Lesley Svendsen watched helplessly as her five-year-old daughter bawled uncontrollably, “I don’t know what’s wrong. I don’t feel good.”
- Download a 491k pdf file showing samples of children’s jewelry The Citizen tested for lead content.
That was more than six years ago, but she can still see Lyndsey screaming.
“That was a terrible time. I was quite scared. I was trying to figure out what I could do and what was wrong and then two weeks later we found out about the necklace.”
That necklace was a $5 Christmas gift. Lyndsey loved it, especially the shiny heart-shaped locket. She loved it so much, it often disappeared behind pursed lips, where it leached harmful levels of lead. The Svendsens only discovered their daughter was sucking on a leaded lollipop after she bit the locket off the necklace. By then, the coating had dissolved and the lacklustre pendant was bluish-grey.
Tests showed it was 100 per cent lead and blood tests showed Lyndsey had lead levels of about 10 micrograms per decilitre — the mark at which experts consider a child to be suffering from lead poisoning. The diagnosis sentenced her to eight months of blood draws, during which time doctors monitored her blood-lead levels.
Since then, Ms. Svendsen has been fighting to get all jewelry containing lead pulled from the Canadian market. Despite her efforts, and decades of research proving the dangers of lead, she laments it is still legal to sell these “pieces of poison.”
While great strides have been made over the past few decades to reduce lead poisoning by phasing it out of gasoline, paint and solder in food cans, high levels of it are still being used to make cheap jewelry that adorns countless necks, wrists and fingers.
Although Health Canada has been considering ways to regulate lead in consumer products since 1997, there are still no maximum allowable levels when it comes to jewelry. In other words, the department has no authority to control the sale of leaded jewelry — even though low-level exposure made a little girl sick and high-level exposure can cause convulsions, coma or death.
Many parents reasonably assume if an item is sold at a store, especially when intended for children, that it has undergone safety testing.
In fact, there is no formal pre-market assessment of jewelry. Case-by-case inspections are done only after complaints from consumers or potential dangers are spotted by inspectors.
And, when risks are identified, Health Canada has few options. It has no power to mandate recalls for consumer products. Instead, it relies on the goodwill of industry to voluntarily pull products.
On two occasions in recent years, Health Canada has asked industry to voluntarily remove children’s jewelry containing lead after tests by the department revealed high levels in items sold across the country. Followup tests showed industry did not fully comply.
Policymakers know the power of persuasion and the threat of bad publicity are weak tactics in securing industry compliance, so they have drafted regulations that would give the department broader enforcement powers, similar to those in the U.S. where courts can mandate recalls.
Regulations have been drafted that would make it illegal to sell jewelry targeting those under 15 containing more than 600 milligrams/kilogram of total lead, or .06 per cent lead.
Some critics say the age should be lowered. Others say there should be a sweeping ban on the use of lead in costume jewelry.
To see just how pervasive leaded jewelry is, the Citizen commissioned lab tests on a dozen pieces, mostly designed and priced to target children.
Jewelry was purchased from vending machines, discount shops and department stores. Some items were selected for their illustrative packaging, designed to catch the attention of young consumers. Others were chosen because they were nestled amongst items marketed to children, such as toys and candy. And a few were singled out after children were spotted eyeing them.
Of the 12 items tested, only one had levels that weren’t detectable. The remainder had lead levels ranging between 46 per cent and 82 per cent. On average, they contained 1,000 times the amount of total lead suggested by Health Canada.
Those amounts are “exceptionally dangerous” if the coating wears off, is broken or scratched, says Kathleen Cooper of the Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA). “Even with one per cent you’re at levels that are very, very hazardous. When you’re up around 40 or 50 per cent, those are just little nuggets of poison.”
Even Health Canada’s Sarah Sheffield agrees the amounts of lead can be dangerously high.
“There is a potential risk of lead toxicity attached to those levels,” said Ms. Sheffield, after the department insisted on running its own series of tests when contacted for comment.
However, she did point out that not all the items of jewelry appeared to be aimed at children, such as the ring and necklaces with crosses.
