Yesterday's post talked about the epidemic of lead poisoning that still plagues Chicago's toughest neighborhoods.
To be totally honest, when I started learning about lead poisoning, I thought it was something that was over and done with.
And then when I learned how insidious it is, and how common it is here, it really shocked me. I started telling everyone I knew about lead poisoning.
Like Loreen at MTO said, once a problem is only happening to poor kids, we tend to think of it as solved. Yet how do we expect these kids to pull themselves up by the bootstraps or compete with kids from upper class neighborhoods, if from their very beginning, they're potential is cut short by lead? It's like tying a weight to a kid's leg and then getting mad when he doesn't win the 500 yard dash.
We don't even really know how many kids in Chicago are lead poisoned. Awhile ago, I looked at stats on each neighborhood, comparing what percentage of kids we test for lead to how many we find with lead poisoning. And the results are interesting - the more kids we test in a neighborhood, the more we find are poisoned. Take a look:
How do we fight lead poisoning?
Data from Chicago Dept. of Public Health Website
Now, some of this is due to the fact that we test more in neighborhoods like Austin and Englewood that we know have high rates of lead hazards. But the trend is still surprising. If this many kids are poisoned that we know of, how many are going under the radar?
Here's the table with each neighborhood listed, if you're interested.
The city has a online map where you can look at all kinds of things, including reported lead hazards. Green means the home was inspected and no hazard was found. Yellow means a hazard was found and fixed.. Red means there's an outstanding lead violation. Now, I'm told that due to layoffs, the map is a little outdated. But take a look at my neighborhood, Lincoln Square, compared with Sandy's neighborhood, Austin.
Lincoln Square
Austin
Crazy, huh? And these are only the reported lead hazards.
The more we perpetuate the myth that lead is over with by not talking about it, the more kids like Angel will never reach their potential, just because of where they grew up.
Lead poisoning is an entirely preventable health crisis. It could be as common as small pox if we had the will to eradicate lead hazards from our homes.
Where can the community get help with lead poisoning?
- The Chicago Department of Public Health - visit their website, or call 311 and request a lead inspection for your home.
- Metropolitan Tenants Organization
does educational visits to homes for free. They can also help advise
people of their rights as tenants, making sure that landlords don't
retaliate against them.
- Lead Safe Illinois
is a campaign to eliminate lead poisoning in our state. Their website
has educational resources and steps to help you take action.
- Lead Safe Chicago is part of the state initiative and is trying to eliminate lead poisoning in the city by 2010.
The next generation is depending on us.
2 Comments
Patrick MacRoy said:
Megan - Great job on the stories. I've been working on lead poisoning prevention issues for my entire career and few journalists have captured the topic as effectively as you have. The flash video on population level IQ shift was fantastic and I've already referred others to it.
One small correction though, on the Chicago website. The red dots are places with outstanding violations - an inspector found a hazard and it was never complied out. The yellow dots are places where a hazard was found, but was later complied out - in other words places where the landlord (or property owner) fixed the identified lead hazards. The green dots are places that were inspected and no hazards were found on the very first inspection.
Along with the CDC, CDPH did a study called "HITS" that did blood lead tests at a sample of children's homes in several different neighborhoods. This allowed the researchers to calculate the "true" prevalence rate in the community, opposed to the doctor-reported surveillance statistics, which, as you imply, have the potential to be biased since not all children are tested as they should be. The study found the "true" rates to be rather close to the surveillance derived rates. So at least at the time of the study and in the neighborhoods studied, the surveillance figures are reasonably accurate. Therefore, I tend to believe that the screening rate to EBL rate correlation is more a factor of increased testing in higher risk neighborhoods. (Although historically, at least, Austin, despite being of the highest risk neighborhoods, had a below average screening rate.)
That said, I strongly agree there is much more effort needed to ensure all children are regularly screened.
Patrick MacRoy
Alliance for Healthy Homes
(Former CDPH Lead Program Director/Epidemiologist)
Megan Cottrell said:
Thanks, Pat!
Sorry about the mistakes - I have corrected the above article to reflect your comments.
Thanks for sharing about the HITS study. Really interesting stuff! I'm glad to know that the sampled rates we see are pretty accurate. I also agree that more needs to be done. In an area like Chicago, I think every kid should be tested. I know that's easier said that done, but I hope these articles have opened people's eyes and encouraged them to get their kids tested.
Thanks again! Glad to know that passionate people like you are working on the problem!
Leave a Comment?
What your comment will look like:
said: