Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x3 *** IL Republicans go after three Dems
Next Post: Disowning the pain
Posted in:
* Every policymaker in this state should read these two Tribune articles. The first one’s from last month…
Alarming levels of brain-damaging lead are poisoning more than a fifth of the children tested from some of the poorest parts of Chicago, even as the hazard has been largely eliminated in more prosperous neighborhoods, a Tribune investigation has found.
The toxic legacy of lead — added to paint and gasoline for nearly a century — once threatened kids throughout the nation’s third largest city. As Chicago’s overall rate of lead poisoning steadily dropped during the past two decades, the disparities between rich and poor grew wider.
Some census tracts, smaller geographic areas within neighborhoods, haven’t seen a case of lead poisoning in years. But children ages 5 and younger continue to be harmed at rates up to six times the city average in corners of predominantly African-American neighborhoods ravaged by extreme poverty, chronic violence and struggling schools, according to a Tribune analysis of city records.
In more than a fifth of the city’s census tracts, the rate of lead poisoning was higher in 2013 than it was five years earlier, the analysis showed. […]
In the upscale Lincoln Park neighborhood around DePaul University, more than 80 percent of kids tested in 1995 had elevated lead levels — about the same rate as the southeast corner of Austin, one of the city’s most impoverished neighborhoods.
By 2013 the rate for the DePaul neighborhood had plummeted to zero. But in the same part of Austin, testing found dangerous lead levels in nearly 24 percent of kids tested.
* And this one’s from the other day…
“People in neighborhoods like Englewood have faced multiple assaults over different periods of time — job losses, segregation, housing discrimination,” said Robert J. Sampson, a Harvard University researcher who has been studying Chicago for more than two decades. “Yet through all of that there is this persistent lead poisoning. It creates a social context where kids are at a clear disadvantage.”
Sampson recently added lead data to his existing research on poverty, education and crime in Englewood and other neighborhoods. The results, he said, were shocking. A map of lead poisoning rates among children younger than 6 in 1995, for instance, looks very similar to a map of aggravated assault rates in 2012, when those kids were 17 to 22 years old.
* And…
A former chief of lead poisoning prevention at the Chicago Department of Public Health, [Anne Evens] obtained the lead tests of more than 58,000 children born in the city from 1994 to 1998 and compared the results with how they performed on standardized tests in third grade.
Her peer-reviewed study, published in April in the scientific journal Environmental Health, found that exposure to lead during early childhood significantly increased the chance that a student would fail reading and math tests, even when controlling for other factors such as poverty, race, birth weight and the mother’s education level. […]
Jessica Wolpaw Reyes, an economist at Amherst College, studied what happened during the 1990s when Massachusetts embarked on an effort to eliminate lead paint hazards in homes with young children. She found the $5 million-a-year program helped reduce the number of students who performed poorly on standardized tests by 1 to 2 percentage points, with most of the benefits seen among children from low-income communities.
While that might not sound like much of an improvement, Reyes said, it was equivalent to what the state could have expected if it had closed the income gap between poor and middle-income communities by 22 percent.
Emphasis added for obvious reasons.
If there ever is a capital bill, lawmakers and the governor ought to make lead removal a serious priority.
It’s hard to argue with the growing body of research, but even if abatement doesn’t lower crime and increase learning abilities, lead is a nasty, nasty poison and removing it from the environment ought to be on our agenda.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 10:38 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x3 *** IL Republicans go after three Dems
Next Post: Disowning the pain
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Kevin Drum wrote about this a couple of years ago for Mother Jones.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline
The Reader wrote about lead in relation to education in 2012.
http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/high-lead-toxicity-in-chicago-public-schools/Content?oid=7819530&showFullText=true
Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 10:47 am
Anyway, as you say, even if you disregard some of the benefits that research suggests in crime and education, you cannot deny that the toxicity of lead is a killer from a personal and public health perspective.
Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 10:49 am
Didn’t realize this was still that much of an issue…
Interesting idea, allow video poker in Chicago and use the proceeds for this.
Comment by OneMan Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 10:52 am
The income gap on this is gruesome. So was this discovery last October
==Chicago Public Schools knew there was lead paint in first-floor bathrooms of Gale Math and Science Academy at least five years ago, but the district didn’t remove the paint until this summer, records show.==
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:00 am
Its long been a quiet fact about the incidence of blood lead levels in childhood and school failure, poverty and criminality. This is a public health emergency that needs to be addressed.
