Laquatra and colleagues collected 10 sets of Christmas lights -- some new, some more than 30 years old. Using gauze and distilled water, the scientists wiped a 3-foot section of cord on each set. They sent the samples to an independent lab for analysis. The results, which appear in the December issue of the Journal of Environmental Health, showed detectible levels of lead in every sample. "The amounts are not huge," said Phillip Landrigan, a pediatrician at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York. "But on the other hand, no amount of lead is safe for a child." The scientists didn't test people's hands or blood after they handled Christmas lights. But they suspect that the cords shed lead dust, especially when exposed to sunlight. For their part, Phillips Lighting company said it has been voluntarily working in the last year to reduce lead content in its products. Lead levels in the company's Christmas light strings are now below 300 parts per million, said Susan Bloom, Director of Corporate Communications at Philips Lighting and Philips Lighting Electronics in Somerset, N.J. That puts them below California's threshold levels for lead and makes them immune to Proposition 65 warnings. Still, since small children put their hands and everything else in their mouths, Landrigan recommends keeping kids away from Christmas lights, washing all hands that come into contact with the glowing strings, and seeking out lead-free alternatives. "Manufacturers might conjure up arguments that lead in their products is not accessible to children," Landrigan said. "My answer is: Hogwash. Lead gets out from wherever it is, and kids get into things wherever they are. The safest way to prevent children from being exposed is simply not to put the lead in, in the first place." Related Links: |
advertisement
|
-
our sites
-
video
mobile
-
shop
-
stay connected
-
corporate
