Lead and morbidity: A dose-response relationship

Abstract

Many laboratory tests have been recommended for monitoring factory workers exposed to lead. To select the most useful test the best predictor of selected measures of morbidity was sought. 639 lead-exposed workers in several factories were questioned about abdominal ache, constipation, and fatigue and were examined for hand tremot. Packed-cell volume, blood-lead, urinary lead, and delta-aminolaevulinic acid were estimated in 489 workers. About half of the values for the latter three tests fell into the "excessive" or "dangerous" category of lead absorption. Blood-lead was a better predictor of morbidity than any other laboratory test, and further information did not add appreciably to morbidity prediction. The findings suggest that blood-lead measurement is the most meaningful test for monitoring workers exposed to lead. The effect of lead on morbidity does not appear to depend on its action on the porphyrin metabolic pathway.