v>EPA

Indicators of Environmental Health Disparities: Blood Lead
Levels

About the Indicators of Environmental Health Disparities

EPA's indicators of environmental health disparities aim to illustrate disparities in key environmental and
public health conditions across race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status, as well as the relationship
between these health outcomes and the work of EPA programs. This project was created in direct
response to EPA's 2022-2026 Strategic Plan. These indicators are intended solely as an informational tool
and are not intended to be the basis for agency decision making. EPA does not, consistent with
applicable laws, distribute governmental benefits or burdens based on race, color, national origin, or sex.

Background Information

Lead is a naturally occurring metal in the earth's crust, but it is highly toxic, particularly to young
children. Lead is both neurotoxic, impacting cognitive and behavioral development and function, as well
as cardiotoxic, raising the risk of cardiovascular disease, primarily in older adults.1 Historically, lead has
been used in gasoline, ceramic products, paints, metal alloys, batteries, and solder production. Lead can
be found inside our homes - on walls coated with lead-based paint, and in everyday consumer products
like toys, ceramics, solders, gasoline, and batteries.2 Lead exposure occurs primarily through ingestion.
Ingestion of lead paint (e.g. peeling paint or lead dust) is the route of highest exposure for children, and
overall, one of the most common causes of lead poisoning. Additionally, ingestion can occur through
geophagy (eating soil), exposure to air pollution consuming non-food items, or frequent hand-to-mouth
activity. Since babies and young children often put their hands and other objects in their mouths, they
are more highly exposed to ingesting lead from dust or soil. Contaminated food, herbs and spices,
cosmetics, and cultural items can also result in the ingestion of lead, as can contaminated drinking water,
as lead can leach into drinking water through corrosion of lead-containing pipes and plumbing fixtures. It
can pollute our air and soil through the combustion of aviation fuels, boat fuel, farm equipment and
other industrial releases. Lead exposure is a concern for both urban and rural communities, both of
which may have older housing stock with multiple potential sources of lead exposure.

There is no safe level of lead exposure. The health effects of lead do not vary based on how individuals
are exposed to lead (i.e. inhalation or ingestion), but the clinical effects of lead are more pronounced for
some organ systems at low levels than others.3 Children, infants, and fetuses are most vulnerable to
these effects of lead and even very low levels of lead in children's blood have been linked to adverse
effects on intellect, concentration, and academic achievement.1,4 Neurotoxic effects from lead exposure
also impact adults; however, it is unclear if these exposures are related to exposure during adulthood,
exposure during periods of nervous system development, or due to the cumulative effects of lifelong
exposure. Lead is also known to cause renal, cardiovascular, hematological, immunological,
developmental, and reproductive effects in adults. In older adults, exposure to lead can lead to
decreased kidney function, reproductive effects in men and women, and cardiovascular effects.5

Despite progress in reducing lead exposure, some communities are disproportionately exposed to lead
—data show disparities in exposure by sociodemographic characteristics and geographic location.6,7,8,9
This differential exposure then contributes to disparities in blood lead levels: for example, Black children
have persistently been found to have higher blood lead levels than non-Hispanic white children and
children from lower income households have higher blood lead levels than those from higher income

1


-------
households.10 Reducing exposure to lead and associated health impacts begins by identifying lead
sources and risk factors at the local level, improving the screening, identification and monitoring of lead
exposed children, and targeting services and resources to localities at greatest risk.

For more information about lead exposure and its associated risks visit the EP.A;s Learn about Lead
landing page.

Figure 1. Blood Lead Levels by Race and Ethnicity

Median Blood lead levels (ng/dL)

2.0

I Non-Hispanic Asian
1.04

Non-Hispanic White
0.76

I Non-Hispanic Black
0.71

I Other Race - Including
Multi-Racial
0.71

| Mexican American
0.62

I Other Hispanic
0.54

0 	

2000	2004	2008	2012	2016 2018

Data Note: Data points for this indicator are collected in 2-year windows.
This graph plots each value in its second year.

2


-------
Figure 2. Blood Lead Levels in Children Ages 1-5 by Race and Ethnicity

Median Blood lead levels (ng/dL)

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

Non-Hispanic Black
0.87

I Mexican American
0.7

I Other Race - Including
Multi-Racial
0.7

Non-Hispanic White
0.66

I Other Hispanic
0.57

2000

2004

2008

2012

2016

Data Note: Data points for this indicator are collected in 2-year windows.
This graph plots each value in its second year.

