3 replies to this topic

[daedalus]

By Amy Norton
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Exposure to even small amounts of lead through a mother's blood may harm the brain development of unborn babies, a new study suggests.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) currently considers 10 micrograms per deciliter (mcg/dL) the "level of concern" for lead in the bloodstream, but researchers in Mexico found that maternal blood lead levels well below 10 mcg/dL appeared to have a lasting impact on their children's IQ, at least up to the age of 10.

Lead is a toxic metal that is present in the air, soil and water, though public health efforts in recent decades to reduce environmental levels -- by taking lead out of gasoline and paints, for example -- have cut Americans' lead exposure.

Young children and unborn babies are especially vulnerable to the toxicity of lead, as even low-level exposure can damage the developing brain and cause learning and behavioral problems.

The new study, along with past research, indicates there is no level of exposure that's "safe" for the fetal brain.

In particular, lead exposure during the early third trimester appeared critical, and much of the effects on children's later intellectual development seemed to occur at levels well below the U.S. federal standard - within the first 6 mcg/dL of exposure.

"The weight of evidence from a number of studies, including this one, argues convincingly that the outdated current CDC recommendations do not adequately protect either children or fetuses from developmental damage related to lead," study co-author Dr. Stephen J. Rothenberg told Reuters Health.

Rothenberg, who is with the National Institute of Public Health in Cuernavaca, Mexico, said he and his colleagues believe the only "safe" level of lead exposure for children and pregnant women is no exposure.

Their study, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, followed 175 children whose mothers' blood lead levels were measured repeatedly throughout pregnancy. The children took IQ tests at the ages of 6 and 10.

The researchers found that maternal lead levels during pregnancy, particularly around the 28th week, were associated with poorer IQ test performance -- even with other factors, such as lead exposure after birth, considered. And the effects appeared to occur largely within the "first few" micrograms per deciliter of exposure, the researchers report.

Pregnant women who are found to have more than a few micrograms per deciliter of lead in their blood can, with their doctor's help, identify and avoid any ongoing sources of lead exposure, Rothenberg said.

But he stressed the importance of limiting low-level exposure long before pregnancy. Over time, lead is laid done in the bone, some of which will be released into the bloodstream during pregnancy.

"Lifetime exposure avoidance is the only way to avoid any fetal exposure to lead," Rothenberg explained.

Some measures for lowering lead exposure include using bottled or filtered water, since tap water can be a source of lead, particularly in older home with lead-based pipes. Older homes may still contain lead-based paint, and if the paint is peeling, lead dust can be inhaled. To remove this hazard, homeowners should hire a certified lead abatement contractor.

SOURCE: Environmental Health Perspectives, online December 29, 2005.

[doug123]

Thanks for posting this. A relevant study is this:

http://content.nejm....act/348/16/1517

Volume 348:1517-1526    April 17, 2003    Number 16
Intellectual Impairment in Children with Blood Lead Concentrations below 10 µg per Deciliter
Richard L. Canfield, Ph.D., Charles R. Henderson, Jr., M.A., Deborah A. Cory-Slechta, Ph.D., Christopher Cox, Ph.D., Todd A. Jusko, B.S., and Bruce P. Lanphear, M.D., M.P.H.
ABSTRACT

Background Despite dramatic declines in children's blood lead concentrations and a lowering of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's level of concern to 10 µg per deciliter (0.483 µmol per liter), little is known about children's neurobehavioral functioning at lead concentrations below this level.

Methods We measured blood lead concentrations in 172 children at 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months of age and administered the Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scale at the ages of 3 and 5 years. The relation between IQ and blood lead concentration was estimated with the use of linear and nonlinear mixed models, with adjustment for maternal IQ, quality of the home environment, and other potential confounders.