Comment by independent Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:01 am
Lead is more prevalent in older neighborhoods, independent of efforts to eliminate or coat it inside homes. Why? Because the white paint pigment (lead oxide) that was used in outdoor house paint washed out over the years and accumulated in surrounding soils. It is not water soluble but can be spread as wind-blown dust or as water-borne particulate. The problem is not as severe in newer suburbs.
Comment by Keyser Soze Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:02 am
This is a serious issue but how are you going to structure the program? The problem is basically old, lead-based paint in people’s homes. To deal with it you have to get the people out and into temporary housing while an environmentally-trained, equipped, certified and monitored crew encases the unit to prevent lead escaping, strips all the old paint, repaints, and disposes of the waste in an environmentally certified way. Similar to asbestos insulation, but it’s everywhere and an even bigger job, and not so easily encased.
If someone can lay out a program to deal with this in an effective manner (I won’t even say “cost-effective,” cost should not be a threshold issue for something like this, but a program that will actually solve the problem) I’m all ears.
Comment by Harry Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:03 am
An extremely important issue - that is too often overlooked.
Comment by DK. Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:08 am
I thought lead was a proxy for poverty, so for me, the link was always indirect between lead exposure and violence. These studies add a lot to the discussion. It’s clear that lead is playing a role along with few jobs, segregation, poor schools, disintegrating families, and other problems common in violent neighborhoods.
And if eliminating lead is as relatively inexpensive as the Massachusetts example suggests, funding lead removal should be at the top of anyone’s list of priorities.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:09 am
Trivia (and snark)-read somewhere that the reason kids eat lead paint is that it tastes sweet: maybe the answer is to feed kids more candy?
Seriously, where is the lead coming from? I don’t believe that lead-based residential paint has been available for years, and unleaded gas has been the norm since before my kids were born…where is the exposure coming from?
Comment by downstate commissioner Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:10 am
Anybody here actually sat down and read through the EPA regs (RRP = Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule (Federal EPA)) on lead abatement?
I have (actually went through a course on it), and it’s a freaking bureaucratic nightmare. IIRC, took effect in 2008.
It’s literally almost as bad as asbestos.
If you are not doing the work yourself (on your own property) - meaning that you contract the work out, then you have to have the following to deal with:
1) Have a Certified Renovator.
2) Jump through all the Pre-Renovation Education Requirements hoops.
3) Have either a Certified Inspector or a Risk Assessor perform paint ship sampling (testing).
4) Meet all the Work Area requirements (See list).
5) Meet all the Work Practice Requirements (See list).
The above is just part of the bare bones outline of what is required. And that’s before you actually start working. I can keep going…..
Oh, and if the structure is a “child occupied facility”, there’s even more regs piled on…..
Here’s the problem - all the regs make it so unbelievably expensive, that very little lead remediation work gets done.
Just sayin.
Comment by Judgment Day Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:14 am
Older dwellings that haven’t been rehabbed are still full of lead paint underneath all the non-lead paint, and studies show that surfaces that rub together, like painted windows and doors, generate lead dust. Also, a lot of the soil in these areas, if it hasn’t been improved in decades, is going to be full of lead from leaded gasoline. Lead has been removed from some neighborhoods because they’ve seen new investment over the years. The poorest neighborhoods haven’t. Rich, thank you so much for highlighting this still important issue. Clearly there is still a lot of opportunity for policy makers to become better informed on this subject.
Comment by rdb66 Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:16 am
downstate commissioner - Some kids, mainly in poorer areas, have homes or schools built more than 40 years ago that still contain lead. Another note from that story
==The CPS “Facility Performance Standards” states that in all buildings constructed in 1978 or earlier, “it must be assumed that all paint products are lead-based.”==
Comment by Formerly Known As... Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:23 am
Thanks for posting this, Rich. And everyone should click on the link precinct captain has above to the Mother Jones article.
I worked for a law enforcement agency years back and tracking crime and incarceration rates was part of my job. I used to think it was a goofy theory from hippie envirornmentalists, but now I am convinced lead poisoning (particularly from leaded gasoline) is probably the best explaination for the national and local crime spike that started in the late 60’s and ended in the mid-90’s.
Oil companies began putting lead in gasoline right after WWII (to prevent engine knock) and ended the practice in the mid 80’s. Crime exploded and then suddenly decreased on a 15 to 20 year lag basis.
Comment by Bill C. Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:27 am
As Precinct Captain noted Kevin Drum at Mother Jones has been writing great stuff in the magazine and on his blog about this issue.
