Forum
« help: venue needed, party of 125 Free Radiator »
January 28, 2009
Lead in the Bathtub
Hi,
So I had the potential 2 family brownstone thoroughly tested for Lead yesterday --since we have a toddler-- and while I was expecting lead on the woodwork, I was shocked to find the highest reading in the whole house to be the inside of the beautiful cast iron clawfoot tub!!!
Now I have to find a replacement tub that looks old-- anyone have experience with this-- do all these old tubs have lead in the porcelain? It doesn't look like it's been refinished...
Is there any other free-standing, NON-tacky, non acrylic options?
Besides the 20k urban archaeology versions... ?
Comments
Why can't you strip it and reglaze it? Sorry if that's a dumb question.
Posted by: superstooper at January 28, 2009 9:57 PM
Are you seriously going to replace a clawfoot tub at an expense of thousands on the off chance that your child might spend several hours a day licking it?
Pardon my ignorance as I don't have children, but is this common? Don't take this the wrong way, but if my child spent his days licking the tub I can't imagine the lead is going to do any more damage than they already have.
Posted by: Bklyn Fire Alarm Guy at January 29, 2009 7:49 AM
There's also the chance that the child might drink the bathwater, but unless you bathe the kid in something acidic, like orange juice, I don't think there'd be any significant quantity of lead. If it was me, I'd leave the tub (which, in fact, is what I did and my son, now 26, showed no sign of lead poisoning). I understand the OP's desire to protect their child, but IMO this borders on the obsessive.
Posted by: Bob Marvin at January 29, 2009 10:00 AM
BFAG it's quite common for new (particularly PS) parents to be absolutely paranoid about lead, asbestos, falls down stairs and heated radiators among other things. They seem to have no sense of proportion, or knowledge of the real danger. And I speak as a parent. As you said, lead in a bathtub is NO danger unless said child licks it.
Recommend OP read story in NY times about how a little dirt on children trains the immume system.
Posted by: cmu at January 29, 2009 10:13 AM
What gives guys? She wasn't asking for people to weigh in on whether or not she was making the right decision.
If she wants to replace the tub let her. If you don't have an answer to her question mind your beeswax.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at January 29, 2009 12:22 PM
Having the tub deleaded and perhaps reglazed would cost you around $600.
Otherwise you are looking around $1,100 for a new tub.
http://www.signaturehardware.com
Has one of the largest selections of various types of tubs at fairly reasonable prices. They also have all the typical fittings and accessories you'd want.
I'd STRONGLY recommend having the original tub rehabbed unless it is in terrible shape.
Posted by: FenFen at January 29, 2009 1:07 PM
THL, once again you come across as the peeve.
OP's fears are groundless and if she has any sense she'll get the message and save a ton of money, not to mention becoming a less-obsessive and happier person to boot. Cheaper than therapy.
And I didn't know that I had the power to prevent her replacing her tub by my post here. I'll have to give myself the POTD award.
Posted by: cmu at January 29, 2009 2:09 PM
F-off and bite me CMU.
The fact is she's having a BROWNSTONE tested for lead which (no offense OP), is redundant in and of itself. It's an old house it's got lead.
But so what? That's her business. Let her test it every year if she wants. No need for you to get sanctimonious about it.
Now do you know a place where she can get an new lead free old looking replacement tub or not?
Posted by: TownhouseLady at January 29, 2009 2:28 PM
Wow, THL, hit a nerve did I? Take two chill pills and post here tomorrow.
Posted by: cmu at January 29, 2009 2:51 PM
Thanks Townhouselady! I can't believe I need defending on this... And thank you fenfen for the recommendation. Also, thanks for the leads on un-leading the original one. I didn't know this was possible. These leads are exactly why I asked this forum, I didn't know that CMU was going to take out all their aggression on me...
Yes I had my brownstone tested for lead and I found out what has been repaired in the last 30 years and what hasn't. It saved me from stripping all the radiators, several doors, etc. I decided it was worth 400 dollars to know this before I bought it. And as far as the asbestos goes, yes, I'm also going to have it removed professionally. And is my 2 year old licking the bathtub, no probably not, but he does really enjoy baths and often takes the water in his mouth and spits it at his toys while he sits in the bath, and yes, sometimes I even let him stay in there as long as he wants -- a whole hour sometimes.
CMU, you really are offensive. The whole reason I am buying a brownstone is because I like the old details, etc. but what is the point of not knowing exactly what I'm getting into before I buy?
