lead in ammunition

[Curmudgeon]

In the other tread Mike started, I just posted some numbers on eagles affected by lead. It is redundant to post them here too.

 

Discussing human impacts always brings out this argument that people have been using lead bullets for years. While all of us probably have some neurons that are lead-damaged, that argument ignores the differences between the behavior of bullets in high powered rifles and older firearms. Slow projectiles do not fragment like high speed bullets. Like Mike said, you will get more lead from small fragments. Their is a large increase in surface area for exposure.

 

Of 20 gut piles that were X-rayed, 50% had more than 100 fragments, 25% had more than 200 fragments. Try to accomplish that with a black powder gun. 

 

Human impacts aren't my main concern. I won't feed lead killed venison to my grandkids but I don't object to you guys doing it. Fragmentation being a modern problem, the consumption of large amounts of venison being an even more modern phenomenon, the grinding of meat (which really helps distribute the lead thoroughly) being something that has increased with the advent of small and effective grinders for the individual, the exposure level should be much higher than historically.  

 

You guys who don't like these discussion can just leave. This isn't a threat. No one is promoting a ban. The problem is, most hunters out there are not aware of the problem, either for scavengers or humans. They cannot make informed choices without information. Many people make better choices when they understand the issues. 

 

 

 

 

[airedale]

 I for one will not be going anywhere my friend! Any time this fear monger lead ammo crap subject comes up I will be standing up  against the slanted narrative posted here!

 

Human impacts are not your concern because there is zero proof that a properly butchered big game animal shot with a jacketed lead bullet that has been removed of all the bloodshot meat suspected of having lead in it and discarded has any kind of adverse affect on long term Human health.

 

With the administration this country has and it's justice department's desperate  search for anything possible no matter how small for a some kind of law that would curb guns and their use what a bonanza it would be if they could ban lead based ammo! The reason they have not prosecuted lead in ammo is because what I said in the first paragraph, they would never be able to prove that there is enough lead consumed by eating game meat to cause enough harm that is measurable.

 

It will not be banned because of Raptors because unlike the Condors out west that almost went extinct the Raptors numbers including eagles has risen every year and will continue to do so. As eagle numbers all over the country continue to rise I am sure you will find more incidents of them getting killed from various things the same as deer accidents with vehicle happen when their populations rise. Like posted on one of the other lead threads it is conservatively estimated that over one million various animal are killed every day on our roadways.

 

I have always found it is pretty easy to target something when one has little or no vested interest. How much actual  deer hunting and rifle-pistol shooting are you and Mr Rossi participating in these days?

 

And finally to the "NO ONE IS PROMOTING A BAN" statement, always the first thing out of the lead ammo  haters mouths, give me a freaking break!! There is absolutely  no question in my mind if you Mr Curmudgeon could snap your fingers and and have all lead ammo eliminated you would do it in a heartbeat.

 

All this being said if the bullet and ammunition manufacturers can ever come up with a bullet material made from some kind of lead substitute that price wise was close to lead and performed as well as lead on both game animals and has the same accuracy along safe for barrels it is shot through I would use it. 

 

Al

Edited June 23, 2016 by airedale

[Bowguy 1]

Oh my God. Don't wanna shoot lead don't, leave everyone else alone.

Interesting note, a gun shop by me did a test. I had nothing to do w it n it is limited but they fed 2 ducks putting tiny bits of lead shot in the food n they lived over 8 years from test start.

How many guys have had split shot in their mouths since kids fishing. There's lead powder on that.

Let's worry bout ISIS instead of our destroying the earth.

If you were sharing info at a gun show you were prob selling something as well. Wonder if the motives are sincere? Maybe you can get us all some lead free bullets free of charge to try a few years?

Edited June 23, 2016 by Bowguy 1

[Padre86]

Then why do you want to ingest it?

