Why 11 N.J. cities have more lead-affected kids than Flint, Michigan

[proverbialwisdom]

Source: By Ben Horowitz | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com

February 03, 2016 at 8:30 AM, updated February 03, 2016 at 2:14 PM

TRENTON — Eleven cities in New Jersey, and two counties, have a higher proportion of young children with dangerous lead levels than Flint, Mich., does, according to New Jersey and Michigan statistics cited by a community advocacy group.

With the eyes of the nation focused on the brain damage and other problems associated with lead-contaminated water in Flint, several community advocacy organizations in New Jersey banded together this week to draw attention to New Jersey's lead problem, asking for a renewed focus on solving it.

In New Jersey, children 6 years of age and younger have continued to ingest lead from paint in windows, doors and other woodwork found in older homes, particularly in older, poorer cities, said Elyse Pivnick, director of environmental health for Isles, Inc., a community development organization based in Trenton.

"In light of the Flint debacle, we wanted people to understand that water is not the only thing that's poisoning children," she said. "Most people think the lead problem was solved when we took lead out of gasoline and new homes in the 1970s, but that's not true."

The communities with the high lead levels include Irvington, East Orange, Trenton, Newark, Paterson, Plainfield, Jersey City, Elizabeth, Atlantic City, New Brunswick and Passaic, along with Salem and Cumberland counties.

"You can breathe it in from dust and you can swallow it," Pivnick said.

Read more: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2016/02/11_cities_in_jersey_have_more_lead-affected_kids_t.html

[DonCoquixote]

1. my hometown of Jersey City

Good old Cancer Alley.

[proverbialwisdom]

2. NJ.com: Christie vetoes $10M fund to remove lead paint from old houses.

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/01/christie_vetoes_10m_fund_to_remove_lead_paint_from.html

Christie vetoes $10M fund to remove lead paint from old houses
on January 20, 2016 at 8:20 AM, updated January 20, 2016 at 1:45 PM
4 shares

TRENTON — A bill dedicating $10 million to a fund that would pay to remove lead paint from old housing stock in New Jersey was vetoed by Gov. Chris Christie on Tuesday.

State lawmakers voted to earmark $10 million from the state budget for the Lead Hazard Control Assistance Fund. The money would have been used to pay for lead abatement projects, relocate families whose children have high lead levels in their blood, create a web-based housing registry among other efforts, according to the bill.

The $10 million is money accrued based on a fee on paint sales. Governors have diverted the funds revenue to support the state budget since 2004, according to the bill's supporters.

The governor pocket-vetoed the bill, (S1279) which means he declined to act on it and allowed it to expire in the legislative session that just ended Jan. 12. He did not include a statement explaining why he rejected the legislation.

This is the third consecutive two-year legislative session in which the $10 million bill has failed to be signed into law.

<>

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1066569

Posted by Miigwech on Sun Jan 18, 2015, 01:15 PM

New Jersey Misused $54 Million Meant to Protect Children from Lead Poisoning

[Herman4747]

3. Yet Another Republican Governor, huh? nt

[fredamae]

4. And Another who also happens

to be a POTUS candidate. OH Gov Kasich
http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2016-01-28/water/another-flint-ohio-community-faces-lead-contamination-in-water/a50101-1

[Beacool]

5. Disgraceful, but not a valid comparison to Flint.

In Flint the entire water system was contaminated by greedy Republicans trying to save money. In NJ older bldgs. are responsible for the lead contamination. Poverty is obviously an issue as it's expensive to have lead paint removed. NJ is only one of a handful of states that universally check for lead in children. There are probably states where there is even more widespread lead contamination.

Either way, it's a health issue that needs to be rectified, but don't hold your breath while Christie remains in office.

[proverbialwisdom]

6. More.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/opinion/sunday/america-is-flint.html

OP-ED COLUMNIST

America Is Flint
by Nicholas Kristof
FEB. 6, 2016

We have been rightfully outraged by the lead poisoning of children in Flint, Mich. — an outrage that one health expert called “state-sponsored child abuse.”

But lead poisoning goes far beyond Flint, and in many parts of America seems to be even worse.

“Lead in Flint is the tip of the iceberg,” notes Dr. Richard J. Jackson, former director of the National Center for Environmental Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Flint is a teachable moment for America.”

In Flint, 4.9 percent of children tested for lead turned out to have elevated levels. That’s inexcusable. But in 2014 in New York State outside of New York City, the figure was 6.7 percent. In Pennsylvania, 8.5 percent. On the west side of Detroit, one-fifth of the children tested in 2014 had lead poisoning. In Iowa for 2012, the most recent year available, an astonishing 32 percent of children tested had elevated lead levels. (I calculated most of these numbers from C.D.C. data.)

Across America, 535,000 children ages 1 through 5 suffer lead poisoning, by C.D.C. estimates.

“We are indeed all Flint,” says Dr. Philip Landrigan, a professor of preventive medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. “Lead poisoning continues to be a silent epidemic in the United States.”

None of this diminishes the tragedy of Flint, which is particularly horrifying because it was delivered by the government through the municipal water system even as state officials scoffed at the local outcry. In any case, data collection is poor, so we don’t have a good handle on the scale of the problem either in Flint or elsewhere: Take comparisons with a grain of salt. But it’s clear that this lead poisoning is not one city’s catastrophe but a nation’s — and the world’s, since the situation is even worse in some low-income countries.

<>