Published on Portside (https://portside.org)
Herbert
Needleman: The Passing of a Pioneer and a Public Health Hero
Carrie Arnold
Wednesday, May 31, 2017
PBS/Nova Next
Where
there’s poverty, you’ll often find lead poisoning.
Decades
before the Flint water crisis, pediatrician Herb Needleman knew the
relationship between poverty and lead poisoning all too well. When he began
practicing medicine in the 1950s, lead was everywhere—in pipes, paint,
gasoline, and countless other consumer products. It affected children from
every social stratum, but poor children were hit the hardest. “He would have
been disheartened to hear of the Flint crisis,” says his son Joshua, “but
probably not surprised.”
Throughout
the 1960s, ’70s, and ’80s, Needleman crusaded for more stringent lead safety
standards after his groundbreaking research showed that chronic, low-level lead
poisoning could cause devastating neurological impairments in children. Before
the publication of his work, researchers believed that lead poisoning was a
short-term problem that could easily be treated. Yet his work showed that the
effects could be lingering and devastating—even if a child didn’t show overt
signs of lead poisoning.
Lead
poisoning continues to disproportionately affect impoverished, minority
communities.
Now 90, Needleman
has advanced Alzheimer’s disease and couldn’t be interviewed for this piece.
But public health experts like Philip Landrigan credit Needleman’s work with
lowering average blood lead levels in American children by 78% between 1976 and
1991.
“We used to
think that lead poisoning was like the flu—either you had it or you didn’t,”
Landrigan says. Thanks to Needleman, we know that lead poisoning can be a
serious problem even at very low levels of exposure.
The lead
crisis in Flint serves as a reminder that Herb Needleman’s work isn’t finished.
There, lead poisoning travels on old pipes. As a result of an April 2014 switch
to the corrosive Flint River as the source of the city’s drinking water, the
protective crust that coated the inside of the pipes dissolved, and lead worked
its way into homes throughout the area. Just over a year after the switch,
pediatrician Mona Hanna-Attisha reported an epidemic of lead poisoning in the
city’s children, with 3% of local kids showing blood lead levels higher than the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommended cutoff of 5 µg/dL.
Today, just
as it was in Needleman’s day, lead poisoning continues to disproportionately
affect impoverished, minority communities. What we lack, Landrigan says, is not
an understanding of the dangers of lead but rather the political will to fix
the problem.
A Long
History
For nearly
10,000 years, humans have turned to lead for medicines and cosmetics, used it
to line aqueducts, shaped it for cooking and eating utensils, and even added it
as a sweetener. Since the time of the ancient Greeks, physicians have
recognized the tell-tale signs of acute lead poisoning in children and adults:
vomiting, confusion, seizures, fever, rash, fatigue, and changes in behavior.
The
Industrial Revolution, however, turned lead poisoning into an epidemic. Paint
manufacturers, taking a cue from artists, who had used white leaded pigments
for centuries, began using lead in mass produced home paints in the late 19th
century. Even baby cribs were coated with white lead paint, its slightly sweet
taste tantalizingly tasty to infants and children. Children unknowingly
ingested or inhaled tiny pieces of paint that flaked off their cribs or the
windows, doors, and walls of their homes. By 1904, early reports linked cases
of childhood lead poisoning to these household leaded paints.
Twenty
years later, a new, more pervasive source of lead pollution appeared. Gasoline
manufacturers had turned to lead to solve the problem of engine knock, the
premature detonation of gasoline inside a cylinder that was slowly destroying
the millions of new cars taking to the roads. Adding a chemical called
tetraethyl lead eliminated the problem, but it also spewed tons upon tons of
lead directly into the atmosphere. Industry claimed the gasoline additive was
safe, but cases of severe, acute lead poisoning in workers who produced the
stuff immediately challenged that notion. Concerns about chronic, low-level
exposure to lead in the atmosphere also arose. Less than a year after
tetraethyl lead hit the market, biochemist William Mansfield Clark noted that
leaded gasoline could cause widespread air pollution, creating “a menace to
public health.” But most attention remained focused on preventing overt cases
of acute lead poisoning.
The first
challenge to the belief that only severe, acute lead poisoning could cause harm
came when pediatric neurologist Randall Byers noticed that several of the
children he saw with cognitive and behavioral issues shared one thing in
common: previous lead poisoning. Throughout the 1930s, Boston psychologist
Elizabeth Lord kept immaculate records of children admitted to the pediatric
ward for acute lead poisoning. Many children were hospitalized with symptoms of
anemia, loss of appetite, itchy palms and feet, stomach pains, brain swelling,
and paralysis. X-rays revealed bones stippled with bright white blotches of
lead.