Results The blood lead concentration was inversely and significantly associated with IQ. In the linear model, each increase of 10 µg per deciliter in the lifetime average blood lead concentration was associated with a 4.6-point decrease in IQ (P=0.004), whereas for the subsample of 101 children whose maximal lead concentrations remained below 10 µg per deciliter, the change in IQ associated with a given change in lead concentration was greater. When estimated in a nonlinear model with the full sample, IQ declined by 7.4 points as lifetime average blood lead concentrations increased from 1 to 10 µg per deciliter.

Conclusions Blood lead concentrations, even those below 10 µg per deciliter, are inversely associated with children's IQ scores at three and five years of age, and associated declines in IQ are greater at these concentrations than at higher concentrations. These findings suggest that more U.S. children may be adversely affected by environmental lead than previously estimated.


Source Information

From the Division of Nutritional Sciences (R.L.C.) and the Department of Human Development (C.R.H.), College of Human Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.; the Departments of Environmental Medicine (D.A.C.-S.) and Biostatistics and Computational Biology (C.C.), University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, N.Y.; the Division of Epidemiology, Statistics, and Prevention, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Md. (C.C.); the Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle (T.A.J.); and Cincinnati Children's Environmental Health Center, Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati (B.P.L.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Canfield at the Division of Nutritional Sciences, College of Human Ecology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, or at rlc5@cornell.edu.

Chlorella at 5 grams a day is a great heavy metal chealator. R-alpha-lipoic acid, L-carnosine, and several others are too.
http://www.nihadc.com/detox_home.pdf

[doug123]

I have no evidence that would suggest that Unique Nutrition's products have any lead in them. However, I have no evidence that would suggest they do not. I have no evidence of anything regarding the content or substance of their products.

Ever wonder why most nootropics never caught on as effective medicines? Because when doctors prescribe something, they want it to really work...and even in Europe, where these compounds are regulated as drugs -- Oxiracetam has lost all popularity and is currently unavailable. The only manufacturers for US supplement companies for these compounds are literally "chemical factories" in China where an hour of a chemist's labor carries a cost 1/8 that of a European, American, or Japanese of the same education and capability. Ever wonder why there is never a company name that manufactures these rare compounds? That troubles me a bit.
It's not like we can buy racetams at the corner store.

I guess it's possible that these rare compounds are somehow able to escape any and all kinds of possible contamination or other types of adulteration that seems to plague the entire unregulated supplement market. Let me think about it for a moment. I am sure there are some cases where these compounds have been bottled and sold with low purity (like 90-95% or so) -- as I have seen independent HPLCs of nootropics that came out to about that level of purity.

To remain as objective as possible, I have to note that I have never independently assayed any nootropics and found heavy metals exceeding 10 parts per million (in accordance with the USP)...and neither has Pete....as far as I know at least...however, my supplier knows his products will be independently tested, and I am sure Pete's does too at this point.

Nootropics (such as Aniracetam, Oxiracetam, Piracetam, Pyritinol, Idebenone, Centrophenoxine, Picamillon etc. -- the ones that are classified as dietary supplements in the USA) are fringe drugs with a very small user base.

I would estimate that, on a population basis, perhaps, if we were generous -- significantly less than 125,000 people are consuming these synthetic chemicals -- in the USA --- and that is being VERY generous. Otherwise they would be available and be sold by a legitimate pharmaceutical company -- or a subsidary of one, at least. Sigma Tau sells many "orphan drugs" and "The EU defines an orphan drug as one that could treat a disease with a prevalence of less than five per 10,000 of the population."(1). 5/10,000 would equal 125,000/250,000,000 -- so that's about 0.0005% or 125,000 people (correct me if I am wrong -- I probably am). So an orphan drug would have a 125,000 person client base in the USA based on EU statistics for orphan drugs. So, in my opinion, all it would take is 125,000 US citizens to be ingesting such products for a pharmaceutical company to find an incentive to manufacture these products as "real" drugs, as in an official pharmaceutical product. I don't know if such demand could be generated for these products.