AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 88, Issue 12 1871-1877, Copyright © 1998 by American Public Health Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Related articles in AJPH
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Needleman, H L
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Needleman, H L
Childhood lead poisoning: the promise and abandonment of primary prevention.

H L Needleman

Lead Research Group, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pa., USA. hlnlead@vms.cis.pitt.edu

In 1991, the Public Health Service published the Strategic Plan for the Elimination of Childhood Lead Poisoning. This document marked a fundamental shift in federal policy from finding and treating lead-poisoned children to authentic primary prevention. It spelled out a 15-year strategy to achieve this goal and provided a cost-benefit analysis showing that the monetized benefits far exceeded the costs of abatement. A strong national effort to eliminate the disease developed. Now, 7 years after publication of the plan, primary prevention of lead exposure has been abandoned. This article examines the role of some prevailing attitudes and institutions in derailing the effort. Some institutions--the lead industry, real estate interests, and insurance interests--behaved as anticipated. Others, including private pediatricians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, some federal agencies, and a public interest group ostensibly dedicated to eliminating lead poisoning, also played an unexpected part in derailing the plan.


Related articles in AJPH:

Public health and brownfields: reviving the past to protect the future.
M Greenberg, C Lee, and C Powers
AJPH 1998 88: 1759-1760. [PDF]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JAMAHome page
H. Markel
Getting the Lead Out: The Rhode Island Lead Paint Trials and Their Impact on Children's Health
JAMA, June 27, 2007; 297(24): 2773 - 2775.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Public HealthHome page
D. R. Buchanan and F. G. Miller
Justice and Fairness in the Kennedy Krieger Institute Lead Paint Study: the Ethics of Public Health Research on Less Expensive, Less Effective Interventions
Am J Public Health, May 1, 2006; 96(5): 781 - 787.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Med. EthicsHome page
S O Hansson
Extended antipaternalism
J. Med. Ethics, February 1, 2005; 31(2): 97 - 100.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Public HealthHome page
D. Fassin and A.-J. Naude
PLUMBISM REINVENTED: Childhood Lead Poisoning in France, 1985-1990
Am J Public Health, November 1, 2004; 94(11): 1854 - 1863.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
J. F. Rosen and P. Mushak
Primary Prevention of Childhood Lead Poisoning -- The Only Solution
N. Engl. J. Med., May 10, 2001; 344(19): 1470 - 1471.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
J. J. Chisolm Jr
The Road to Primary Prevention of Lead Toxicity in Children
Pediatrics, March 1, 2001; 107(3): 581 - 583.
[Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the American Public Health Association