The Citizen was prompted to launch its own investigation after U.S. regulators recalled 150 million pieces of toy jewelry from vending machines in early July because half contained dangerous levels of lead. Action was taken after a four-year-old Oregon boy nearly died from swallowing a 25-cent pendant made with 39 per cent lead. The recall was extended to Canada.
While there’s little risk from wearing jewelry, lead has a sweet taste so it’s no surprise these items often end up in the mouths of children, who then risk swallowing them.
Even handling leaded jewelry can be risky if children put their hands in their mouths without washing them.
While there’s little data on the extent of lead poisoning in Canada, lack of reporting a problem doesn’t prove there is no problem, says Kelly O’Grady, president of Lead Environmental Awareness and Detection.
After all, she points out, the last national pediatric blood lead survey of Canadian children was done in 1978.
Even medical experts such as Benoit Bailey of Montreal’s Hopital Sainte-Justine, who recently co-authored an article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal stating lead poisoning is rare in Canada, admits it’s possible cases go undetected because low-level lead poisoning is hard to spot.
Most patients with elevated lead levels are either asymptomatic or have nonspecific symptoms such as anorexia, vomiting or abdominal pain.
Although the threshold for lead poisoning is 10 microg/dL, medical treatment is usually only required at 40 microg/dL.
“It’s difficult to look at a child and say, ‘That child has lead poisoning,’ especially at the very low end,” says Jill Courtemanche of the poison control centre at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario. Even physical signs associated with high-level exposure are often so vague physicians don’t immediately suspect lead poisoning.
Typically, you’ll only know a child is suffering from lead poisoning if the child is tested. Left untreated, exposure to low levels can result in behavioural problems, learning disabilities, hearing difficulties and growth retardation. Short-term exposure to high levels can cause vomiting, bloody diarrhea and death.
Even exposure to an amount small enough to fit on the head of a pin can wreak havoc on growing bodies, say some.
Bruce Lanphear of the Cincinnati Children’s Environmental Health Center in Ohio contributed to a study published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine that showed exposure to seemingly “safe” amounts of lead can affect a child’s intelligence.
Children with blood lead levels of 10 microg/dL had IQs that were 7.4 points lower than children with levels of one microg/dL. When levels rose from 10 to 30 microg/dL, intelligence dropped by another 2.4 IQ points.
“Most parents aren’t going to pick up on subtle differences like an IQ drop of five to 10 points, but that could certainly determine whether someone gets into Harvard or Princeton,” he said.
While exposure to lead comes mostly through old paint, Dr. Lanphear points out it’s a cumulative toxin that builds up in the bones, soft tissue and organs.
Lead occurs naturally and can be found in water, dust and soil, but “what’s particularly compelling about doing something with pendants, necklaces or other kinds of toys is that it’s a lot easier to try and reduce exposure before they’re put in the environment,” says Dr. Lanphear.
“Having regulations that set some standards that are enforced, makes a lot of sense with lead. … In the absence of regulations, the industry is pretty free to do whatever it wants. And in this country, a toxin is innocent until proven guilty, and again, and again, and again.”
It’s a view shared in this country as well.
“This is not something that’s essential to be out there — it’s a toy,” says Ms. Courtemanche.
The Citizen commissioned the University of Toronto’s Analytical Laboratory for Environmental Science Research and Training (ANALEST) to test 12 samples of cheap jewelry. Each sample cost about $40 to test.
Only one item had virtually no lead, while the rest contained between 463,000 mg/kg and 827,000 mg/kg. Overall, the pieces contained about 1,000 times Health Canada’s suggested limits.
“That’s incredible,” says Ms. Cooper of CELA. “It’s just as pervasive as I would’ve expected, and that’s the problem for parents: How do you know?
“While the coating provides some barrier, those things are cheap, coatings wear off and then the lead becomes available. So at those levels it’s extremely hazardous.”
Continued on next page
Continued from previous page
To determine risk, it’s necessary to figure out the amount of total lead and leachable lead. Total lead content is the amount of lead in the item. Leachable lead is the amount released, which is based on how quickly the paint, plating or protective covering — if there is one — wears off.
