Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Anyone choosing unleaded bullets for meat safety?

Got a link?

I assume you are referring to the initial results of the ongoing University of Calgary Macaque study?

Awesome! Thanks 4 the study.


People with meat ( I. E. Food) have many problems.
People with out meat have but one.

As long as I do not die of liver cirrhosis .........I win.

I feed all my suspect trim to the dogs, they have a very short lifespan. Canines call me the candyman.

If I fed young children, Or pregnant women I would not be so flippant......or hunted out of Leadore Idaho.

It seem in a couple sentence you make some absolute statements with absolutely nothing to back them up.

Not everything is digested on the internet. I was listening on the radio. But you could google it, and decide for yourself.

Knew you would come thru John. Mine got lost on a old computer

The poster qualified this by stating blood inside the body cavity,not what leaks out.You need to reread that if confused

Saddlesore is like usual a very good source of information. The not opening the thoracic or abdominal cavity prior to removing the limbs back straps and exterior rib meat is a most practical way for optimum meat recovery with minimum chance of bacterial contamination.
IMO
On a side note I applaud saddlesore for his perhaps extraordinary paitience and tolerance in sharing his wealth of knowledge.

My bad, I thought you might have some information on the subject of your post that you could share. I, of course, did Google it, and didn't find any new information or studies about transmission of CWD to Humans. What I did find was a brief blurb about The initial results of a study where researchers were able to transmit CWD to some macaques over the course of 3 years by feeding them infected meat, and injecting prions directly into their brains. That really sucks.... for any macaques routinely munching on CWD deer carcases or getting shot in the head with CWD infected bullets.

What it doesn't show is any probability of transmission to Humans. In fact, in the over 30 years since CWD was discovered, there has never been a single documented case of transmission to Humans, test mice modified to have a human version of the affected protein.... Or even cows for that matter, even though an experiment in Wyoming kept cows locked in pens with infected cervids for 13 years straight.

Every expert opinion that I can find on the subject suggests caution with tainted animals, but concedes that the chances humans can even contract it
Is vanishingly small, not to mention the tiny infection rates associated with even theoretically transmissible prion diseases... But hey, you heard a blurb on the radio, so that's something.

Yeah, I noticed that millions of hunters have been keeling over dead from lead bullets used on game for the past 400 years, so I only use depleted uranium.

Very well said gt, but don't expect that to slow the zerk down.

Miles, you're making a lot of unsupported assumptions (more on that below) and you're asking the wrong question here. I've spent the last 35 years studying and cleaning up hazardous waste sites and documenting their impacts on human health. Some of which have lead contamination. I've worked on sites with documented impacts to children. The reason the standard is lower for children and women of child bearing age is the effect of lead on developing brains. It has nothing to do with "intake" except that children will incidentally ingest more lead from playing in contaminated soil and eating things that adults don't.

A couple of observations. The "red mist" from a prairie dog is visible because it's a liquid traveling through a gas (air). Inside an animal the bullet is a solid traveling through a combination of liquid, soilid tissue, and air. You can't just assume that they behave the same without some kind of evidence to back it up. In fact it's more logical to assume that they don't behave the same absent of evidence to the contrary.

Your second assumption is even more illogical. If blood inside the chest cavity was in fact "well-contaminated" and there was no way to avoid contaminating the meat when a hunter guts an animal then you would expect that lead to show up in people who consume the meat. But we don't see that. So it's more logical to assume that what you describe does not happen.

Once again I can't blame anyone for playing it safe by using copper bullets, it's not that big a deal. But that decision is not based on anything you can point to except caution.

I think that was it. I agree I am not al that worried. But I wouldn't eat a deer that was funny. What we don't know is how many deer hunters have ate deer with CWD. How apparrent is it? If you knew it had it, you wouldn't eat it.

I am not in a CWD area. I have read stuff here and there, and looked at few pics. But I really don't know how appearant it is, when a deer has it, and especially when full blown.

I find the m onkey study interesting, and worth noting, myself.

Adults should be able to discuss topics. It doesn't have to be you are stupid, because you want to hear about it.