From a
chemical standpoint, lead and calcium are similar. Both atoms occupy the same
column of the periodic table, calcium near the top and lead closer to the
bottom. If lead gets in the body, it can disrupt a multitude of cellular
processes that rely on calcium. Neurons use calcium to send messages, which is
one of the reasons the nervous system receives the brunt of lead’s toxic
effects. The presence of lead hijacks the brain’s calcium pathways, causing
decreased signals from some neurons, while increasing signals in others. In
children, this can alter brain development, leading to the behavioral and
neurological issues that Lord and Needleman saw. Treatment, such as it was,
consisted of removing the source of lead from the child and administering a
high calcium diet along with liberal doses of cod liver oil. If they recovered
from the initial bout of brain swelling, Lord and other physicians initially
assumed the children would be fine.
There’s no
such thing as a short-term exposure to lead.
When Lord
began to pore over her records, however, that’s not what she found. With Byers,
Lord found that hopes for a full recovery after acute lead poisoning were
misplaced. The children’s marked improvements while hospitalized masked ongoing
neuropsychological problems. Many children developed behavioral problems like
aggression and angry outbursts. Others had difficulty in school, or with
sensory and motor skills. Lord and Byers’s data on nearly 100 lead poisoning
cases in Boston children, published in 1943 [1], provided
the first hints that exposure could have long-lasting effects.
There’s no
such thing as a short-term exposure to lead, says Nick Newman, a pediatrician
at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and director of their lead clinic. “Lead is
the archetypal poison. It stays in the body for years, and even a small amount
can become significant over a long time,” he says.
Building
His Case
As a newly
minted pediatrician at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Herb Needleman
treated an endless parade of lead poisoned children. It all seemed like just
part of the job until he told a mother whose infant daughter lay comatose in
the ICU that her child’s health depended on her finding a new place to live.
The mother replied, “Where else am I going to go?”
That moment
reverberated throughout Needleman’s life. “I suddenly realized that the issue
was not just making diagnoses and treating them. The issue was in the life
story of people,” he said in an interview 50 years [2] later.
As
Needleman bounced from position to position early in his career, he found he
couldn’t escape the long reach of lead poisoning. Patient interactions like
this, combined with the Lord and Byers’s study, suggested to Needleman that the
effects of lead poisoning may linger far beyond a child’s hospital stay. A
short stint as an adult psychiatrist only reinforced this belief: The problems
affecting many of his adult patients mimicked those he saw in young, lead
poisoned children.
What set
Needleman apart from other physicians of the time, his son says, was his
natural curiosity and deep-seated sense of justice. “He just wouldn’t let any
kind of injustice stand. That’s how he was,” Joshua says.
Most of his
colleagues ridiculed the idea that the slow buildup of lead in the body could
create chronic health problems even in the absence of overt symptoms. They
could buy the idea that acute lead poisoning might have long-term effects, but
Needleman’s idea of low-level chronic poisoning seemed a reach.
Before
Needleman could test his hypothesis that longstanding lead exposure decreased
IQ and increased behavioral problems, he needed a way to measure long-term lead
levels in the body. Blood lead levels only told him current lead exposure, and
Needleman needed a measurement that would capture this over a much longer
period. Bone biopsies would give him the information that he needed, but they
were too invasive and expensive. Finally, as he transitioned away from treating
patients directly to researching lead poisoning as a young professor at the
University of Pittsburgh, Needleman hit on an accessible and cheap stand-in for
bone: baby teeth.
Calcium
deposits in teeth just like it does in bone. Because lead mimics calcium, and
teeth and bone are similar, Needleman realized that baby teeth could provide
the same information about long-term lead exposure as bone biopsies. Needleman
collaborated with several Philadelphia dental clinics, including one in the
suburbs and two in the inner city. The researchers found that the poor, mostly
African-American kids from the inner city had lead levels five times higher than
their wealthier suburban counterparts. The resulting 1972 Nature paper [3] revealed
that baby teeth could readily identify long-term lead burden.
Now,
Needleman needed detailed cognitive and behavioral testing to link lead to
neuropsychological issues. He gathered more data in Boston, this time
collecting more than 3,000 teeth from 2,500 kids. With colleagues from the
Boston Children’s Hospital, they administered half-day psychometric tests to
kids with the highest and lowest lead levels. They also surveyed teachers,
asking about the kids’ ability to follow directions and manage their emotions.
On every level, the data were clear: the greater a child’s exposure to lead, the
greater their neurological damage.
“Needlman
showed through innovative research that neurological damage could occur at much
lower levels of lead than anyone thought,” says Gerald Markowitz [4], a public
health historian at the City University of New York.