The Citizen’s tests did not reveal whether the items surpassed Health Canada’s limit of 90 mg/kg of leachable lead because that’s dependent on a number of different variables. But, the general rule is the more lead an item contains, the more it will leach.
And it isn’t just sucking on an item that poses a risk. Wearing it can also be dangerous, says Dan Mathers, lab manager at ANA-LEST.
“It’s something I wouldn’t recommend people wear at any amount,” he says, explaining that because sweat is acidic, lead can be easily absorbed through the skin.
“It’s funny how the Ministry of Labour regulates the exposure of this metal in the work environment, but legislation is slow in protecting children.”
Despite potential dangers, all the retailers contacted by the Citizen said the same thing: they’re not doing anything illegal.
The reason lead is used to make jewelry is quite simple, says Peter Woolford of the Retail Council of Canada: “It’s cheap and there are no laws against it.”
It has a low melting point, is extremely malleable, easily coated, very abundant and easily absorbs paint.
Labour rates in Canada are too high to justify making baubles that sell for a few dollars, so 98 per cent of the stuff on the Canadian market is imported from the Far East and South Asia. While Canadian retailers buy from different manufacturers and suppliers, the same process is used to make most of it.
In fact, lead is so ubiquitous that an all-out ban on its use in costume jewelry would kill the market in Canada, warns Mr. Woolford. The industry has been searching for an alternative, but hasn’t yet found a metal with the same attributes and without the same toxic effects.
In July, the vending machine industry was dealt a heavy blow when the U.S. Consumer Product and Safety Commission asked four major importers to recall 150 million pieces of toy jewelry made in India because tests showed half contained toxic levels of lead.
A&A Global Industries Inc., Brand Imports LLC; Cardinal Distributing Co. Inc. and L.M.Becker & Co. were affected by the largest recall in American history.
Ken Giles of the product safety commission says the agency is now expanding its investigation and testing much more than cheap baubles in plastic bubbles. Officials are now looking into the risk associated with jewelry sold in discount stores.
Although no U.S. standard exists for lead content in children’s jewelry, it’s illegal for an item to have accessible lead that is deemed hazardous.
The companies willingly agreed to pull their product after the safety commission approached them. If they had refused, the commission could have asked a federal judge to order the recall.
While the lion’s share was sold in the U.S., an estimated two to three million pieces made their way north of the border, where 20 different companies sold them. American distributors contacted Canadian buyers and asked them to comply with the recall.
When reached in early August, three of Canada’s largest vending machine companies told the Citizen they were complying, but admitted items affected by the recall were likely still floating around in machines that hadn’t yet been serviced.
Officials at Folz Vending, Televending Ltd. and Remarc Mat-O-Vend said it was unfair that a negative light was only shed on the vending machine industry when leaded jewelry extends beyond coin machines.
“You can go to (retail stores) and get costume jewelry, but they’re never mentioned,” said Tony Leal of Televending. “I’ve seen things hanging up that we’ve sold in capsules. It’s bizarre that (lead) is all over, even high-end costume jewelry.”
Nonetheless, the Ottawa company has decided it will no longer sell even plastic jewelry because it fears the recall has tarnished the public’s perception of all toy jewelry.
Ann Wakelin of Remarc Mat-O-Vend said that while the Mississauga company doesn’t want to be perceived as selling anything harmful, she questioned the real danger of these items.
“How is this going to hurt anybody, really? It’s mostly teenagers who (wear) this. … How many teenagers are going to eat a big chunk of jewelry?”
It was a sentiment echoed by Gary Walters of Toronto-based Folz Vending, who said he didn’t really think there were serious safety issues with the product, but was complying nonetheless.
“Acute care divisions and emergency rooms are not full of kids or people with lead poisoning. Are we making more out of this than need be? I’ve got to believe that what was found to be safe within the last 10 years, with respect to this product, is probably on balance sufficient. So, what is the real risk in exposure that the public has? I don’t really see it.”
But Kara Burkhart of Redmond, Oregon, would argue otherwise. Last summer her son, Colton, contracted levels of lead poisoning that could lead to coma or death after he swallowed a pendant that got lodged in his stomach for weeks.
