In The News...Lead in Pet Toys

The holiday season means toys not only for our human kids, but also for our dogs and cats. Following the recalls on certain products from China (pet food, toothpaste, children's toys, etc.), news of high levels of lead found in pet toys was reported in September by ConsumerAffairs.com. Off-shoots of that reports are resurfacing in the news. You may hear or read about it in the local news or online.

Should we worry? Not really, or at least not at the panic level that these news reports can sometimes cause in the pet-loving populace. The two veterinarians in the ConsumerAffairs.com article stated that the lead levels found in the toys do not pose a health risk to dogs and cats. Unless other tests have since been done showing higher levels of lead, those toys are not dangerous to our dogs and cats. (Unless the dog swallows the toy --- in which case the danger becomes the choking hazard and intestinal obstruction, not necessarily lead poison.)

But what about dogs licking / chewing the toys? Or eating from the same bowls (that may contain lead) every day? What about chronic exposure and lead building up in the body over time? At the reported lead levels in those toys and the current life span of most dogs, it is still not a concern.

First, some data and terminology:
* ppm is parts per million. This is also expressed as milligram (mg) per kilogram (kg).
* Federal law prohibits painting toys (for children) with any solution (i.e. paint) that contains more than 0.06 percent lead. 0.06 percent is equivalent to 600 ppm. The risk is from children ingesting the chipped or peeling paint. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recalls children's products if they contain more than 600 ppm lead.
* CPSC recalls ceramic flatware (for human adults) that leaches more than 3 ppm lead (http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fdaact.html#lead)

Now, here are some numbers from the ConsumerAffairs.com article:
* The lead amount in the green monster was 907.4 micrograms (NOT milligrams) per kilogram. That's 0.9074 milligrams per kilogram, which is less than 1 ppm. And this amount was detected after soaking part of the toy in an acidic solution. Acidic solution increases the leaching potential of lead --- which is why storing acidic food in decorative lead-containing bowls is not recommended. So the green monster, after soaking in an acidic solution, contains less than one-third of the amount allowed to leach from lead-containing bowls deemed safe for human use. Is that not safe enough for you?

But what happens to the dogs after years of chewing and licking these toys? More numbers for you:
* Dogs can get chronic lead toxicosis (poison) if they ingest 3 to 30 milligram (mg) of lead per kilogram (kg) of body weight per day (d) over several weeks. Twelve-weeks or 90-days is often the time period used in studies for chronic exposure. To make it easier, we will use 5 mg/kg/d as the toxic dose in our calculation.
* For a 22 pound dog, the toxic amount is: 22 pounds body weight (BW) = 10 kg BW
10 kg BW x 5 mg lead / kg BW / d = 50 mg lead / d x 90 d = 4500 mg of lead. A 10 kg dog can have lead toxicosis after ingesting 4500 mg lead over a period of time. How long will that take?
* Some of the earlier reports claimed paint with lead levels of 30 to 40 ppm. For easy calculation again, let's use a higher concentration of 50 ppm (that's 50 mg of lead per kilogram of paint). Assuming a dog will consume 1/2 oz or 15 gram of paint per day (by the way, the amount varies with the size of the toy, but it seems very unlikely that a toy would contain that much paint), here's the math:
15 gram paint / d = 0.015 kg paint / d x 50 mg lead / kg paint = 0.75 mg lead / d
From the above calculation, the accumulated toxic amount for the 10 kg dog is 4500 mg of lead. 4500 mg lead divided by 0.75 mg lead (per day) = 6000 days divided by 365 days = 16.4 years. So if your 10 kg (or 22 pounds) dog licks and chews 1/2 ounce of 50 ppm lead-containing paint from her toys every day for 16 years, she may end up with lead toxicosis.

There you have it.
So why did I say "Not really" instead of a resounding "No?" In veterinary medicine, we deal with complex living biological system (pets) that not only have varied sensitivities (my dog may be more sensitive to lead than your dog), but also have families (you and I) with different risk tolerances. Knowing that it is very unlikely for my dog to ingest enough lead-containing paint from her toys to poison her may be enough reassurance for me. It may not be for you. You may rather there be NO lead at all in her toys. In that case, there are lead testing kits you can purchase to check all the toys and products in your home and discard any suspects.

There is no need for panic, but there is cause for concerned interest. We should be aware of what we bring into our homes. ConsumerAffairs.com and similar consumer protection agency do their job by bringing these findings to light. We, as intelligent consumers, then need to look at the reports, interpret it along with all the other information at our disposal, and come to our own conclusion. And that conclusion may change as more information is revealed. The lead levels in toys tested so far are low compared to the accepted safe levels established for human use. There’s probably greater exposure to lead from certain cages, carriers, or housing for pets than from their toys.

So what toys do I have for my own Elaine? A Kong and a couple thick rope ties that look like these. Not because of lead toxicosis but because of foreign body obstruction --- she would destroy and eat most any other toys.

If you worry that your pets have lead toxicosis, discuss it with your veterinarian regardless of how unlikely it seems after reading this post. Lead toxicosis is dependent on many factors, not just what were discussed here. Here's an article on signs of lead poisoning.

Follow-up: Lead in Pet Toys II