Watchdog Report Finds Alarming 20 Percent of Baby Food Tested Contains Lead (arstechnica.com)

According to an analysis released Thursday by the nonprofit advocacy group, the Environmental Defense Fund, twenty percent of 2,164 baby foods sampled between 2003 and 2013 by the Food and Drug Administration tested positive for lead. Ars Technica reports: Lead is a neurotoxin. Exposure at a young age can permanently affect a developing brain, causing lifelong behavioral problems and lower IQ. Though the levels in the baby food were generally below what the FDA considers unsafe, the agency's standards are decades old. The latest research suggests that there is no safe level of lead for children. Yet the Environmental Protection Agency this year has estimated that more than five percent of U.S. children (more than a million) get more than the FDA's recommended limit of lead from their diet. The products most often found to contain lead were fruit juices, root vegetable-based foods, and certain cookies, such as teething biscuits, the EDF reports. Oddly, the presence of lead was more common in baby foods than in the same foods marketed for adults. For instance, only 25 percent of regular apple juice tested positive for lead, while 55 percent of apple juices marketed for babies contained lead. Overall, only 14 percent of adult foods tested contained lead. The findings come from data collected in the FDA's annual survey of foods, called the Total Diet Survey, which the agency has run since the 1970s. Each year, the agency samples 280 types of foods from three different cities across the country, tracking nutrients, metals, pesticides, and other contaminants.

Comments

Did I stutter and have it come out like an "R"?

[rsilvergun]

I said Congress & Trump. I don't care who's in charge. Neither party is doing much of anything. But if you're gonna bring up parties I'll remind you that the Rs pretty much own State legislatures. And while I'm on the subject Clinton the Bill was basically an R with a D next to his name. That's how he formed the coalition that got him elected. Moderately left wing on social issues and hard right on anything economic. And make no mistake, clean water is very much an economic issue. He can bet you're ass Trump's kids don't eat baby food with lead in it. Not at his income bracket.

Re:Why didn't Obama fix this ?

[liquid_schwartz]

I know that you're being snarky, but you have reason to be. The Obama administration changed the rules to allow importing of food *without* labeling country of origin. Want some leaded pre-cooked chicken nuggets from China? Well step right up.

People need to stop bickering over D and R as if either mattered. Both will sell you down the river, they just use different excuses as to why.

Citation:https://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2016/03/07/chicken-raised-and-slaughtered-in-china-moves-one-step-closer-to-your-dinner-plate/#498614f1167a

Re:Levels

[Namarrgon]

If you'd read the rest of the article, you'd see that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends lead levels in drinking water be kept below 1 part per billion - a thousandth of the amount you're talking about, even with imperfect absorption. And if you followed up the article's sources, you'd see data showing that e.g. Walgreen's 100% Grape Juice was found to contain around 15 ppb. FDA levels for e.g. grape juice are currently 50 ppb, so it can legally contain far more than the AAP considers wise, which is why the article noted that the FDA is currently reviewing its 20 yo standards to account for more recent research.

But again, that's not the actual point of the article. To repeat; if we can keep lead below detectable levels in most adult foods, why are we not doing at least as much for the baby versions of those same foods?

Re:Yes, Well crap

[LostMyBeaver]

I'm not sure I agree with you regarding whether we're supposed to be the smart people in the room.

I tend to spend that majority of my time on Slashdot with hopes for an interesting science or engineering article that makes it worth my while to read the comments.As that doesn't happen nearly as often as it should, I'm not willing to give up and I spend the rest of my time here reading comments to see if there's someone I can contradict instead of simply doing something useful with my life.

It is very likely that many people on Slashdot are genuinely smart people... when speaking in terms of engineering knowledge. It's possible they are also skilled at historical knowledge. But it generally strikes me that most of us are relatively clueless when considering topics outside of our scopes of expertise... like politics and law. Though, it seems that every single post on Slashdot will have at least a few gripes about the elected administration. And given the diversity of the audience on Slashdot, I believe all political beliefs are fairly well represented... and noisy it seems.

Over the years, I believe that Slashdot has helped me greatly to understand politics better as well. I now truly understand the two party system. I also understand why people argue over who is president. It's unintentionally orchestrated. I don't believe there's a mastermind or two behind it. I believe that people are so well programmed that we feel the need to join teams.

- Liverpool vs. Chelsey
- Mets vs. Yankees
- Red vs. Black
- Black vs. White
- America vs. (whoever is convenient at this time)
- America vs. everyone else just because we have to be better because we are Americans... so let's just piss on everyone
- Libtards vs. Right wing nut jobs.
- Jews vs. Muslims
- Christians vs Christians

Consider the approach of how sports teams work. It doesn't matter what sports team you support, there are rarely players on that team which are from the regions which their teams represent. Instead, some team owner (also unlikely from the area) will put a great deal of effort into recruiting talent from wherever they can for however much money they can. When the team is assembled, a group of people will get together and try and teach them to play together and work as a group. Then, they will through a very organized system play a bunch of games with other teams and attempt to monetize their efforts through many different methods. The more successful teams can afford the better players or at least the more exciting players and can generate stir. That stir causes people to not just pay to watch these games, but also to invest in the purchase of licensed merchandise such as hats and t-shirts or oddly enough, towels... which are meant to wipe up spilled beer... which they'll wear as clothing... as if they were bar maids... from the age of 2 or 3.

What's the rationality of this working? In order for this to work, people have to be willing to pay to watch basically a bunch of kids play games, buy merchandise and more. But society has programmed us to believe we absolutely have to "be part of something more than ourselves". We have to be part of a team. As though the performance of these children in costumes playing with a ball will have some impact on our lives in a spiritually meaningful way.

Consider this. People may justify the behavior or watching sports because they like to see experts at work and see they greatest athletes of the world playing. And that makes sense. It's even sensible that a person could form something of an emotional attachment to a player because of many different reasons. I personally for example like the color green. There's no rational reason for it, I simply find it pleasing. What is completely illogical is that people believe it's important who wins.

That's the problem. It matters who won. Instead of simply enjoying the grace of a great athlete, it is really important that the individual

Re:Yes, Well crap

[Powercntrl]

There's no insight, no tech content, no explanation - just a childish swipe at the elected president

Shouldn't have to explain this, but contaminated baby food is precisely one of those situations where the government should step in and "interfere" with capitalism. In case you haven't been paying attention, the Obama administration is over and while you're free to blame whatever you want on him, work towards resolving issues has to be performed by the *current* administration.

The Trump administration could actually be considered pro-contamination, without much of a stretch. It's reasonable to assume they won't consider leaded baby food to be anything worth dealing with, so it will be at least 3.5 to 7.5 years before there's a potential for progress to be made on this issue.

Also, how fucked up do you have to be to defend lead in baby food? It's as twisted as watching Republicans come up with excuses for why healthcare shouldn't be a basic human right. Some people just shouldn't be healthy because they don't make enough money? If only there was a religion which believed you honored their deity by treating the poor with dignity... Nah, that'd never catch on.