3


-------
Figure 3. Disparities in Biood Lead Levels by Race arid Ethnicity

Median Blood lead levels (ng/dL)

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

I Non-Hispanic Asian
1.04

I Overall average*
0.73

All other races and
ethnicities

2000

2004

2008

2012

2016 2018

Data Note: Data points for this indicator are collected in 2-year windows.
This graph plots each value in its second year.

The "overall average" line includes other racial and ethnic groups not
shown in the other charts.

4


-------
Figure 4. Disparities in Biood Lead Levels in Children Ages 1-5 by Race and Ethnicity

Median Blood lead levels (ng/dL)

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

Non-Hispanic Black
0.87

I Overall average*
0.69

All other races and
ethnicities

2000

2004

2008

2012

2016

Data Note: Data points for this indicator are collected in 2-year windows.
This graph plots each value in its second year.

*The "overall average" line includes other racial and ethnic groups not
shown in the other charts.

5


-------
Figure 5. Blood Lead Levels by Poverty Level

Median Blood lead levels (ng/dL)

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

11 to 2 times the
Poverty Level
0.76

Over 2 times the
Poverty Level
0.72

I Below the Poverty
Level
0.71

2000

2004

2008

2012

2016 2018

Data Note: Data points for this indicator are collected in 2-year windows.
This graph plots each value in its second year.

6


-------
Figure 6. Blood Lead Levels in Children Ages 1-5 by Poverty Level

Median Blood lead levels (ng/dL)

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

Below the Poverty

Level

0.85

1 to 2 times the
Poverty Level
0.67

Over 2 times the
Poverty Level
0.6

2000

2004

2008

2012

2016

Data Note: Data points for this indicator are collected in 2-year windows.

This graph plots each value in its second year.

What These Charts Show

These charts show the median11 levels of lead in the blood in micrograms per deciliter (ng/dL) of the U.S
population from 1999 to 2016 (for children ages 1-5) and 2018 (for all ages), respectively, across race,
ethnicity, and socio-economic status (SES). Overall, for both children and adults, across race, ethnicity,
and SES, median blood lead levels have declined since 1999.

•	Non-Hispanic Black children ages 1-5 years have the highest median blood lead (0.87 ng/dL)
when compared to the total median blood lead levels of children ages 1-5 (0.69 ng/dL) and all
other races and ethnicities (Figure 4).

•	Children ages 1-5 in households that were below the poverty level,121 to 2 times the poverty
level, and over 2 times the poverty level had median blood lead levels of 0.85, 0.67, and 0.6
Hg/dL respectively (Figure 6). This data reveals that Non-Hispanic Black children and children
below the poverty level maintain the highest median blood lead levels.

•	Non-Hispanic Asian populations (1.04 ng/dL) had the highest blood lead levels, compared to the
overall average median blood lead levels (0.73 ng/dL) and all other races and ethnicities (Figure
3).

•	The median blood lead level for populations in households over two times the poverty level was
0.72 ng/dL, the median for populations in households 1 to 2 times the poverty level was 0.76
Hg/dL, and the median for populations in households below the poverty level 0.71 ng/dL (Figure

7


-------
5). Populations in households that were 1 to 2 times the poverty level thus had the highest blood
lead levels.

U.S. children's blood lead levels (BLL) show significant reductions and progress in recent decades. The
BLL data for this indicator was collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's)
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) through the National Health and Nutrition Examination
Surveys (NHANES). While NHANES is designed to provide nationally representative information for the
general U.S. population, this dataset is a relatively small sample compared to the United States and may
not reflect the highest children's BLLs collected in state surveillance programs.13,14 Thus, consideration of
both national and state/local blood lead level data is important for understanding progress and
remaining needs to further address lead exposures in the U.S. For more information about this dataset,
see the technical documentation.

What These Charts do not Show

While these charts provide valuable data that may help determine and identify vulnerable communities,
they do not reveal the underlying factors contributing to disparities in lead exposure across ages, races,
ethnicities, or socioeconomic statuses. Although lead exposure can affect anyone, the data reveals that
certain groups, particularly Non-Hispanic Asian populations, Non-Hispanic Black children and children
below the poverty level, experience higher levels of lead exposure compared to others. However, the
graphs do not show the specific environmental, social, and economic factors that may exacerbate these
disparities, such as housing quality and occupational conditions. It is critical to understand these broader
factors to develop targeted strategies that address and mitigate inequities in lead exposure.