“He was nearly dead. His blood lead level was 123 microg/dL,” recalls Ms. Burkhart in a telephone interview from her home.
In July, the Burkharts noticed four-year-old Colton was vomiting, losing weight and complaining of stomach cramps. At first they thought it was the flu, but when the pain didn’t subside, they took him to the hospital.
X-rays revealed a foreign object in his stomach. Doctors immediately operated and removed the nickel-sized pendant, which they suspect had been there for two to four weeks.
With the object gone, doctors figured the worst was over and he was released from hospital. But a week later, he bit the inside of his cheek, which quickly swelled up to the size of a golfball. A series of blood tests revealed lead levels 12 times higher than normal.
It turns out the uncoated pendant was made of 39 per cent lead.
Colton, after various tests and chelation therapy, now has a blood lead level of 27 microg/dL, which is still almost three times higher than normal.
“It will never be back to normal,” says Ms. Burkhart. “We won’t know for a while how this has affected him neurologically or behaviourally.”
In September 2003, the distributor, L.M. Becker & Co., recalled 1.4 million of those pendants. Following that, various media organizations and the product safety commission ran a battery of tests, which ultimately prompted the recall in July of this year.
“We will have to deal with this for the rest of his life,” says Ms. Burkhart. “Fortunately, the major nightmare is over, but it will continue to haunt us.”
In hindsight, she says, she had a “false sense of security” and assumed that if something was being sold to children, it was safe. “Unfortunately, we’re finding out first-hand that you can’t do that.
“I’d like to see (the industry) eliminate lead in children’s toys and jewelry of any sort and own up to the responsibility that they have done this and put kids in danger.”
The Burkharts are embroiled in a lawsuit with L.M. Becker & Co. seeking $40,000 U.S. — the amount they’ve spent on medical expenses — and an undisclosed amount in punitive damages.
The state of California is also enmeshed in a court battle. It’s suing 13 major retailers, including Wal-Mart, Target, Kmart, and Sears for failing to warn customers of hazardous levels of lead found in numerous brands of costume jewelry marketed to young children and teenagers. According to The Associated Press, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said tests found levels of lead “well above” that requiring consumer warnings.
Health Canada’s attempt to protect children by proposing jewelry regulations has drummed up a chorus of criticism.
The regulation would ban advertising, selling or importing into Canada children’s jewelry containing more than 600 mg/kg total lead and more than 90 mg/kg leachable lead. Children’s jewelry is defined as jewelry that’s produced, sized, decorated, packaged, advertised or sold in a manner that appeals to those under 15.
If cabinet approves the changes, the products would be considered hazardous under the Hazardous Products Act, says Ms. Sheffield, the department’s project officer of the Consumer Product Safety Bureau.
But who knows whether the regulations will ever make it off the shelf and on to the floor?
“The fact that this jewelry is still available … it’s given us the determination that we must take some legal action,” she said, adding she hopes the new minority government will make it a priority.
Ms. Sheffield also said she’d like Health Canada to have the same recall power as in the U.S. Currently, it can only pull medicine, medical devices and a few other things.
Exempting costume jewelry as a whole ignores the lion’s share of the problem, says Ms. Cooper, explaining it offers manufacturers and retailers a loophole to argue their jewelry isn’t targeting “children.”
Furthermore, says Ms. Cooper, older teens and women of child-bearing age are also at risk.
“I’ve seen women holding six-month-old infants with the lead pendant of their necklace in the child’s mouth.”
Ms. Sheffield admits there will have to be judgment calls when it comes to identifying jewelry that targets children versus older teens, but says 15 was chosen as the cutoff because children don’t typically put things in their mouths by that age.
Vending machine jewelry, however, would automatically be considered children’s jewelry — a classification that raises the ire of vendors who say their product is no different than what is sold in many discount stores.
According to the regulations, a sweeping ban on lead would disrupt the costume jewelry trade because so much of it contains lead.
Besides, says Ms. Sheffield, the department can provide an appropriate level of protection for children without having to ban the metal outright.
