the only one over stepping here.

I said, it may cause a drop in ammo sales. No one can validate or prove something that hasn't happened yet.

You asked questions or more specific for a 'debate'. If you don't like the answers, don't ask the questions.

 

This thread has been peppered more or less about doves, and then it got the point it was inevitably going to reach with this:

 

 

 

 

Looking at this, and seeing it's all about doves, again, I think it proves the majority of dove hunters want to keep using lead ammo. Just sayin'. As for proving the bullet points? The stats you posted don't even really go with your 'bullet points'. They are facts ( maybe, where's the links to prove your stats are correct ) based on the opinions and feelings of others. An opinion isn't a fact.

I would guess with this post Rob is not only at the top by himself he has a slam dunk.  On top of that he is learning the other poster very well about how things go when someone disagrees with His debate.  Wow!

[DirtTime]

I wasn't aware it was a contest. Just an informative debate.

 

OK, I have been looking, the one phrase that keeps showing up in all these studies is this:

To date, there have not been any cases of human illnesses linked to lead particles in hunter-harvested venison or other wild game.

 

.

 

 

As for finding CDC on lead poisoning in children from eating wild game, Can't seem to find Anything.

Here's a pic of the search I did, and I did not find one link on 3 pages ( 30 links ) that had CDC in the study or article.

 

 

[mike rossi]

Rob,

 

Don't get sarcastic with me. Nearly everyone on this forum is compelled to teach, not just me. 

 

You have not demonstrated you understand even the most basic everyday logic, so I am not interested in how you analyze and critique science research. 

 

You posted a price difference in ammo. That does not even prove lead ammo is cheaper across the board, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume such is true. Now, in keeping with the gist of this thread topic, can you prove that this price difference would impact participation in hunting? 

 

 

 

[mike rossi]

As I see it, up to this point, (after 3 pages), this is what we got. Did I miss anything? 

 

There is no clear, direct link between eating wild game and elevated lead blood levels. However, it is clear that.....

Espresso has cited multiple studies which link the consumption of wild game harvested with lead ammunition to elevated blood lead levels.

 

The use of lead ammo, either shot shells or bullets does indeed harm wildlife. As with meat samples, gut piles have....

Curmudgeon posted his own trap camera data showing many animals scavenge deer carcasses. 

 

Lead alternatives are to costly, therefore it will cause people to quit hunting.

Nobody provided definitive evidence which substantiates this.

 

Lead alternatives damage guns

Nobody provided evidence which substantiates this.

 

Lead alternatives perform poorly

Nobody provided evidence which substantiates this.

 

Some hunters claim the conclusions about lead ammunition is part of a bigger conspiracy to restrict hunting or firearms ownership.

Data from the National Dove Hunting Survey was cited. 52.2 % of those surveyed in the National Dove Hunting Survey indicated they believe this to be true. That shows , at least "some"hunters believe this. 

Edited March 15, 2016 by mike rossi

[Skillet]

"Don't get sarcastic with me". LoL.

Keep it up Rob, & you're headed to the office, mister.

[Curmudgeon]

This quote that Rob recycled is bizarre: "To date, there have not been any cases of human illnesses linked to lead particles in hunter-harvested venison or other wild game."

 

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention state, for children "lead may impair development and have harmful health effects even at lower levels, and there is no known safe exposure level."

 

"There is no known safe exposure level" for children because even below the threshold of 5 μg/dL, damage is done. "Impairing development" may still leave a child within the average range so nothing is evident. Lead from any source can be responsible for such "impairment". Since meat killed with lead raises blood-lead levels to a measurable level (at least at a population scale, if not the one baby cited), it follows that these levels are unacceptable for children. Those low levels can accumulate in a females' bones over a lifetime for release during pregnancy and nursing, even if they never cause a measurable problem for her. Such is the value of discussing "illnesses".

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Rob,

 

Don't get sarcastic with me. Nearly everyone on this forum is compelled to teach, not just me. 

 

You have not demonstrated you understand even the most basic everyday logic, so I am not interested in how you analyze and critique science research. 

 

You posted a price difference in ammo. That does not even prove lead ammo is cheaper across the board, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume such is true. Now, in keeping with the gist of this thread topic, can you prove that this price difference would impact participation in hunting? 

Again..Has your name been put at the top of this site somewhere that  we are missing?     Everyone on this site can see how Rob has 100% disputed your statements with 100% fact and research.  You are getting told and shown something that does not agree with your thoughts and beliefs and you cry

 

Again...If you cant handle the pressure on most of your silly failed pipe dreams that all go back to a now and any near future Dove hunting season in Ny State then keep it on your website..