Relevant EPA Activities

EPA contributes to a goal of eliminating disparities in childhood blood lead levels as an integral part of
reducing lead exposure for all populations.1 Federal and state regulatory actions have reduced the
amount of lead in air, soil, drinking water, food, paint, and other sources. This progress, however, has not
been equally realized across the United States, and lead exposure continues to be a top childhood
environmental health problem that disproportionately affects communities of color and low-income
populations. In 2022, the EPA published its Strategy to Reduce Lead Exposures and Disparities in U.S.
Communities. The EPA's goals include reducing community exposure to lead sources in homes and
facilities with lead-based paint, drinking water, soils, and ambient air emissions; identifying communities
with high exposure and improving health outcomes; communicating with stakeholders; and supporting
and conducting critical research to inform efforts to reduce lead exposure and related health effects.
While the EPA is enacting these actions to reduce blood lead levels, several factors contribute to blood
lead levels that cannot be addressed through EPA regulatory activity and programs. Addressing lead
exposure requires a whole of government approach, which is currently coordinated across federal
agencies—including the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and more—through the Federal Lead
Action Plan. It also requires partnerships with state, local and Tribal governments and coordination with
community organizations, doctors, and public and community health experts.

Offices across EPA are engaged in activities to reduce blood lead levels and reduce blood lead level
disparities across race/ethnicity and socio-economic status. Some of these key activities include:

• Lead pipe replacement: In October 2024, EPA announced the finalized improvements to the
Lead and Copper Rule to better protect communities from lead in drinking water. The proposed
rule would require the vast majority of water systems to replace lead service lines in the U.S.
within 10 years. The proposed rule also includes identification of legacy lead service lines,

8


-------
improvements to tap sampling, a lower lead action level, and strengthened protections to
reduce exposure. EPA is also investing $15 billion through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to
identify and replace lead service lines throughout the nation. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
also dedicates $11.7 billion to projects that improve drinking water quality, including reducing
lead in drinking water. These funds must be provided to disadvantaged communities15 as grants
or forgivable loans.

•	Reducing exposure to lead in soil: EPA manages lead contamination at Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA, or "Superfund") sites,
brownfield sites, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action
Facilities. In fiscal year 2024, EPA completed 63 Superfund cleanup actions, and Brownfields
grant recipients completed 63 cleanup actions—including in or near disadvantaged
communities—that addressed lead contamination (lead is the environmental contaminant most
reported by EPA Brownfields cleanup grant recipients). To strengthen these efforts, in January
2024, EPA announced updates to guidance for addressing lead in residential soil at Superfund
sites and RCRA corrective action facilities, lowering recommended screening levels and
strengthening guidance for investigating and cleaning up lead-contaminated soil.

•	Lead paint inspection in communities with EJ concerns: In June 2023, EPA published the
Environmental Justice Toolkit for Lead-Based Paint Enforcement Programs, which includes
strategies for developing partnerships, conducting community engagement, maintaining ongoing
communication with the communities where enforcement activities are planned or ongoing, and
methods for how to target inspections in high-risk communities, including areas with suspected
or confirmed lead service lines, pre-1978 housing stock, or proximity to high ambient or soil-
based lead contamination.

•	Leaded aviation fuel endangerment finding: In October 2023, EPA issued a final determination
that emissions of lead from aircraft that operate on leaded fuel cause or contribute to air
pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare. With this
final determination, EPA and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have begun work to
consider regulatory options to address lead emissions from aircraft engines and will announce
timelines as soon as possible. EPA and FAA will work in partnership and engage all interested
stakeholders and the general public as the two agencies develop their separate regulatory
actions.

•	Dust-Lead Hazard Standards and Post Abatement Clearance Levels: In October 2024,

EPA finalized stronger requirements for the dust-lead hazard standards and post abatement
clearance levels, which govern how to identify and clean up lead-based paint hazards in pre-
1978 homes and childcare facilities. Together, these regulations will reduce the potential lead
exposures of approximately 250,000 to 500,000 children under age six per year.

•	Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Units (PEHSUs): EPA supports the work of the PEHSUs
through continued funding and programmatic support to educate health care providers on
prevention, diagnosis, management and treatment of lead exposure.

•	Lead safety documents and outreach materials: EPA provides a range of public education
materials on lead exposure for families, schools, daycare facilities and more.