By the time
Needleman published these results in the New England Journal of Medicine in
1979, other scientists had been working on the issue of chronic lead exposure
in children, including Philip Landrigan. As a young officer with the Epidemic
Intelligence Service in 1971, Landrigan traveled to El Paso, Texas, after
public officials discovered that a local lead smelter had released 1,116 tons
of lead, 560 tons of zinc, 12 tons of cadmium, and 1.2 tons of arsenic into the
soil and air. Atmospheric tests revealed airborne lead levels almost 50 times
the EPA’s limit at the time. Landrigan was placed in charge of testing blood
lead levels in the local populace, and he found that two-thirds of kids under
the age of 10 who lived within a mile of the smelter had evidence of lead poisoning [5].
“Every kid
we tested who lived on the west side of the city had lead poisoning,” Landrigan
says.
Results in
hand, both Landrigan and Needleman began pushing for stronger rules around
acceptable blood lead levels and for eliminating lead from gasoline and paint,
which continued to be the largest contributors to lead poisoning in children.
As the momentum behind their work began to build, industry struck back.
Chronic
Problems
By the
1970s, the U.S. produced more than 250,000 metric tons of tetraethyl lead,
which was mixed with 90% of all gasoline sold in the country. Industry
assembled an array of experts to prove to the government and the public alike
that their gasoline was safe. Industry scientists tried to sow doubt about the
potential for negative health effects from tetraethyl lead or gasoline fumes.
Experts described workers who became sick after working with the additive as
“careless” for not following instructions. As the years passed, industry
efforts grew more savvy, involving clever marketing campaigns and relying on an
army of public relations firms and industry consultants that actively lobbied
Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency. The producers of leaded
gasoline also produced the science on its safety, and leaded gasoline got a
clean bill of health through the 1960s.
Needleman
and Landrigan’s studies appeared just as the burgeoning environmental movement
began pushing to remove lead from pesticides, paint, gasoline, and other
consumer products. Eventually, lead paint was banned by the EPA in 1978.
Gasoline refiners, determined not to see their industry follow suit, struck
back, aiming their blows at Needleman and Landrigan.
“Industry
didn’t see the public health crisis, just a public relations one. They were
determined to kill the messenger as well as the message,” Markowitz says.
Industry
marshaled an army of paid experts to pick apart Needleman’s work. Throughout
the 1980s, they criticized his data collection and analysis. They also tried to
counter his findings by publishing studies of their own.
“These
battles can get very messy. When the economic issues are very strong, industry
doesn’t listen to science,” says Virginia Rauh [6], an
environmental health scientist at Columbia University.
Things hit
a fever pitch in 1991, when, spurred by PR firms and industrial consultants,
the University of Pittsburgh, with the National Institutes of Health, who had
funded much of Needleman’s research, opened a formal investigation of
scientific misconduct. During the multi-year investigation, Needleman couldn’t
access any of the decades of data on childhood lead poisoning, which ground his
research—and sense of purpose—to a complete halt.
Needleman’s
work was influential, forming a foundation on which other scientists could do
their research. “In 1990, there were now 30 papers from around the world all
saying the same thing…The [lead industry] couldn’t contest that, so what were
they going to do? If they could discredit my work, the whole thing would
collapse or be fundamentally revised,” Needleman said in a 2003 interview [2].
Needleman
tried to shield his young family from the venom directed towards him, but the
stress nevertheless leaked out. He had no problem with questions about the
science itself, but the attacks became personal. To Needleman, the university
investigation was the lowest blow because it signaled that his employers didn’t
stand by his decades of service.
“Had he not
been so willing to defend himself, his work would have quickly been
discredited,” Joshua says.
After a
two-tiered investigation by the university and the NIH, Needleman was ultimately
exonerated. The small irregularities flagged by the gasoline industry as
fraudulent were either honest errors that resulted from the management of large
datasets in a pre-computer age or alterations in study design that Needleman
had disclosed in the original paper.
By that
point, sales of leaded gasoline were in a tailspin and had been for more than a
decade. The passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970 gave the Environmental
Protection Agency the authority to regulate lead levels in gasoline. In 1974, the
EPA required unleaded gasoline in cars with catalytic converters, which
emissions standards all but required the following year. More stringent
refinery regulations also required that gasoline companies decrease the amount
of lead in their automobile fuel beginning in 1979. By the early 1980s, the use
of leaded gasoline dropped by more than 80% in the U.S. And in 1996, the EPA
outright banned the sale of leaded gasoline in cars. The precipitous drop in
sales of leaded gasoline perfectly matched the decline in average blood lead
levels in children.
“Levels we
thought were safe and innocuous just a few decades ago are now considered
harmful,” says Bruce Lanphear [7], an
environmental health scientist at Simon Fraser University in Canada. “Science
advances one funeral at a time,”
As blood
lead levels continued to decline, scientists determined that no safe level of
lead exposure existed. Even small exposures could harm the body.