 

I don't.  If I see lead fragments in my meat, I pull them out out.  But I don't find a lot of those fragments, and in fact a lot of these studies have shown that the lead residue being left from bullet strikes are only observable at the microscopic level.  Eating lead is bad.  Is eating lead residue so small that you can't even see it with the naked eye really going to have a measurable affect on you?  It's like saying that eating paint chips are bad for your, but if a tiny spec of one falls into your dinner plate and you eat it by accident, are you really going to notice?  I don't know that anyone has decisively proven that either way.  The studies I've read into have shown that people who eat lead-shot game meat, as a whole, have the same lead exposure, if not slightly less, than the average American (who most definitely does not lead-shot game meat).  Again refer back to the 2008 North Dakota study.

 

Then tell me why it is relevant. You are not making any sense, whether you know it or not. 

 

 Lead and many other harmful substances naturally occur in this earth, and it is not unheard for there to be natural exposure to such substances.  That aside, there are a whole bunch of other man-made applications that use lead, and so when animals turn up with lead poisoning, it is not necessarily a given that a hunter's bullets were the cause...again refer back to the Washington Times article on the lead ban in CA and the Condors....there were obviously other sources of lead that were affecting the Condors, not just bullets.

 

You all ask for "proof" or for studies, but never provide your own substantiations. No matter how many studies that are cited,  you all have your ideas why the study is flawed. Anti - hunters do the same thing, So does industry, Its an old game. That is why sound laws do not get passed. But a thinking person does not need laws to protect himself and his family. All a thinking person has to do to be safe is be guided by the evidence. The evidence shows eating meat harvested with lead ammo is not a good idea. 

 

I actually provided a well referenced and reviewed study conducted by a scientist, and while he did a fairly decent job of concealing any obvious biases, there is no doubt that he is against using lead for hunting bullets.  

https://www.peregrinefund.org/subsites/conference-lead/2008%20CDC%20ND_Final_TripReport_5NOV08.pdf

 

The "proof" that I cited was quoted directly from the study:

 

 

While this study suggests that consumption of wild game meat can adversely affect PbB, no participant had PbB higher than the CDC recommended threshold of 10µg/dl—the level at which CDC recommends case management; and the geometric mean PbB among this study population (1.17µg/dl) was lower than the overall population geometric mean PbB in the United States (1.60 µg/dl) (CDC 2005).

 

I am willing to acknowledge the results and findings from other studies, but as I have pointed out numerous times now, there should be no reason that we can't conclusively prove this case one way or the other using real-world data and real-world sample populations (of humans).  Hypothetical models and studies using livestock are nice, but we as humans have been ingesting lead-shot game meat for a long time now.  It shouldn't be hard for someone to analyze the data and make the case that eating lead-shot meat is bad, if in fact there is a case to be made.  If the matter is so settled, as you claim it is, why can't you provide me with a link to such a study?

 

 Also you should reply to my actual quote blocks next time instead of writing within the quote blocks.

Edited June 23, 2016 by Padre86

[jjb4900]

if there's something out there that is just as good as lead without the possible dangers, I'm all for it as long as it's a choice.....as long as it kills what I'm shooting, I really don't care, dead is dead.

[Padre86]

Also, why all of a sudden is there this sudden push to ban or de-emphasize lead bullets?

 

How many birds get fried flying over solar panel arrays?

 

How many people are exposing themselves to radiation when they talk on their phone for 2 hours a day or watch TV?

 

How much industrial waste and harmful runoff is generated to produce pretty much everything we buy, use and eat in this consumer culture of ours?

 

I don't question that lead is bad for us and the environment, but the tiny fragments, and often times microscopic residue, we're talking about here barely even counts as a drop in the proverbial bucket when you consider all the other ways we are degrading this environment and our bodily health.  If the vocal opponents to lead bullets, here and elsewhere, were truly adhering to some environmental principle, there should be a slue of other action items that take priority over banning lead bullets.

[grampy]

These days, just about everything we eat, drink, see and do is reported to be bad for "our" health. I think I'll just live my life how I like and take my chances.

[jjb4900]

I'm not the least bit concerned about the amount of lead I may consume or already have consumed from eating wild game I've killed.....but if there's alternatives that can be used by CHOICE to make some feel better, then I don't see a problem with someone using it and putting the info out there for others to look at.

