 |
|
Andrew Jackson's Exposure to Mercury and Lead
Poisoned President?
Ludwig M. Deppisch, MD;
Jose A. Centeno, PhD;
David J. Gemmel, MA;
Norca L. Torres, MS
JAMA. 1999;282:569-571.
Historians have suggested that US president Andrew Jackson (1767-1845) experienced lead and mercury poisoning following his therapeutic use of calomel (mercurous chloride) and sugar of lead (lead acetate). To evaluate these claims, we performed direct physical measurement of 2 samples of Jackson's hair (1 from 1815, 1 from 1839). Following pretreatment and acid digestion, mercury was measured using cold vapor generation techniques, while lead levels were measured by electrothermal atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Mercury levels of 6.0 and 5.6 ppm were obtained from the 1815 and 1839 hair specimens, respectively. Lead levels were significantly elevated in both the 1815 sample (mean lead level, 130.5 ppm) and the 1839 sample (mean lead level, 44 ppm). These results suggest that Jackson had mercury and lead exposure, the latter compatible with symptomatic plumbism in the 1815 sample. However, Jackson's death was probably not due to heavy metal poisoning.
Author Affiliations: Department of Pathology, Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine, Rootstown (Dr Deppisch); Departments of Pathology (Dr Deppisch) and Research (Mr Gemmel), Forum Health, and Department of Health and Human Services, Youngstown State University, Youngstown, Ohio (Mr Gemmel); and Department of Environmental and Toxicologic Pathology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, DC (Dr Centeno and Ms Torres).
RELATED LETTER
Did Andrew Jackson Have Mercury Poisoning?
Elsa Cernichiari, Gary M. Myers, Thomas W. Clarkson, Bernard Weiss, Ludwig M. Deppisch, and David J. Gemmel
JAMA. 2000;283(2):200-201.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Interpreting Hair Mercury Levels in Individual Patients
Nuttall
Annals of Clinical & Laboratory Science 2006;36:248-261.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Did Andrew Jackson Have Mercury Poisoning?
Cernichiari et al.
JAMA 2000;283:200-201.
FULL TEXT
|