This is just a small sampling of EPA's recent activities aimed at reducing lead exposure. For a robust
accounting of EPA's lead-related work, along with the work of our sister federal agencies, explore the
recent Progress Report on the Federal Lead Action Plan.

9


-------
For further information on indicators related to environmental and human health, explore EPA's Report
on the Environment, and for further information on indicators related to children's environmental
health, explore EPA's America's Children and the Environment (ACE) report.

10


-------
References

1)	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). (2013a). Integrated Science Assessment (ISA)
for Lead (Final Report, Jul 2013). https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplay.cfm?deid=255721

2)	Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. (2017). Case Studies in Environmental
Medicine (CSEM): Lead Toxicity, https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/leadtoxicitv/cover-page.html

3)	Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). (2020). Toxicological profile for Lead.
Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.
http://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxProfiles/ToxProfiles.aspx?id=96&tid=22.

4)	Nadakavukaren, A. (2000). Our global environment: A health perspective. Fifth edition. Prospect
Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc.

5)	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). (2013b). Learn about Lead. US EPA.
https://www.epa.gOv/lead/learn-about-lead#effects

6)	Hanna-Attisha M., LaChance J., Sadler R.C., and Schnepp A.C. (2016). Elevated Blood Lead Levels
in Children Associated with the Flint Drinking Water Crisis: A spatial Analysis of Risk and Public
Health Response. American Journal of Public Health. 106(2):283-290. https://ajph.
aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH. 2015.303003

7)	Roberts E.M., Madrigal D., Valle J., King G., Kite L. (2017) Assessing Child Lead Poisoning Case
Ascertainment in the US, 1999-2010. Pediatrics. 138(5). https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2Q16-
4266

8)	Xue, J., Zartarian, V., Tornero-Velez, R., Stanek, L. W., Poulakos, A., Walts, A., Triantafillou, K.,
Suero, M., and Grokhowsky, N. (2022). A Generalizable Evaluated Approach, Applying Advanced
Geospatial Statistical Methods, to Identify High Lead Exposure Locations at Census Tract Scale:
Michigan Case Study. Environmental health perspectives, 130(7): 77004.
https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP97Q5.

9)	Zartarian, V., Xue, J., Poulakos, A., Tornero-Velez, R., Stanek, L., Snyder, E., Helms Garrison, V.,
Egan, K., and Courtney, J. (2024). A U.S. Lead Exposure Hotspots Analysis. Environmental Science
& Technology\ 58(7): 3311-3321. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.3cQ7881.

10)	Egan et al. (2021). Blood Lead Levels in U.S. Children Ages 1-11 Years, 1976 - 2016. Env. Health
Pers., 129(3). https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP7932

11)	The median is the value in middle of a sorted ascending or descending set of data. It is used in
this context because the distribution of blood lead levels in a population tends to be skewed,
and thus a median provides a better representation of the typical blood lead level.

12)	Following the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Statistical Policy Directive 14. the
Census Bureau uses a set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition
to determine who is in poverty. If a family's total income is less than the family's threshold, then
that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty. The official poverty thresholds do
not vary geographically, but they are updated for inflation using the Consumer Price Index (CPI-
U). For more information, see: How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty.

13)	Stanek, L.W., Xue, J., Zartarian, V.G. et al. Identification of high lead exposure locations in Ohio at
the census tract scale using a generalizable geospatial hotspot approach. J Expo Sci Environ
Epidemiol 34, 718-726 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-024-00666-x

14)	Xue J, Zartarian V, Tornero-Velez R, Stanek LW, Poulakos A, Walts A, Triantafillou K, Suero M,
Grokhowsky N. A Generalizable Evaluated Approach, Applying Advanced Geospatial Statistical
Methods, to Identify High Lead Exposure Locations at Census Tract Scale: Michigan Case Study.
Environ Health Perspect. 2022 Jul;130(7):77004. doi: 10.1289/EHP9705. Epub 2022 Jul 27. PMID:
35894594; PMCID: PMC9327739.

11


-------
15) Most EPA grant programs identify 'disadvantaged communities' using the White House Council
on Environmental Quality's Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) and/or EPA's
EJScreen Supplemental Indexes, in addition to any statutorily required factors. For projects
funded through the Inflation Reduction Act, EPA defined disadvantaged by a specific set of
criteria that expressly reflects the Agency's efforts to distribute funds based on race-neutral
criteria. For more information on this criteria, see this webpage.

United States Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460

EPA 231R24002
December 2024
www.epa.gov

12


-------