[Four Season Whitetail's]

This quote that Rob recycled is bizarre: "To date, there have not been any cases of human illnesses linked to lead particles in hunter-harvested venison or other wild game."

 

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention state, for children "lead may impair development and have harmful health effects even at lower levels, and there is no known safe exposure level."

 

"There is no known safe exposure level" for children because even below the threshold of 5 μg/dL, damage is done. "Impairing development" may still leave a child within the average range so nothing is evident. Lead from any source can be responsible for such "impairment". Since meat killed with lead raises blood-lead levels to a measurable level (at least at a population scale, if not the one baby cited), it follows that these levels are unacceptable for children. Those low levels can accumulate in a females' bones over a lifetime for release during pregnancy and nursing, even if they never cause a measurable problem for her. Such is the value of discussing "illnesses".

You read words into statements much???  They say lead MAY impair..... Just like they said CWD prion MAY be passed in deer urine.

[Lawdwaz]

You read words into statements much???  They say lead MAY impair..... Just like they said CWD prion MAY be passed in deer urine.

 

Keep reading..........."and have harmful health effects even at lower levels, and there is no known safe exposure level."

[Tacti_Steve]

 

 

Complete and comprehensive studies have been done by the CDC and other universities and research centers and continue to be done. As for the for the alternative being toxic also remember it is not just the toxicity that is important it is the fragmentation at high velocity. Even if copper were just as toxic, which it is not, it does not fragment at high velocity like lead.

 

Like climate change those who do not want to change will continue to say there is not enough evidence or that the studies were not done properly or worse that they know and don't care.

 

Arizona is on board!

http://www.azgfd.gov/w_c/documents/110715_NonLead_broch_FINAL.pdf

 

These studies are not complete nor comprehensive. In fact they are extremely flawed. Most have no control study and extremely limited samples. None control for outside factors and make or ignore major assumptions. Not to say their findings are useless. They are good for saying hey we should look closer at this. But not much more than that. States that have made regulations based off of these have made bad regulations and/or gone along with special interest groups. 

[mike rossi]

These studies are not complete nor comprehensive. In fact they are extremely flawed. Most have no control study and extremely limited samples. None control for outside factors and make or ignore major assumptions. Not to say their findings are useless. They are good for saying hey we should look closer at this. But not much more than that. States that have made regulations based off of these have made bad regulations and/or gone along with special interest groups. 

 

How can you control for all sources of lead? Run an experiment with rats or chimps? Maybe someone did, search the literature. But didn't somebody quote at least one study which indicated that venison eaters had higher blood lead levels than controls? 

Edited March 15, 2016 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

How can you control for all sources of lead? Run an experiment with rats or chimps? Maybe someone did, search the literature. But didn't somebody quote at least one study which indicated that venison eaters had higher blood lead levels than controls? 

 

I found a few, Here is one you can start with. They used young pigs, 70 to 80 days old. Before the trial they were fed commercial feed which can contain lead, but they were still only 80 days old, and - the control pigs were also fed the same commercial feed....

 

Here is the link: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0005330

Edited March 15, 2016 by mike rossi

[Tacti_Steve]

How can you control for all sources of lead? Run an experiment with rats or chimps? Maybe someone did, search the literature. But didn't somebody quote at least one study which indicated that venison eaters had higher blood lead levels than controls? 

You can control for Deer shot by hunters. You can take Deer hit by cars and not put down with a bullet. 

[Tacti_Steve]

I found a few, Here is one you can start with. They used young pigs, 70 to 80 days old. Before the trial they were fed commercial feed which can contain lead, but they were still only 80 days old, and - the control pigs were also fed the same commercial feed....

 

Here is the link: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0005330

That is the best study I've seen so far. Now take that and scale it up across the country and using different rifles and bullets (and shotguns). Pair that with a true control of Deer not shot and you've got yourself a study.

[dbHunterNY]

As I see it, up to this point, (after 3 pages), this is what we got. Did I miss anything? 

 

There is no clear, direct link between eating wild game and elevated lead blood levels. However, it is clear that.....

Espresso has cited multiple studies which link the consumption of wild game harvested with lead ammunition to elevated blood lead levels.

 

The use of lead ammo, either shot shells or bullets does indeed harm wildlife. As with meat samples, gut piles have....

Curmudgeon posted his own trap camera data showing many animals scavenge deer carcasses. 

 

Lead alternatives are to costly, therefore it will cause people to quit hunting.

Nobody provided definitive evidence which substantiates this.

 

Lead alternatives damage guns

Nobody provided evidence which substantiates this.

 

Lead alternatives perform poorly

Nobody provided evidence which substantiates this.

