Hacker News Reader

Comment by ars | Hacker News Reader

We can [partly] solve this in the tech field. (Startup idea.)

A cheap (very cheap!) device to detect lead in paint. It would have to cost under $50, and better under $30.

If you can detect it you can work on it because you can see the problem.

The only way I know to detect lead with a device (as opposed to chemically) is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_fluorescence

So, how to make a cheap enough device? You don't need great accuracy - 20% accuracy is fine for this. You need very high sensitivity in the detector because you don't want to generate a lot of x-ray energy in a device hold for household use.

To be practical the device would have to emit so little energy as to be basically harmless even if used on a person. (Low power, but also short duration.)

View on HN

You can also just test children's blood. That is much more direct and would catch the problem whether it's the paint at home, the water, the paint at grandma's house, etc...

The problem is cumulative, so if you're testing everyone early you greatly limit the damage.

Massachusetts mandates that every child is tested for lead in the blood between 8 and 12 months of age, then at 2 years and at 3 years. Every pediatrician does the tests automatically at the normal checkups. And our rates of lead poisoning are much better than most other states with old houses.

That's one brilliant government policy. Whoever thought that up deserves a gold star.

Edit: really? downvotes for this? Mind explaining?

Probably sounded unintentionally sarcastic?

Entirely unnecessary if you stmt a bad patent who let's your child live with lead paint.

You can buy a lead detection marker for about 3$ you use it over paint if it turns pink/red it's lead....

In some places, like NYC, there's often a legal presumption that ALL paint contains lead. It seems that for legal purposes detection is not always the central issue.

"All paint in a pre-1960 multiple dwelling unit where a child under age 6 resides and in the common areas of such multiple dwellings is presumed to be lead paint. A lead-based paint hazard is any condition in a dwelling or dwelling unit where a child under age 6 resides that causes exposure to lead from lead-contaminated dust, from lead-based paint that is peeling, or from lead-based paint that is present on chewable surfaces, deteriorated subsurfaces, friction surfaces, or impact surfaces that would result in adverse human health effects."

http://www1.nyc.gov/assets/hpd/downloads/pdf/lead-ll1-guide-...

Maintenance and remediation become central in these cases, I think. A government-approved technology that lowers the cost and risk of remediation would be a big winner.

I can't help but add: I wonder what Donald Trump does to maintain and remediate the lead in his NYC buildings...

>In some places, like NYC, there's often a legal presumption that ALL paint contains lead.

If that wasn't the case nobody would ever test for lead, and they'd just shrug and say "we didn't know" when it came out later there was lead.

Like so?

http://www.zefon.com/store/leadcheck-swabs.html?gclid=CKag27...

Or you could just look up the year the house was built.

"All houses built before 1978 are likely to contain some lead-based paint."[1]

(If you do have such a house, don't panic. Read the article below for what you need watch out for)

[1] http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/tips.htm

I'm curious and know nothing of the subject, but what's wrong with the chemical testing? I thought they had home lead paint test kits.

Living in the Pacific NW, we don't really have a lot of lead paint issues like back east.

If you have lead paint that has been painted over the chemical test will not detect it.

You have to scratch the paint to search each layer and people don't want to do that.

You also can't offer to visit someone for free and do a quick test since each test costs you money.

> You have to scratch the paint to search each layer and people don't want to do that.

So you scratch the bottom, and patch it if you really care that much.

> You also can't offer to visit someone for free and do a quick test since each test costs you money

A fancy x-ray whizzbang that hasn't been developed yet costs money, too. And so does a technician to run it.

This seems like a very silly solution looking for a problem.

If you have lead paint that has been painted over, you don't really have a problem.

That's not true at all. Most lead pain has been painted over by now - it's almost 40 years old.

Yet people are still exposed to it.

People are still exposed to it because it is in poor repair. The top advice for what to do with interior lead paint is to paint over it.

(Shrug) You could always teach your kids not to eat paint chips.

Infants put everything in their mouths. They may be poisoned before they understand.

Sounds like an excellent reason not to leave infants unsupervised, then.

Go raise an infant and report back with your luck on this method.

This is why the human race is pretty much doomed.

"Lead paint is poisonous. Your child shouldn't be allowed to consume it."

"No, actually, you're wrong. Have a downvote."

Eventually all civil discourse will look like this. We're already starting to see it in Presidential debates.

Sorry you were downvoted. I gave you an upvote before my initial response.

You may have been downvoted because your response may have seemed a little snarky to some. While your suggestions make sense they are not necessarily practicable or economically feasible in all cases. People are pretty sensitive when it comes to the health their children and wants what's best even when they cannot provide it.

No, if the human race is doomed, it's because ignorant people think it's okay to leave children exposed to known toxic substances.

No amount of "supervision" is going to keep a child from consuming lead paint. Children do not get lead poisoning because they walk up to lead-painted walls and start gnawing on them like they are corncobs.

Lead paint forms toxic dust. The dust gets on floors and into dirt. Children crawl around, and they WILL put their hands in their mouths even if they are "supervised" at all times.

What we are starting to see in presidential debates is an ignorant man talking like he knows everything.

Plenty of old houses in Portland were built in the early 1900s and have lots of lead issues. There have been quite a few uproars over demolitions without abatement of houses with lead paint near schools.

Probably you don't want to scratch that new toy only to find no lead in it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com