The root cause of the problem is childhood lead poisoning permanently damages the brain and impairs impulse control and executive functions.
It is interesting to see the correlation between removal of lead from gasoline. Since various countries and states remove lead at different times, you can see a clear pattern of crime dropping about 22 years after its removal. One study indicated the removal of lead from gasoline resulted in 56 percent of the decrease in violent crime in the 1990s. https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/what-caused-crime-decline
Comment by Chicago Guy Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:31 am
What none of these articles touch on is how much gentrifying needs to happen to get the lead out. These articles all mention how old these houses are, but if they were torn down and rebuild the people currently living there couldn’t afford it anymore.
Its a problem with an obvious solution that no one is really comfortable discussing.
Comment by Sleepysol Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:31 am
One idea not mentioned is to create a nexus between federal or state funding assistance toward any dwelling or occupant - thus if each of those receive funding, then the building owner would be required to mitigate the lead paint, or have those funds directed at removing the hazard in lieu of full payment. I agree also that the regulations relating to removal also have to be lessened, else the hamster wheels continue to spin.
Comment by Captain Illini Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 11:37 am
“What none of these articles touch on is how much gentrifying needs to happen to get the lead out. These articles all mention how old these houses are, but if they were torn down and rebuild the people currently living there couldn’t afford it anymore.”
————–
Problem is that the lead still exists. It doesn’t degrade. It sits in the soil, or goes to a dump site. So you still have to remediate the site before you can build on it. That’s expensive.
No easy answers.
Comment by Judgment Day Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:02 pm
Just about every residential property built prior to 1976 has lead paint in it. The cost of stripping the paint from walls and ceilings is prohibitive. Requiring this be done will just result in more abandoned property in areas that can’t afford to have any more vacant properties.
For rental properties, the best solution is to have all lead paint encapsulated and regular inspections to ensure that there is no chipping or pealing paint. A property I used to have in Evergreen Park did this annually, and virtually any chipping or pealing paint had to be scraped, patched, repainted and re-inspected within 30 days.
It seemed to work pretty well. I was especially diligent in apartments where there were young children.
I understand Chicago and most suburbs in trough neighborhoods have similar inspection programs.
I suspect the bigger problem is in owner occupied properties like condos and single family homes. I doubt there’s the political will in Chicago to hit every homeowner with a $50 inspection fee and the inconvenience of the inspection every year, especially in low income areas.
Of course, it WOULD result in a lot of political hack Precinct Captains getting “flexible” schedule City jobs….
Comment by Arizona Bob Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:05 pm
It took the USA decades longer than Europe to get the lead out. The industry challenged the studies and dragged its feet, just as the chemical industry does today.
Comment by nona Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 12:14 pm
Rich,
Great purpose, but check the rules on the use of bond funding. Use on private property strictly prohibited. This program will have to exist outside of a capital program.
Comment by PAM Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:00 pm
===Use on private property strictly prohibited. ==
Pretty sure private schools have received bond money.
===This program will have to exist outside of a capital program. ===
They can do pay-go.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 1:04 pm
Fascinating post, Rich. The disparity on how such things are handled is not surprising.
Comment by Liandro Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 4:56 pm
Correlation does not imply causation, no matter how sympathetic the cause, nor how great the desire by some to use coercive taxation to ’solve’ the problem.
Comment by Henry Moon Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 6:04 pm
What about all those lead pipes in older homes and underground?
Comment by Ugly Rumours Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 6:25 pm
Henry Moon - Have you looked at the evidence? This goes far beyond a simple coincidence. In regards to your comment about taxes to solve the problem - we developed public sewer and water systems to “solve” the problem of cholera and other diseases. I think that worked out pretty well - even if it did cost some money.
Comment by Chicago Guy Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 6:40 pm
My village of DePue, IL located on the bend of the IL river and near LaSalle- Peru, is strongly contaminated with both lead and arsenic. It is a superfund site and the small town of 1,800 has been battling CBS-Viacom and Exxon Mobile for more than 18 years to clean up what they left behind. A bill that would potentially clean up lead around the state or hold those responsible, would be tremendously valuable.
Comment by College Student Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 7:21 pm
“Hold those responsible, accountable”*
Comment by College Student Monday, Jun 8, 15 @ 7:23 pm
http://www.monbiot.com/2013/01/07/the-grime-behind-the-crime/
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Jun 9, 15 @ 12:29 am