“In those
early studies, we had few children with very low blood lead levels. Almost no
preschoolers had blood lead levels below 10 µg/dL,” says David
Bellinger [8], an environmental health scientist at the Harvard School of
Public Health who did his training with Needleman. Low levels in the early
1980s are now more than twice as high as the CDC’s current recommendations.
Beginning
in the mid-1980s, not long after Needleman’s studies first appeared, Rauh, the
Columbia environmental health scientist, and other researchers began to piece
together why symptoms of chronic lead exposure didn’t necessarily appear until
years later. As children mature, Rauh says, they have to tap into an
ever-expanding set of skills that increase in complexity. The neurological
effects of lead poisoning become apparent only when children need to tap into
more fine-tuned skills. Epidemiological studies revealed that African-American
children had a slightly different way of metabolizing lead that made them more
prone to lead poisoning. They absorbed calcium 50% more efficiently, and since
lead is closely related to calcium, this meant they also absorbed more lead.
Needleman’s
pioneering work has also enabled scientists like Quan Lu [9], an
environmental geneticist at the Harvard School of Public Health, to tease apart
why lead is so toxic to the developing brain. Lu exposed neural stem cells to
levels of lead twice as high as the recommended CDC threshold (although still
not enough to cause acute toxicity), and then measured how lead changed which
genes were active. The deep sequencing identified 19 changes, 16 of which were
involved in the oxidative stress response, a type of chemical stress that can
damage key ingredients in just about any cell, including proteins, lipids, and
DNA. Insights like these would likely go undiscovered without Needleman’s
foundational research.
Ongoing
Crisis
Although
the Flint water crisis appears to be the poster child for modern-day lead
poisoning, Lanphear points out that there are hundreds more communities in the
United States that are similarly at risk.
“Flint is
in the middle of the pack” when it comes to severity, he says. Nonetheless it
serves as a classic example of how lead poisoning occurs alongside poverty, and
how government and industry often try to cover up the problem. The issue has
also served as a reminder that the country has billions of dollars of
remediation ahead to truly win the fight against lead.
To
Markowitz, spending valuable and increasingly limited research dollars on
understanding why lead is poisonous and how it impacts the body is a complete
waste of money.
“Lead
poisoning is totally preventable. We can take it out of the environment and
just stop using it. There are 500,000 kids with elevated blood lead levels—it
doesn’t need to be that way. These kids are victims of a society willing to let
its least powerful members suffer the effects of lead,” Markowitz says.
Needleman
has become a hero to public and environmental health scientists. His work in
developing a way to measure for chronic lead exposure and for standing up to an
industry determined to bring him to his knees has saved thousands of lives and
improved the health of countless others.
“We still
have a long way to go to eliminate the threat, but we wouldn’t have made it
this far without Needleman,” Bellinger says.
Carrie
Arnold is a freelance science writer and contributing editor for NOVA Next. She
has written for Scientific American, Discover, New Scientist, Science News,
among others. She can be reached via Twitter [10].
Source URL: https://portside.org/2017-07-22/herbert-needleman-passing-pioneer-and-public-health-hero
Links:
[1] http://rachel.org/files/document/Late_Effects_of_Lead_Poisoning_on_Mental_devel.pdf
[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1497712/pdf/16134577.pdf
[3] https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v235/n5333/abs/235111a0.html
[4] https://www.gc.cuny.edu/Page-Elements/Academics-Research-Centers-Initiatives/Doctoral-Programs/History/Faculty-Bios/Gerald-Markowitz
[5] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00049347.htm
[6] https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/people/our-faculty/var1
[7] https://www.sfu.ca/fhs/people/profiles/bruce-lanphear.html
[8] https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/david-bellinger/
[9] https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/quan-lu/
[10] http://www.twitter.com/edbites
[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1497712/pdf/16134577.pdf
[3] https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v235/n5333/abs/235111a0.html
[4] https://www.gc.cuny.edu/Page-Elements/Academics-Research-Centers-Initiatives/Doctoral-Programs/History/Faculty-Bios/Gerald-Markowitz
[5] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00049347.htm
[6] https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/people/our-faculty/var1
[7] https://www.sfu.ca/fhs/people/profiles/bruce-lanphear.html
[8] https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/david-bellinger/
[9] https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/quan-lu/
[10] http://www.twitter.com/edbites
Donations can be sent
to the Baltimore Nonviolence Center, 325 E. 25th St., Baltimore, MD
21218. Ph: 410-323-1607; Email: mobuszewski2001 [at] comcast.net. Go to http://baltimorenonviolencecenter.blogspot.com/
"The master class
has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles.
The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject
class has had nothing to gain and everything to lose--especially their lives."
Eugene Victor Debs
No comments:
Post a Comment