This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Daniel S. Blumenthal, MD, MPH
Morehouse School of Medicine Atlanta, Ga

JAMA. 1993;270(21):2556.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Gellert et al¹ declare that "pediatric lead poisoning is not a major problem affecting Orange County children" because only 7.25% of a sample of 5115 such children (aged 12 to 72 months) had blood lead levels of 0.50 µmol/L (10 µg/dL) or higher, and only 0.12% had blood lead levels higher than 1.20 µmol/L (25 µg/dL). They then suggest that in Orange County and other locales with such low prevalence rates universal screening for lead could be replaced by testing only those children with a history of lead exposure or a history of risk factors for lead poisoning. Gellert et al present no information on the percentage of children with elevated blood lead levels in their sample that would have been identified by such a history; experience and older literature² suggest that history is a poor predictor of children with elevated blood lead levels. In . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?