Other nations aren't researching this?
My memories are fuzzy and incomplete, but I remember that nothing ever happened because there was a big uproar from manufacturers. They demanded "proof" and threatened litigation. The problem with tests is that you can create a lot of questions about procedures, for example, did you test just after descaling? First shot in the morning after letting water rest in the pipes overnight? Then there's discussion about "this is so little water, just a tiny espresso, so the amounts are smaller than in drinking water which you drink by the liter so the thresholds don't really apply". Basically, the lab would have to fight the manufacturers in court, so the whole thing was dropped silently.
I still have a 2012 Rancilio Sylvia entrance-level portafilter machine, almost unused, that I had tested by my Bavarian city's own water lab, with a sample taking procedure agreed upon with the leader of that lab (they did not have any procedures for a citizen who wanted something tested but did not want to turn me away, so the head of the lab himself took time to deal with my request). The lead values greatly exceeded the allowed limits. I don't think it would be any different with a current model. I ended up with a copper-based Vibiemme, and now I have a stainless steel based Ascaso Steel PID Uno that was designed with being environmentally flawless in mind.
Most, or just many?, people don't care, however. I found plenty of people who wanted to take my Rancilio Silvia, but I refused because I don't want this lead-laden piece of junk in use by anyone, even if they take it willingly despite knowing of the problem.
The 2013 report: https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/studie-teure-espressomaschine... (German article from 2013, website is from a public German state radio)
Just get an Ascaso Steel, it's a far better machine anyway :) It was a significant upgrade from my Vibiemme Domobar, which already was a significant upgrade from the Silvia. Not just espresso quality, there the upgrade (from the Domobar) is mostly greater consistency and the ease of getting the best outcome with less experimenting, it also uses significantly less resources - much less energy and also much less water. The only small complaint I had was that I had to keep my finger on the activation switch because I find the automatic flow-control useless (too inaccurate), until somebody pointed out I could program it to measure a huge amount of water that I would never reach in practice and then I could use it as on/off switch for drawing the espresso.
https://www.ascaso.com/div-espresso-coffee-machines-grinders...
My memories are fuzzy and incomplete, but I remember that nothing ever happened because there was a big uproar from manufacturers.
Tangential: let's not forget the whole dieselgate scandal of VW and certain other European car manufacturers.
I mean, they use all their engineering prowess to come up with this?
https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/banned-europe...
> "This principle, in the words of the European Commission, “aims at ensuring a higher level of environmental protection through preventative” decision-making. In other words, it says that when there is substantial, credible evidence of danger to human or environmental health, protective action should be taken despite continuing scientific uncertainty. In contrast, the U.S. federal government’s approach to chemicals management sets a very high bar for the proof of harm that must be demonstrated before regulatory action is taken."
Novel food additives are always approved in the US first and there are more types of additives allowed in the US to begin with. This is an extraordinary claim that requires evidence.