[pistolp71]

I don't see the problem. I shoot a deer in the heart/lungs, and I should be worried about eating the meat? Must be missing something.

[Rattler]

No one is promoting a ban. The problem is, most hunters out there are not aware of the problem, either for scavengers or humans. They cannot make informed choices without information. Many people make better choices when they understand the issues. 

 

This is where I see denial and arrogance in those who promote non-lead ammo.  When someone uses the lead ban for waterfowl hunting to defend the elimination of lead rifle bullets, they spin it as voluntary, but want it to be mandatory.  And that would be mandatory with all of the government imposed penalties that come with it.

 

Also, implying that most hunters are not aware of the issue and cannot make informed choices is really calling them stupid, mainly because they don't want to go along with the program for whatever reason.  Finally, saying they will make better choices when they have more information is a sign of a superiority complex, believing you know the only right answer to the problem and do not question your own choices.

 

Yes, lead is bad, deer bullets using lead may be affecting raptors, (but so are many other things) they may even be contaminating some venison for consumption if not properly butchered.  But do we want the government telling us it is now making the choices in this area for us by force, because they make better decisions than we do?  Do we want to hand over freedom of choice here, like we did for waterfowl, without being absolutely sure the actual effects claimed are caused by deer bullets?

 

If you believe it's harming you, choose not to use lead bullets.  But do not think you have the authority, or even moral high ground, to tell others what to do.  If you can't sway hunter's opinion on lead ammo with information, unless you are a total statist, you cannot use that same information to pass a law effecting others against their will.  

 

That's where America is going on many issues these days.  It is completely against the original concept of freedom of choice and liberty this country was founded on.

[Curmudgeon]

This is where I see denial and arrogance in those who promote non-lead ammo.  When someone uses the lead ban for waterfowl hunting to defend the elimination of lead rifle bullets, they spin it as voluntary, but want it to be mandatory.  And that would be mandatory with all of the government imposed penalties that come with it.

 

Also, implying that most hunters are not aware of the issue and cannot make informed choices is really calling them stupid, mainly because they don't want to go along with the program for whatever reason.  Finally, saying they will make better choices when they have more information is a sign of a superiority complex, believing you know the only right answer to the problem and do not question your own choices.

 

Yes, lead is bad, deer bullets using lead may be affecting raptors, (but so are many other things) they may even be contaminating some venison for consumption if not properly butchered.  But do we want the government telling us it is now making the choices in this area for us by force, because they make better decisions than we do?  Do we want to hand over freedom of choice here, like we did for waterfowl, without being absolutely sure the actual effects claimed are caused by deer bullets?

 

If you believe it's harming you, choose not to use lead bullets.  But do not think you have the authority, or even moral high ground, to tell others what to do.  If you can't sway hunter's opinion on lead ammo with information, unless you are a total statist, you cannot use that same information to pass a law effecting others against their will.  

 

That's where America is going on many issues these days.  It is completely against the original concept of freedom of choice and liberty this country was founded on.

 

1 - What are you talking about? You quote me and immediately go into the waterfowl issue. I never mentioned waterfowl or anything to do with that. 

 

2 - I have spoken to hundreds of hunters on this issue. They are not stupid. However, most - way more than half - have been totally unaware of the lead fragmentation issue.       That is empirical knowledge, not a "superiority complex". Most hunters who learn that there is an alternative, one that performs better and lowers risk, at little increased cost switch.

 

3 - While no one here is advocating any regulation, you, and some of your compatriots are opposing education. You don't want the information out there.

 

4 - Why are you so angry?

 

[Four Season Whitetail's]

 I for one will not be going anywhere my friend! Any time this fear monger lead ammo crap subject comes up I will be standing up  against the slanted narrative posted here!

 

Human impacts are not your concern because there is zero proof that a properly butchered big game animal shot with a jacketed lead bullet that has been removed of all the bloodshot meat suspected of having lead in it and discarded has any kind of adverse affect on long term Human health.

