A cost effective comparison of controls on environmental lead: a decision methodology

Abstract

Currently no consensus exists regarding the health implications of environmental lead. However, a policy decision is required now concerning the metal's control. Should a cheap, effective strategy be available, it may be thought best to implement it immediately as an insurance against the possibility that lead is harmful. If no such option is found, then it may be decided to control lead only when a more definite hazard is shown. A control's effectiveness is measured by the reduction effected on a standard man's blood lead concentration, weighted by the fraction of the population acted upon. A total of 89 single and multiple controls is considered. If one control is equally effective as another, for a lesser cost, then the former is said to dominate the latter, which is eliminated. This enables a range of undominated controls to be drawn up, one of which may be selected should it ever be decided to reduce environmental lead levels. A surprising feature of this set is its insensitivity to unknowns such as future crude oil prices and airborne lead fallout's contribution to dietary lead through impaction. It also clearly reveals the superiority of exhaust gas filters over gasoline lead reductions.