Nonetheless, Ms. Cooper is firm in her beliefs, saying the department is allowing free trade in junk jewelry to trump an overwhelming health hazard.
“To base a regulatory strategy on protecting the economic interests of the costume jewelry trade over the health of children is frankly, a national embarrassment.”
CELA isn’t alone in its criticism. Even the industry is critical.
Because there’s so little difference between marketing to teens and pre-teens, retailers want the cutoff age of children’s jewelry to be eight. That, says Mr. Woolford, is a more clearly defined margin.
“We know what that jewelry looks like — size, design, colour.
“The last thing we want to have is a situation where the retailer doesn’t really know whether a product has to be lead-free or not. What we need are some bright, clean lines in the area.”
In the absence of bright, clean lines, Claire’s Boutiques has drawn up its own in the form of Claire’s Club, a line of lead-free jewelry targeting children under the age of eight.
“Even though we know that jewelry is not a food product, very small children may put it in their mouths,” said spokeswoman Marisa Jacobs.
While there may be a line of jewelry targeting young fashionistas, she recognizes there are plenty of other flashy gems made of lead that will appeal to little girls.
“We are currently engaged in a process of reducing the lead levels in all of the non-Claire’s Club jewelry to bring it more in line with Claire’s Club. … We are working with all of our vendors in Asia and redeveloping the formulations to lower the lead.”
No one from Hudson’s Bay Company was available for comment, but the company did issue a statement saying it’s working with other large retailers to “tackle” the issue of leaded jewelry and said it does not “market or promote jewelry with lead to children under the age of six.”
While the definitions of child and children’s jewelry are extremely murky, Brian Evenchick of the Canadian Jewellers Association worries officials don’t have the “teeth” to monitor imported jewelry, which puts complying Canadian manufacturers at a major disadvantage.
“Canadian manufacturers, and there’s only a few of us left, are trying to stay within this lead-free guideline, but we can’t compete, we just can’t do it,” says Mr. Evenchick of M. Evenchick Jewellery Ltd.
“When they put laws like this in and have no one pinching them … they create a very confusing situation.
“I hope they get the legislation through, but there’s holes in it, let’s face it.”
Barbara McElgunn, of the Learning Disabilities Association, of Canada is a little more cynical.
“Is this really going to make a difference? Unless the regulations give (Health Canada) more power to recall items, stop (leaded jewelry) at the border or attach penalties to it for retailers, they’re not going to make a difference.”
Even before Lyndsey bit the pendant off the necklace, there were warning signs something was wrong: Teachers called her parents to find out why she was acting up in class. At home she’d erupt for no apparent reason. And the shiny pendant on her cherished necklace, which she refused to take off even in the bath, had become dull.
But because the five-year-old had been diagnosed two years earlier with Asperger’s syndrome, which causes motor delays and behavioural problems, her mother assumed she was displaying symptoms associated with the disorder.
Only when Lyndsey asked her dad, who is a welder, to fix her necklace, did the cause of her flareups become evident. Suspicious that the lacklustre pendant contained lead, he took a piece of paper and drew a line with it.
The Svendsens called the city’s poison centre, but were told they must be mistaken. Surely, children’s jewelry wouldn’t be made of lead, they were told. But lab tests done by Health Canada proved otherwise.
“Health Canada said then they would take care of it, but it’s been years,” says Ms. Svendsen. “Laws aren’t written and set in one night, but maybe this one should’ve been.”
Lyndsey remains the only known Canadian case of a child developing lead poisoning from jewelry, but Ms. Svendsen suspects there may be more.
“Certainly my daughter is not the only one who would put that in her mouth. I just can’t believe it.”
Lyndsey is now 12 and her blood lead levels are normal, but because of the Asperger’s, it’s tough to tell if there are any lingering effects.
The outbursts and tantrums have faded from her memory, but she hasn’t forgotten the string of blood work she underwent.
There is one thing, however, that has weighed heavily on her: “I don’t get it,” says Lyndsey. “If lead is poison, why do they make anything out of lead?”
Teotonio, The Ottawa Citizen