 

With the administration this country has and it's justice department's desperate  search for anything possible no matter how small for a some kind of law that would curb guns and their use what a bonanza it would be if they could ban lead based ammo! The reason they have not prosecuted lead in ammo is because what I said in the first paragraph, they would never be able to prove that there is enough lead consumed by eating game meat to cause enough harm that is measurable.

 

It will not be banned because of Raptors because unlike the Condors out west that almost went extinct the Raptors numbers including eagles has risen every year and will continue to do so. As eagle numbers all over the country continue to rise I am sure you will find more incidents of them getting killed from various things the same as deer accidents with vehicle happen when their populations rise. Like posted on one of the other lead threads it is conservatively estimated that over one million various animal are killed every day on our roadways.

 

I have always found it is pretty easy to target something when one has little or no vested interest. How much actual  deer hunting and rifle-pistol shooting are you and Mr Rossi participating in these days?

 

And finally to the "NO ONE IS PROMOTING A BAN" statement, always the first thing out of the lead ammo  haters mouths, give me a freaking break!! There is absolutely  no question in my mind if you Mr Curmudgeon could snap your fingers and and have all lead ammo eliminated you would do it in a heartbeat.

 

All this being said if the bullet and ammunition manufacturers can ever come up with a bullet material made from some kind of lead substitute that price wise was close to lead and performed as well as lead on both game animals and has the same accuracy along safe for barrels it is shot through I would use it. 

 

Al

One does not hunt deer and not real sure the other hunts at all. The past has not shown much for either.

 

Anyone ever take out a set of lungs on a whitetail and found fragments in the hams?

[vlywaterman]

wow, a lot had been talked about since I was last on here.

I just looked and did find another study where they did look at blood lead levels in humans and compared it to the game meat that was consumed.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1247612/

"Participants reporting less than weekly intake of sea birds had blood lead concentrations of approximately 75 μg/L, whereas those who reported eating sea birds several times a week had concentrations of approximately 110 μg/L, and those who reported daily intake had concentrations of 170 μg/L (p = 0.01)." That is /L so 7.5,11, and 17.

And don't forget the CDC study in ND, the people who consumed game meat had a 50% higher blood lead level than those that did not.

Someone noted that they shot deer in the heart and lungs, if you look at the research, some of these particles are traveling over a foot from the bullet channel, so your inner tenderloin, and shoulders may have lead particles in them. And don't forget, what do you do with the guts and organs? leave them for scavengers?

This is from the pig study, if you think you may not have any lead in your venison.

Wound radiographs of all 30 eviscerated deer showed metal fragments (median = 136 fragments, range = 15–409) and offered a measure of fragment dispersion, albeit two-dimensional. Extreme distance between fragment clusters in standard radiographs averaged 24 cm (range±SD = 5–43±9 cm), and maximum single fragment separation was 45 cm. Radiography revealed visible metal fragments in the ground meat of 24 (80%) of the 30 deer. At least one fragment was visible in radiographs of 74 (32%) of 234 packages of ground meat; 160 (68%) revealed no fragments, 46 (20%) had one, 16 (7%) had two, and 12 (5%) showed 3–8 fragments. An average of 32% of ground meat packages (N = 3–15 packages, mean 7. per deer showed metal fragments (range = 0–100% of packages). The ground meat derived from one deer showed more fragments (N = 42) than counted in the radiograph of the carcass (N = 31), and two ground meat packages (2 deer) each contained a single shotgun pellet which had not been detected on the carcass radiographs. No relationship was apparent between the number of metal fragments counted in carcasses and those subsequently counted in ground meat from the same individual (correlation coefficient 0.06). In the aggregate, we observed 155 metal particles in the ground meat packages, 3.1% of the 5074 we counted in the carcasses. Of 16 deer carcasses with metal fragments near the spine, four (25% of selected deer, 8% of 49 packages) showed fragments in processed loin steaks (1–9 fragments). Additional fragments may have occurred in 220 unscanned packages of steaks derived from all animals

As far as the price for non-lead bullets, it does suck that we can't have this stuff shipped in NY, but I have found most modern rounds locally in Margaretville. It's about twice as much as cheap lead bullets, but almost the same if you are looking at quality lead rounds. 