 

Some hunters claim the conclusions about lead ammunition is part of a bigger conspiracy to restrict hunting or firearms ownership.

Data from the National Dove Hunting Survey was cited. 52.2 % of those surveyed in the National Dove Hunting Survey indicated they believe this to be true. That shows , at least "some"hunters believe this. 

 

I thought you said Rob's evidence was good.  now it's not definitive?  added with mine too?  what if someone went on the MidwayUsa site averaged ALL the cost per round of lead hunting ammo and then averaged non-lead hunting ammo?  Don't expect me to do this.  I already have a good idea what the answer will be, and you can't afford my rates.

 

for others like damaging guns you seemed to ignore evidence that's qualitative and not quantitative.  you're treating much of it as inadmissible when in fact it wouldn't be.  not quite sure what your roll is but you seem to be playing judge, jury, and prosecutor.

 

I've got more evidence for you for the first one... my wife ate venison before, throughout, and after pregnancy.  she breast fed.  2/3 of that venison has been from deer harvested with a gun and ammunition with lead.  everyone in the household eats it including my daughter even before she had teeth.  it makes up probably 90+% of your diet for meat.  haven't gotten a single pediatric blood test back saying any blood lead levels were anything other than negligible.  it should also be noted that I participate in mostly indoor pistol competitions, including clean up where lead bullets are used exclusively.  while I take measures to prevent health risks and unnecessary exposure to it, I do not see its responsible use a grave concern.

 

I find it hard to believe anyone here cannot honestly acknowledge it's probably a good thing to move more and more away from using lead ammunition.  Also, an outright ban on lead and exclusive use of non-lead ammo is just not feasible or good for sportsmen in general.

[Tacti_Steve]

For those that haven't seen it here is my research http://huntingny.com/forums/topic/32110-my-hunting-with-lead-bullets-research-not-a-debate/Keep the debate here

[Curmudgeon]

It doesn't matter where the debate is as long as people are reading it.

 

Make intelligent and informed choices.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Curmudgeon

[airedale]

Copied off the boxes of three different ammo manufacturers I have on the shelf, in the fine print of course. From the horse's mouth!

 

1." Winchester Xpert Hi-Velocity Steel shot, Use only in firearms designed for steel shot that are in good condition with markings exactly matching ammunition!"

 

2." Kent Fasteel Precision Steel, Potential barrel damage may occur when using steel shot in some guns. If no information exists that can confirm your guns ability to shoot steel shot do not use it!"

 

3. "Federal Speed Shok Steel, The use of steel shot can cause damage in some guns, our protective shot cup is designed to prevent or minimize this tendency, but we will accept no responsibility for such barrel damage resulting from the use of these shells!"

 

Edited March 15, 2016 by airedale

[airedale]

I worked in a friend's sporting good store in the late seventies and early eighties when steel shot started being used. We sent several barrels back to the manufacturers for repair, we were advised by all firearms manufacturers to tell customers not use steel shot in their firearms unless they were proofed for steel!!!

 

Al

[airedale]

Hevi-Shot is comprised of tungsten alloy (tungsten is an element which is harder than steel/iron), nickel, and iron. Hevi-Shot pellets are very hard and they must be contained within a special non-toxic shotcup.

 

I do not have any Hevi-Shot because of it's price so I do not know if they have a warning on their box but with the above being the case I personally would not shoot Hevi Shot out of any older shotguns that did not have barrels that were proofed for steel.

 

Al

Edited March 15, 2016 by airedale

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Keep reading..........."and have harmful health effects even at lower levels, and there is no known safe exposure level."

No need to read further than the word MAY..Meaning there is possible doubt with the work AND just adding to the doubt.

 

Cant have fact with the word May...

[Lawdwaz]

No need to read further than the word MAY..Meaning there is possible doubt with the work AND just adding to the doubt.

 

Cant have fact with the word May...

 

OK, lets go with this..........

 

"there is no known safe exposure level."

[Grouse]

OK, lets go with this..........

 

"there is no known safe exposure level."

 

This is an obviously radical extremist statement.  If it were true ANY exposure, to ANY amount of lead would be fatal.

[Lawdwaz]

This is an obviously radical extremist statement.  If it were true ANY exposure, to ANY amount of lead would be fatal.

 

Where is the word "fatal" in the quoted statement? 

 

"there is no known safe exposure level."

 

 

It's "not" safe to speed or run red lights either.  You don't necessarily die if you do those things, do you?

Edited March 15, 2016 by Lawdwaz

[Rattler]

Safe levels of lead exposure would be those your body can tolerate and overcome with regeneration.  Those levels do exist, so there are known levels of exposure that are safe.