Worried about microplastics? You should fear lead way more for your health

Microplastics— tiny plastic particles less than 5 millimeters in size— are pervasive in the environment and have been detected in human tissues, including blood and breast milk.

They have been grabbing headlines and getting a whole lot of attention in the media, as well.

The spotlight is shining all the more brightly now that the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution is underway in Busan, South Korea.

As if that wasn’t enough, there are memes about microplastics, too!

Still, for all the attention they are getting, the health effects of microplastics are not yet fully understood. Some studies suggest potential risks, such as inflammation, oxidative stress, and disruption of the endocrine system, but more research is needed.

There is, however, plethora of research on the adverse health and environmental impact of another pervasive element: lead.

Lead has been extensively used in various industries, leading to widespread environmental contamination. Activities like mining, smelting, and the recycling of lead-acid batteries have significantly increased lead levels in the environment, especially near industrial sites.

Crops grown in contaminated soil or irrigated with polluted water can accumulate lead. That’s how this metal can enter the food chain, and thus, our bodies.

Lead exposure poses a more immediate and well-documented threat to human health compared to microplastics. There is no identified safe blood lead level; even low exposures can cause significant health issues.

In children, lead exposure can result in developmental delays, reduced IQ, attention-related behavioral problems, and learning difficulties.

In adults, it can lead to hypertension, renal impairment, and reproductive problems.

We don’t yet have perfect comparable data on the relevant health burden of lead and other chemicals. But a 2016 WHO report found that nearly half of all deaths from chemical exposures were due to lead exposure.

For an element that dangerous and pervasive, one would expect international bodies are paying more attention to the problem, right?

Wrong.

According to Centre for Global Development, last month, a new $26 million fund was launched under the UN Global Framework on Chemicals, with no mention of lead. The toxic metal was also not mentioned in last year’s “Bonn Declaration for a Planet Free of Harm from Chemicals and Waste”.

Despite that, 2024 has seen significant progress in raising global awareness about lead poisoning, highlighted by the launch of the USAID and UNICEF-backed Partnership for a Lead-Free Future.

However, a fleeting reference to the issue’s economic toll— estimated at 7 per cent of global GDP— in recent UN documents on chemical regulation shows the work that remains.

The omission points to a lack of evidence-based policymaking. They argue that if the UN is committed to addressing the world’s most harmful pollutants, it must prioritise lead, beginning with binding commitments and dedicated funding for cleanup efforts.