I'm not trying to tell anyone what to use, I myself feel foolish that up until a few years ago, I had no idea about this issue. And it all came about upon finding an immature bald eagle that subsequently died of lead poisoning, and loosing a golden eagle we had just put a transmitter on in the same location. A spot where the DEC and USDA had come in to exterminate pigs that had escaped from a canned hunting facility near Hancock. The farmer was supposed to bury the carcasses, but left them in a field where these eagles fed on them. 

I feel like I am trying to put information out there that people can read that is not someones opinion, but rather scientific papers or based on papers. And I think if one looks honestly at the information, even if one isn't quite sure,, why risk feeding lead to your family.

And, having shot both, the copper groups better, kills better, and, I don't worry about any lead contamination.

check this out if you wonder about copper's effectiveness: http://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/tortured-path-armys-m855a1-ar-15/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=social&utm_content=122615chronicle&utm_campaign=CH122615-torturedpatharmysm855a1ar15 

[ants]

One does not hunt deer and not real sure the other hunts at all. The past has not shown much for either.

 

Anyone ever take out a set of lungs on a whitetail and found fragments in the hams?

Um……No. You have shot deer through the lungs and found lead fags in the hams?? As in rear hams?? How does that happen??

 

And BTW Im still on the fence on the whole lead ammo thing.

[DirtTime]

These threads always go bad. This debate will go on until lead ammo is actually banned. I wonder what will be first, the banning of guns or the lead ammo?

I have posted how I feel about using alternatives. For me, it's a cost issue. I am not going to rehash that.

 

I said it before, it's just a circle. All the proof are estimates. If I want my Jeep painted I can go to 6 different body shops and get 6 different estimates. Just like saying "ballpark figure". Get some proven, current, on paper stats and maybe you would have a soap box.

 

Like a few have said, I will just about my merry way using ammo I trust and shoots well through my guns. Sorry if it's lead and puts a kink in some peoples thongs.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Um……No. You have shot deer through the lungs and found lead fags in the hams?? As in rear hams?? How does that happen??

 

And BTW Im still on the fence on the whole lead ammo thing.

No sir..Thats the point i was trying to make. High powered rifles blasting the heart and lung section of a whitetail?  Cant see where the fragments are being found in these tests?

[vlywaterman]

this shows and x-ray so you can see where those fragments end up.

http://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2012/07/lead-or-copper-an-alternative-hunting-ammunition-comparison.html

[vlywaterman]

Just one more thing, if you can take the 15 minutes to watch it, it covers much of the stuff we have been talking about the last few days, but does it with pictures and videos.

[ATbuckhunter]

One does not hunt deer and not real sure the other hunts at all. The past has not shown much for either.

 

Anyone ever take out a set of lungs on a whitetail and found fragments in the hams?

As stated before or possibly in the other thread, it would be microscopic and not detectable by eye or feel. Generally id say not many microscopic pieces make it to the hams, but I could be wrong. 

[vlywaterman]

I'd agree completely, shot placement is important. But, as I said before a shot into the chest could make the front quarters vulnerable as well as the inner tenderloins. A neck or head shot is safer if you are tossing that. But if you are concerned with scavengers, where do you toss it?

[Curmudgeon]

Images you may have seen before.

 

Deer carcass X-ray (not field dressed). White spots are metal.

 

 

CT scan of meat from random samples from the ND Venison Donation Program 2008. The bright spots are metal - mostly lead, some copper. I know some of you consider 8 years ancient history but the point is, the metal gets in the meat, and grinding it mixes it well. Yes, well placed shots reduce the problem. Butchering yourself reduces the problem. Those are best case scenarios, not guarantees. And, they do nothing for scavengers.

 

 

This is an X-ray of lead fragments inside an eagle.

