Silver Adept (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
silveradept) wrote2009-04-24 05:51 pm
silveradept) wrote2009-04-24 05:51 pm
Books are not a major source of lead in your child's diet. Curbstomp anyone who says otherwise.
Oh, hell no. Someone's going to die (in the metaphorical sense), painfully, at the hands of library systems in the area. The culprit? Sensationalism about lead levels in children's books, as reported by a local affiliate. They went into the Seattle Public Library, selected 18 books at random, tested them for lead and found that two of the books, printed before 1983, contained sufficient lead as to need regulation under the new laws. They then extrapolated this into "The books in your library children's section are leaded and dangerous! Who knows what would have happened if a toddler had chewed on these! The ALA is blowing smoke up your ass when they say library books don't have harmful lead concentrations! Their studies proving books aren't harmful are shams! Test all the books!"
...yeah. Remember the part about slow, painful deaths? Here's the rest of the story - those copies were books that were printed from the 1950s and possibly earlier. It's a testament to how gently they've been handled that those books survived that long to become a problem now. The law only applies to books printed (not copyrighted) before 1986, because after that point, the CPSC says "Nope. Not there." Even better, when putting an actual scientific sample to the test, all modern books passed well underneath current and projected lead level caps, as did all the component parts of a standard book. So, if your library hasn't gotten a new book since 1986, then sure, maybe you can be worried (I would be. Where was the materials budget, the selectors, and the weeders that the collection is primarily more than two decades old?), but if your library, like mine, probably doesn't have anything earlier than 1986 in the collection at-freaking-all, then you don't have to worry that little Johnny or Suzie will be ingesting lead content if they chew on their normal books. (Books with toy components, or toys that look like books? They're totally different categories, and will be tested. But the library doesn't often have a lot of those, either. They tend to get broke.)
The decision to play up a "Your Children Are In Danger!" angle on something that doesn't really exist is something perhaps more worthy of out tabloid papers, not an organization that purports itself to give us the news. Hopefully they get the verbal and record-correcting beatdown, head-chopping, and pike-mounting they deserve.
...yeah. Remember the part about slow, painful deaths? Here's the rest of the story - those copies were books that were printed from the 1950s and possibly earlier. It's a testament to how gently they've been handled that those books survived that long to become a problem now. The law only applies to books printed (not copyrighted) before 1986, because after that point, the CPSC says "Nope. Not there." Even better, when putting an actual scientific sample to the test, all modern books passed well underneath current and projected lead level caps, as did all the component parts of a standard book. So, if your library hasn't gotten a new book since 1986, then sure, maybe you can be worried (I would be. Where was the materials budget, the selectors, and the weeders that the collection is primarily more than two decades old?), but if your library, like mine, probably doesn't have anything earlier than 1986 in the collection at-freaking-all, then you don't have to worry that little Johnny or Suzie will be ingesting lead content if they chew on their normal books. (Books with toy components, or toys that look like books? They're totally different categories, and will be tested. But the library doesn't often have a lot of those, either. They tend to get broke.)
The decision to play up a "Your Children Are In Danger!" angle on something that doesn't really exist is something perhaps more worthy of out tabloid papers, not an organization that purports itself to give us the news. Hopefully they get the verbal and record-correcting beatdown, head-chopping, and pike-mounting they deserve.
no subject
This is just more ludicrous whining from people with nothing better to do. They need to go buy a fucking life.
no subject
Criminy, go play a video game. A top score bragging rights is a hades of a lot more useful then half the 'IT'S DANGEROUS' cries we keep hearing. Overcooked meat gives you cancer. Undercooked meat gives you parasites. There's lead in your books. Where does it end?
LIFE is dangerous. Quit whinning and just live it.
Btw, if I had a kid and caught them chewing on a library book they'd very quickly learn to fear the word 'grounded' that or I'd borrow my mom's old 'hungry shoe'. Whichever proved more effective.
no subject