Letter to the Editor: replacing toxic lead pipes
The following was submitted by a local Leadfree MKE organizer:
Outrage after US Congress votes to slash $125m in funding to replace toxic lead pipes (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/07/congress-lead-pipe-funding)” gets it right that the replacement of millions of lead service lines faces three significant obstacles – federal funding, which was never enough to complete a $46-$56 billion (https://www.nrdc.org/press-releases/staggering-health-benefits-replacing-lead-water-pipes-could-save-nearly-1-trillion) project; an obstructive water utility industry; and a Republican leadership that does not prioritize safe drinking water.
We must not, however, forget a fourth significant obstacle to the public’s protection from both low-level and acute lead-in-water exposures: a national discourse painting lead service lines as the only source of lead in water and their removal, as a panacea. This discourse is dangerously misleading.
Lead service lines, although typically the most significant source of lead in water, are not the only source. Other common sources include lead solder, leaded brasses, and bronze fittings, which are present in most buildings. Moreover, scientific studies have linked childhood lead poisonings to lead solder, even in cities (https://awwa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/j.1551-8833.2007.tb07959.x) with no reported lead service lines, since the late 1980s (https://www.jstor.org/stable/44541239).
Prompt replacement of all lead-bearing plumbing is practically impossible, even under favorable conditions. As we continue to fight for funds to replace lead service lines, we must not forget that communities across the US continue to be routinely – and often unknowingly – exposed to lead in water, even when their water utilities meet regulatory requirements (https://www.campaignforleadfreewater.org/our-blog/2021/6/22/the-epa-lead-and-copper-rule-lcr-as-optical-illusion) and declare their water “safe.”
It is long overdue that we level with the public about the prevalence and severity of the risk involved. And it is urgent, from a public health perspective, that we highlight the benefits (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11182191/) of relatively inexpensive lead-certified point-of-use filters, which can significantly reduce, if not eliminate, lead in water, now.
Honest information is not costly. It is morally imperative and necessary for living up to the federal Safe Drinking Water Act’s public right-to-know principle (https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-04/documents/epa816f04030.pdf).
Yanna Lambrinidou, PhD
Campaign for Lead Free Water
6687 32nd Street, NW
Washington, DC 20015
202.997.1834