 

 

FSW likes to imply I am not a hunter. He cannot seem to accept that someone can be both a hunter and a conservationist. I assure you all, I have killed scores of deer, most recently last fall. FSW is blowing hot air.

 

As far as the charges that I want a ban. I actually think a ban would be harmful. My goal in this discussion is to reduce eagle deaths. The question is: what is the best way to accomplish that? A ban is not. Considering how little the average hunter knows about bullet fragmentation, education is needed. If you haven't watched the video, please do so with an open mind.

 

If anything I post disturbs you, I have provided a warning at the bottom of every post.

 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2016 by Curmudgeon

[mike rossi]

 

Human impacts are not your concern because there is zero proof that a properly butchered big game animal shot with a jacketed lead bullet that has been removed of all the bloodshot meat suspected of having lead in it and discarded has any kind of adverse affect on long term Human health.

 

There is at least one research study that used deer professionally butchered, and used numerous different butchers. All of the meat contained lead fragments. No matter how it was shot or who butchered it. You all keep throwing out things because you think you have more research ability than researchers. Perhaps, before you throw out intuitive statements, you search the literature and make sure you are not the first man on earth to think of something that might bias the study. 

 

With the administration this country 

 

The administration of this country has nothing to do with this. 

 

 

 

I have always found it is pretty easy to target something when one has little or no vested interest. How much actual  deer hunting and rifle-pistol shooting are you and Mr Rossi participating in these days?

 

I do none, but if I did I would not use lead ammo. I do not use lead shotgun ammo and have not for 20 years or longer. When new hunters (or parents) speak to me about hunting, I make it clear lead ammo is both deleterious and unnecessary. If I ever decide to teach hunter education I would work that into the course if the DEC allowed me to. 

 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2016 by mike rossi

[mike rossi]

As stated before or possibly in the other thread, it would be microscopic and not detectable by eye or feel. Generally id say not many microscopic pieces make it to the hams, but I could be wrong. 

 

Through blood vessels it could travel anywhere.

[mike rossi]

Another thing: Don't allow this to high-jack this thread,  But why is attention called to me in post 27? As if I am for it, others should go against it? 

 

The guy goes on for a full page, and then makes a quasi- ad hominun attack against me. It is almost impossible to have a rational discussion on this site and people attack things for no apparent reason. 

 

If the opposition was making valid points, that would be one thing. But they are just a sort of rebels without a cause or suffer from the Stockholm syndrome. 

 

One or two guys in NJ pretty much under-minded efforts to pass Sunday hunting there using their cell phones on a hunting forum. So, yeah, you can exercise some degree of control by coming on a forum and disrupting the flow of information, congratulations....

[Curmudgeon]

Another thing: Don't allow this to high-jack this thread,  But why is attention called to me in post 27? As if I am for it, others should go against it? 

 

The guy goes on for a full page, and then makes a quasi- ad hominun attack against me. It is almost impossible to have a rational discussion on this site and people attack things for no apparent reason. 

 

If the opposition was making valid points, that would be one thing. But they are just a sort of rebels without a cause or suffer from the Stockholm syndrome. 

 

One or two guys in NJ pretty much under-minded efforts to pass Sunday hunting there using their cell phones on a hunting forum. So, yeah, you can exercise some degree of control by coming on a forum and disrupting the flow of information, congratulations....

 

He went after me in #27 too. A lot of the accusations against me are nonsense - e.g. pro-ban, not really a hunter. Much of it is highly emotional, knee jerk stuff. Some is 

a demonstration of a lack of anything substantive to counter the overwhelming evidence on impacts. How many of them have read the literature, or even watched the video?

 

BTW - Hunter safety instructors can teach about lead vs non-lead. However, it is optional.

 

Some of you act like this issue just came out of nowhere and is being pushed by a few radicals. Mike has been using non-lead for 20 years. I have for a decade. The Peregrine Fund conference on this was in 2008. This is not new. You just have not been paying attention. Knowledge is power. Everyone who hunts should have the knowledge to protect scavengers and assure themselves their food is pure and safe.