As I said I am not all that worried., but I welcome discussion on it. I don't think it is an arguement, to say ya we been doing it and we are ok.

ildren
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH INTAKE EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT ANY INTAKE HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE HARMFUL.

When you can explain the biochemical differences and how the lead acts differently on one to the other Perhaps I would give you five minutes. As it is, the is no difference. The difference is that the effect is more readily apparent in children, not that the effect s different in adults. Adults suffer the same symptoms,

Go look at the MnDNR Xrays of the sheep. To a point you are correct in that lead from disintegrating bullets does not travel the same way through muscle. The dynamic conditions of a bullet penetrating the chest of an animal and the introduction of air under the hide (demonstrated by the expansion of the hide outward from the body on both sides) is the means by which that lead n the Xrays gets dispersed. Go shoot a gallon jug full of water and measure the dispersion of the water all the way around the jug. The amount of water dispersed backwards in the direction from which the bullet came is pretty surprising. The same exact effect is visible to varying degrees with varmints depending on the hit, the bullet and the velocity. At those high velocities flesh and bone being largely water tends to act like water (surprise).

All of the studies I am aware of and have read include a substantial portion of shotgun pellet killed animals. Lead DOES react very differently at 600-800 FPS than it does at >2500 FPS. Even children learn very early on that the hard bits in their burgers are not to be eaten. The studies have not differentiated that lead that I have seen. <1000 FPS projectiles tend not to shed much if any weight in game. >2500 FPS projectiles do tend to do so and it tends to be in the 30-50 percent of initial weight range. Further, it tends also to be the very fine particulate that MnDNR found.

The MnDNR study was designed to inform us about the amount and nature of lead deposition in animals shot with typical hunting weapons, and is unique in that I know of no other so designed.

Lead is toxic in all forms. Lead in the body, particularly when it's a foreign body, may not produce damage because it is frequently walled off and isolated from the body. There is never any need for lead in the body. Why would someone willingly put a toxic substance into their body? Is the superiority of lead projectiles so marked that copper is ineffectual to any noticeable degree? Lead is not like substances that can be toxic at high levels, it is quite toxic at extremely low levels.. Lead accumulates, and it is not readily excreted.

Accepting any lead in your food is no different whatsoever that accepting that Jack In The Box solved their E Coli 0157:H7 problem by cooking the meat a little longer. Sooner or later it catches up with you. Same exact comparison. If they don't mix fecal matter with meat we don't get poisoned. If I don't put lead in my deer, I don't get poisoned. The meat industry put cows in feed lots and they do so for simple economic reasons. Wild game has virtually no 0157:H7 E Coli. Cows removed from a feedlot an put on grass have a reduction of 90% or more in fecal matter E Coli. Copper bullets perform as well or better than cup and core bullets at 300 yards and less. They cost a little more than they cheapest cup and cores and about the same as better cup and cores. There just isn't a good argument for me to put lead in my food. Not a difficult question at all.

Miles, using words like "biochemical differences" doesn't make your argument any stronger. The effects of serum lead are most certainly different in adults than children, that much is beyond dispute. If that was not true there wouldn't be different standards for children and women of child-bearing age. There are a multitude of substances that affect developing brains differently than adult brains, not only lead but THC and others.

And to make the blanket statement that "any intake is harmful" is just incorrect. Intake does not equal lead in the blood. Any detectable levels of lead in the blood of children and women of child-bearing age is what has been deemed harmful.



You need to bone up on your toxicology if you're going to provide opinions on the subject. Everyone willingly puts toxic substances into their body on a daily basis. The most extreme example is water, which is toxic in excessive amounts. It causes hyponatremia, which can be fatal. Alcohol is another good example. A glass of red wine is harmless but a half gallon of vodka can kill you. Other substances like selenium are nutrients in small doses (sold as over-the-counter supplements) and toxic in high doses. The list goes on. To get a deleterious effect you have to consider not only the substance, but the dose.

Exactly my point. Any argument about availability or current usage of mono bullets will be moot.

As much of a dunce as you appear to be, you'd be better off reading more, and posting way less.

Good points. Except the on on copper bullets working as well or better than traditional bullets. They simply don't and the multiple generations of Barnes bullets is evidence of this. The fact of the matter is monos kill slower than traditional bullets.