Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)


Print Feedback Export to File
348598 
Journal Article 
A study of potential exposure to environmental lead resulting from porcelain enameled bathtubs 
Hart, MA 
2008 
47 
01 
English 
Porcelain enameled bathtubs produced in the early twentieth century contained lead. Hamilton (1912) reported on occupational lead poisoning in potteries, tile works, and porcelain enameled sanitary ware factories. These factories used a glaze containing one or more compounds of lead in the manufacturing of porcelain enameled bathtubs. Recently, bathtubs have been identified as the lead source during elevated blood lead level investigations. The objective of this study was to investigate lead exposure from porcelain enameled bathtubs by examining the lead concentration in water, dust wipes, and x-ray fluorescence (XRF) readings. Six porcelain enameled bathtubs were filled with 5 gallons of water to simulate a child's bath time and water samples were collected at 15, 30, and 60 minutes. In addition, a 929.03 cm super(2) template was used to delineate the sampling area for three dust wipe replicates from the raw drain hole on the interior bottom. The bathtub XRF readings were obtained using hand-handle XRF analyzer and a template with three 58.06 cm super(2 ) cut outs that are 7.62 cm apart from the raw drain hole for the interior bottom (horizontal distance away from drain) and the interior side of the bathtub where the natural curvature starts (vertical distance away from the natural curvature). Additionally, three XRF readings were taken on the exterior side of the bathtub below the stopper lever hole. Water and dust wipe samples were analyzed by a commercial laboratory using inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES) and flame atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS), respectively. All water sample results were below the detectable limit of 0.01 mg/L for lead. All dust wipe sample results were above the detectable limit of 0.02 mu g/cm super(2)and were significantly different by position (ANOVA; Tukey-Kramer HSD, P = 0.0023). All XRF readings analyzed were positive for lead; however the exterior XRF readings and bathtub 2 were excluded due to being outliners. XRF mean readings were not significantly different by location (interior side or bottom; pooled t-test; P = 0.1927) but were significantly different by position (side 3 readings; ANOVA; Tukey-Kramer HSD; P = 0.0012; and bottom 3 readings; P = 0.0041). A liner regression model indicated no correlation between dust wipes and XRF readings either by location or position. There appears to be no relationship between water, dust wipes, and XRF readings with lead concentrations and exposure. Data suggests that the only possible source of surface lead is porcelain deterioration. Further investigation is needed between XRF readings, dust wipes, bathtub water, and bathtub condition to reveal the true extent of lead exposure to humans by porcelain enameled bathtubs. 
Article Subject Terms: Dusts; Lead; Water Analysis; Exposure; Drains; Water Sampling; Deterioration; Sampling; Blood; Dust; Factories; Blood; levels; Fluorescence; Poisoning; Dissertations; Sanitation; Article; Geographic Terms: Chile, Atacama, San Antonio; SW 3030 Effects of pollution; P 0000 AIR POLLUTION; EE 40 Water; Pollution: Monitoring, Control & Remediation