Lead compounds such as paints, liquids and vapors can be a real problem. In the US the lead background exposure from historical uncontrolled smelting, lead paints, and leaded gasoline among others is actually quite high by some measures. But testing of children has shown that unless ingested is not a problem. Ingestion is where paints made prior to 1968 are the problem, with white and yellow colors being the worst.
Metallic lead is not an issue as it is very stable and develops an oxide quickly which is insoluble. You don't see them digging up Gettysburg or any other battle site which has tons of lead bullets in it as the lead is not migratory in the soil.
So, banning of metallic lead is over reaction, but a Regulatory Official never makes his/her bones by not regulating. There is a case in Colorado where the EPA found a lot of insoluble lead in mine tailings on which homes were built. The EPA stated that all the homes would need to be evacuated and the whole neighborhood "cleaned" up to protect the children. Unfortunately, for the EPA, there were a number of doctors who lived in this neighborhood and started to do some of their own research. The result was that a review of over 30 years of standard blood test on children from that neighborhood showed no elevation of blood lead levels when compared to other, non-contaminated areas. ABC did a story on this in a series of shows called "Bad Science."
Other heavy metals of concern are nickel and chrome. Chrome for instance is found as metallic chrome, chrome +3, and chrome +6.
Chrome +6 is a known human carcinogen.
Chrome +3 is a required trace metal for good health
Chrome metal is on every Harley you see on the street and is known to be harmless (the guy riding the Harley might not be harmless).
So, should we ban all chrome like lead due to the problems with chrome +6? When will I see the EPA running down the street after every Harley they see?