They tested my 2 year old last year and his lead was not exceeding the max level but high nonetheless, and I'm trying to figure out how to keep him heathy. I let him eat dirt, kiss our dog, etc. but you are truly pathetic for reacting to my posting the way you did. You obviously have other problems most likely more severe than if I am testing my house for lead or replacing an old tub.
good luck to you!
Posted by: Downing2fam at January 29, 2009 3:22 PM
by the way, the lead inspector said that there is a lead risk if a child was soaking in warm water for more than 10 minutes and if the child was ingesting some water...
Posted by: Downing2fam at January 29, 2009 3:24 PM
What's offensive about pointing out the realities of lead, asbestos etc? We all grew up with these supposed "dangers" and we're ok as pointed out by two others above. If you're obsessive and risk-averse, ok, but I don't have to agree with it and I will point out the physical facts.
Nobody suggested that you renovate while living in a lead paint zone. If you don't disturb lead paint, there's absolutely no danger. That's a fact. And the same for asbestos, you can even quite safely remove it yourself (disposing it is another story.) The danger in both cases is prolonged or extensive exposure, not casual.
We live in a climate of fearfulness and litigiousness, and of course, there's big money in official abatement procedures. Pardon me if I don't march along...and I am both an engineer and have a degree in environmental studies.
And I contest downing2fam's assertion. It's counter to all I know. Of course, if you subscribe to the theory that there's NO level of lead that's safe, you could say touching solder would kill you.
Posted by: cmu at January 29, 2009 3:46 PM
CMU, I hear you, but I can't blame Downing for being careful. Downing, you sound informed and I'm not sure I would not do the same, even though I renovated a large house in Mass. where the hype and regulation made me choke.
We replaced our cast iron tub for other reasons with one from Victoria & Albert. They call the material Englishcast, which is not metallic but not acrylic, either. It has a 25-year warranty, which is pretty rare. The material is relatively warm to the touch (doesn't conduct thermal energy the way cast iron does). We really like our Como. Prices are 2-3K. Check it out.
http://www.vandabaths.com/usa/baths.php
Posted by: renomandru at January 29, 2009 5:33 PM
renovators has reproduction tubs..but absolutely do not buy their faucets or anything like that they are totally awful and will fail w/in 2 years..http://www.rensup.com/Categories/Cat-1525.htm
Posted by: eman1234 at January 29, 2009 8:08 PM
I feel like it's important to point out here that an internet forum is a forum of opinion, that we are all here to have a good time as much as to help, and that CMU's opinion is just as valid as the original poster's. In fact, I tend to agree with it. We do live in a society that consistently misunderstands risks in a few specific dimensions:
1. We focus exhaustively on *known* risks, simply because they are known, in a way that is not proportional to the risk itself.
2. We protect our children more than most cultures do.
3. We tend to think about risk in terms of making it go away, as if that's possible. This creates a lot of consumer pain.
CMU's delivery was characteristically blunt. But I think that his larger point (which I believe is merely to state that this way of looking at risk represents a worldview that speaks volumes about our collective ignorance and lack of humility and, ironically, has the potential to create weaker children) is a tangent, but not a radical one, not out in left field.
It could even be a helpful set of ideas to throw out there. All of my friends who are mothers grapple mightily with the concept of risk, and how it dovetails with our construction of motherhood. It sucks.
Posted by: vanburenproud at January 29, 2009 8:53 PM
Downing2fam,
You might reconsider the eating of dirt. Especially if there were elevated levels of lead in your child's test results. I have friends that eventually discovered the source of their child's high lead levels was the dirt in the back yard of their brownstone! I'm kinda with cmu on this one. If you ride in the subway system with your child, he will be exposed to more lead in the air as the train passes than he will ever get from your old tub.
Posted by: pig three at January 29, 2009 11:18 PM
"F-off and bite me CMU"
"you are truly pathetic"
wow ... THL & Downing2fam. Quite a shrill reaction you folks have.
Nobody's stopping you from buying a new tub if you want to, but if you live in an old house in the city, not in a bubble, there will be risks. I think cmu's point, that your actions should be proportionate to the risk, is a fair one.
Did anyone see the subway ad for Flatrate movers - The growing family move? I couldn't find a link, but I got a good chuckle when I saw it yesterday.
Posted by: Bklnite at January 30, 2009 11:54 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.